Trump seeks clearance for his kids to serve as national security advisors

[Homerboy]

Well, dash off an email to somebody important. I'm sure you can turn this around to your liking. Some sincere tweeting and facebooking will probably help too.

It's become apparent that a lot of this concern is rooted in Trump being one of those evil businessmen that the left and to a much greater degree the progressives despise.

Whatever.

WTF is the point you're trying to make? So nobody should be posting opinions or thoughts? You've never done so in P&N?

 

[VRAMdemon]

If Trump surrounds himself with incompetent advisors who have little interest in collaborating with even a Republican dominated Congress and proposing initiatives that can be readily challenged in court, it may tie up a large measure of plans that are beyond purely executive authority, nullifying the worst aspects of a Trump presidency. And if he is sufficiently at odds with an oppositional Congress, he may reflexively veto measures they pass.

I would love to see Trump stick to his guns to aggressively pursue Congressional term limits, this would put him immediately at odds with his political base in the legislature. Sadly he will cave to the establishment on this, so it seems. Trump voter's should be pissed if he starts walking back these "tear the system down" type promises.

So you should be hoping his advisors are Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, Chris Christie, Forest Lucas, and others who are unwilling to compromise, and fraught with scandal and conflicts of interest. You should be afraid if he appoints manipulative more intelligent advisors like Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich who know how to work the political system and get their agendas through Congress while pacifying Trump in his worst tantrums. In that case, so much for being "the maverick outside the system"; he'll just be a mouthpiece for the Heritage Foundation agenda that Gingrich started advancing twenty-odd years ago.

 

[fskimospy]

That'd be akin to sending classified emails to people without clearance, right?

Not really, as the president is the source of all classification authority. There aren't many times that 'if the president does it that means it's not illegal', but this would basically be one of them.

 

[umbrella39]

When you make arguments like this, the only question is whether the other conservatives here are dumb enough to find them convincing. See, I don't think they are.

This is just someone's sock puppet account here. It's uncanny how they become an even more dumbed down version of the one working their mouth...

 

[VRAMdemon]

Well, dash off an email to somebody important. I'm sure you can turn this around to your liking. Some sincere tweeting and facebooking will probably help too.

It's become apparent that a lot of this concern is rooted in Trump being one of those evil businessmen that the left and to a much greater degree the progressives despise.

Whatever.

Aren't you one of those "tear the whole system down to fix it" kinda voter. Are you disappointed that Trump seems to be appointing his Wall Street insiders, lobbyist, long time establishment Republicans and politicians that are wrought with scandal and are unwilling to compromise to positions of power?

 

[theeedude]

Might have reversed course once he got the blowback in the media. He's already eating a lot of crap for Bannon.

 

[fleshconsumed]

The OP got suckered again.
Trump didn't ask for top secret clearance for his kids: official

The actual quote is

The official told the pool of reporters Monday that it wasn't something he was expecting right now.

The way I read it is that Trump expects his children to get security clearance, just not right away. He's willing to wait for the machine to turn its cogs.

 

[agent00f]

When a "Kenyan Muslim Marxist God Damn America black man" can win twice decisively, both popular and electoral vote, against much better candidates than Trump in a white majority America, the Rust belt was never the problem, put the blame where it belongs, the many millions of Democrat voters that couldn't bother to go vote.

I recollect there was a guy who got his successful start in politics by pushing that line to the distaste of his own party establishment. Can't quite recall his name, really weird hair and small hands, help me out here. Kinda wonder where his career went.

Save your ire for when he actually becomes the President. If they're on the transition team (this is an important term to comprehend) along with many other people, fine. Once he's sitting in the oval office I agree with you and I think we'll all find that the kids won't be involved in running the government. I would certainly think that Trump won't be forwarding classified emails to his kids or even his housekeeper like you know who.

The only time I can recall this much concern for a new President coming in is back in 2008. Oh, wait...

What's your excuse going to be when it happens?

 

[boomerang]

Aren't you one of those "tear the whole system down to fix it" kinda voter.

Yes I am. But I highly doubt it's going to happen with the two major parties we have right now. I have hopes that Trump can reform it to a great degree but I have no expectations. If we can't reform the government soon we'll experience a financial collapse and the system will crumple on its own.

Are you disappointed that Trump seems to be appointing his Wall Street insiders, lobbyist, long time establishment Republicans and politicians that are wrought with scandal and are unwilling to compromise to positions of power?

Disappointed? He's appointed Priebus and Bannon to date as far as I know although until today, I have been unusually busy and may not be up to date.

Neither of them fall into any of those classifications you mentioned.

But I will touch on compromise. Obama, shortly after taking office in his first term said, "elections have consequences". I'm in total agreement with him on that one. Obama then proceeded to do everything in his power to make it abundantly clear that his administration was going to be one run with the theme of 'my way or the highway' and he did so. Oh, the media painted a picture of him extending his hand and wanting to work together and leftists ate that shit up despite it being right in their faces that it was the opposite. Now, leftists want compromise. They always do when they lose but never do when they win.

The right is under no obligation to compromise. They can play using the same playbook.

 

[boomerang]

WTF is the point you're trying to make? So nobody should be posting opinions or thoughts? You've never done so in P&N?

I'm telling you that you're belaboring a point that I have little interest in.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

I'm saying one of the most popular Democrats of all time appointed his brother as AG.

And pray tell what are the Trump lads qualifications to serve in such a role?

Its not as if JFK nominated his brother the dry cleaner owner to be Attorney General.

 

[agent00f]

Yes I am. But I highly doubt it's going to happen with the two major parties we have right now. I have hopes that Trump can reform it to a great degree but I have no expectations. If we can't reform the government soon we'll experience a financial collapse and the system will crumple on its own.

Disappointed? He's appointed Priebus and Bannon to date as far as I know although until today, I have been unusually busy and may not be up to date.

Neither of them fall into any of those classifications you mentioned.

But I will touch on compromise. Obama, shortly after taking office in his first term said, "elections have consequences". I'm in total agreement with him on that one. Obama then proceeded to do everything in his power to make it abundantly clear that his administration was going to be one run with the theme of 'my way or the highway' and he did so. Oh, the media painted a picture of him extending his hand and wanting to work together and leftists ate that shit up despite it being right in their faces that it was the opposite. Now, leftists want compromise. They always do when they lose but never do when they win.

The right is under no obligation to compromise. They can play using the same playbook.

LOL, he said elections have consequences then went on to arduously enact the republican/gingrich/romney healthcare plan against the people who were for it before they were against it.

Let's be charitable and assume you're one of the smarter ones who have no integrity instead of too dumb to know better. Btw, I'll be waiting for what the wannabe alphas are going to do about this slight.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Yes I am. But I highly doubt it's going to happen with the two major parties we have right now. I have hopes that Trump can reform it to a great degree but I have no expectations. If we can't reform the government soon we'll experience a financial collapse and the system will crumple on its own.

Disappointed? He's appointed Priebus and Bannon to date as far as I know although until today, I have been unusually busy and may not be up to date.

Neither of them fall into any of those classifications you mentioned.

But I will touch on compromise. Obama, shortly after taking office in his first term said, "elections have consequences". I'm in total agreement with him on that one. Obama then proceeded to do everything in his power to make it abundantly clear that his administration was going to be one run with the theme of 'my way or the highway' and he did so. Oh, the media painted a picture of him extending his hand and wanting to work together and leftists ate that shit up despite it being right in their faces that it was the opposite. Now, leftists want compromise. They always do when they lose but never do when they win.

The right is under no obligation to compromise. They can play using the same playbook.

What alternate universe have you been living in for the last 8 years?

Its (again) documented fact that Republicans refused to work with Obama. Period. They wouldn't even let him fill the SC seat, something unprecedented.

 

[nageov3t]

or Trump's team is lying... they don't have a whole lot of credibility in that area.

yup, lying.

Donald Trump Requests Security Clearance for Son-in-Law Jared Kushner

 

[agent00f]

The OP got suckered again.
Trump didn't ask for top secret clearance for his kids: official

Just paging the sucker to see if he has the basic integrity to admit it.

 

[MrSquished]

yup, lying.

Donald Trump Requests Security Clearance for Son-in-Law Jared Kushner

this is gonna be a giant shit show. may as well enjoy it, after all it's just our nation at stake

 

[soundforbjt]

And of course going home to his wife (who will be running daddy's Co + her own), there will be no talk between them about "work"... right.

 

[Jhhnn]

yup, lying.

Donald Trump Requests Security Clearance for Son-in-Law Jared Kushner

And Flynn, a general whom only Neocons can love...

 

[Homerboy]

I'm telling you that you're belaboring a point that I have little interest in.

Oh, ok. I'll make sure to run my posts through you for approval first, sir.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Yes I am. But I highly doubt it's going to happen with the two major parties we have right now. I have hopes that Trump can reform it to a great degree but I have no expectations. If we can't reform the government soon we'll experience a financial collapse and the system will crumple on its own.

Disappointed? He's appointed Priebus and Bannon to date as far as I know although until today, I have been unusually busy and may not be up to date.

Neither of them fall into any of those classifications you mentioned.

But I will touch on compromise. Obama, shortly after taking office in his first term said, "elections have consequences". I'm in total agreement with him on that one. Obama then proceeded to do everything in his power to make it abundantly clear that his administration was going to be one run with the theme of 'my way or the highway' and he did so. Oh, the media painted a picture of him extending his hand and wanting to work together and leftists ate that shit up despite it being right in their faces that it was the opposite. Now, leftists want compromise. They always do when they lose but never do when they win.

The right is under no obligation to compromise. They can play using the same playbook.

I'm speaking more to the Republicans not compromising with Republicans (post #77). Trump is not well liked by some. Also, I'm pretty sure the "leftists" are neutered and not a threat. Unless you think anybody who didn't support Trump (Republicans alike) are "leftists".

 

[nageov3t]

Report: Trump Son-In-Law Likely To Get Top White House Job

Trump is forbidden by a federal anti-nepotism law from appointing any of his children to a job in any government “agency,” though the Journal notes that it’s unclear if the law applies to the White House. The Journal said that Kushner would try to address these concerns by refusing pay for any work done for his father-in-law’s administration.

nothing to see here, folks... definitely not a conflict of interest that the guy married to the woman running Trump Inc -- a multi-billion dollar corporation with foreign debts and international assets that the President directly profits from -- will be sitting next to POTUS.

 

[Pens1566]

Report: Trump Son-In-Law Likely To Get Top White House Job



nothing to see here, folks... definitely not a conflict of interest that the guy married to the woman running Trump Inc -- a multi-billion dollar corporation with foreign debts and international assets that the President directly profits from -- will be sitting next to POTUS.

This will actually violate federal anti-nepotism laws. I'm guessing Team Trump is unaware of those. Like most everything else. Will be comical to see them try it.

 

[nageov3t]

This will actually violate federal anti-nepotism laws. I'm guessing Team Trump is unaware of those. Like most everything else. Will be comical to see them try it.

it sounds like Trump will be trying to exploit a loophole saying that Kushner isn't "working" in the Executive Branch since he's not being paid.

the problem is, who's going to enforce the ethics rules? White House ethics staffers under Trump's employ? or Republicans in Congress?

 

[Pens1566]

it sounds like Trump will be trying to exploit a loophole saying that Kushner isn't "working" in the Executive Branch since he's not being paid.

the problem is, who's going to enforce the ethics rules? White House ethics staffers under Trump's employ? or Republicans in Congress?

Oh, I agree. His idiot supporters will be all for it. The rest of the functioning world should see it for what it is. Which kind of tells you whether or not anything will happen regarding enforcement.