Trump White House/Cabinet appointments

[raildogg]

I've seen admitted felons with no right to vote bitch about various political issues online, as if anybody cares. These are the dregs of society, who call themselves trash because they know they are actual trash. It's quite funny, almost as if they have deluded themselves into thinking that future felon Trump means they can be successful felons too.

If your going to call Trump a felon, you should say the same about the past Presidents and many, many other elected politicians as well.

People are caught up in this Trump vs Hillary divide.

Step back a little a look at the bigger picture.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

I've seen admitted felons with no right to vote bitch about various political issues online, as if anybody cares. These are the dregs of society, who call themselves trash because they know they are actual trash. It's quite funny, almost as if they have deluded themselves into thinking that future felon Trump means they can be successful felons too.


News flash: You aren't an american citizen. You have no say in this election, you will have no say in any future of the country, and that's all for the best. Your best, too.

In Texas you can vote 5 years after being released from prison and keeping your nose clean. So since its been 17 years since I've committed my felony I am plenty okay to vote.
Seek some professional help. Seriously. Getting this bent out of shape over online discussions with strangers isn't healthy.

 

[FIVR]

In Texas you can vote 5 years after being released from prison and keeping your nose clean. So since its been 17 years since I've committed my felony I am plenty okay to vote.
Seek some professional help. Seriously. Getting this bent out of shape over online discussions with strangers isn't healthy.

I don't think most real Americans, who have a right to vote in the general election (the topic of this thread) care about what idiotic crap you end up voting for in Texas. Our concern is that you've been proven to be so criminally incapable of understanding and following the laws of the US, that you've lost your right to vote (thus removing you from this political discussion, effectively).


It disturbs me that felons in the US have been aided by our racist Russian Mole-In-Chief, and that you've now found political representation for your idiotic criminal views. That your idiotic views are respected in the state of Texas is not my concern. I am not poor enough to have to live in Texas, so we're good trashman. Vote away, as long as it's only in texas.

 

[Brainonska511]

I don't think most real Americans, who have a right to vote in the general election (the topic of this thread) care about what idiotic crap you end up voting for in Texas. Our concern is that you've been proven to be so criminally incapable of understanding and following the laws of the US, that you've lost your right to vote (thus removing you from this political discussion, effectively).


It disturbs me that felons in the US have been aided by our racist Russian Mole-In-Chief, and that you've now found political representation for your idiotic criminal views. That your idiotic views are respected in the state of Texas is not my concern. I am not poor enough to have to live in Texas, so we're good trashman. Vote away, as long as it's only in texas.

You're an idiot. Criminals may have a history, but they should have the right to vote after they've served their punishment. And even when that isn't restored, their opinion still matters, even if you don't want to hear it.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I think most Americans have no issues with felons who have completed their punishment and staying clean regaining their right to vote.

 

[FIVR]

Yeah, that's why nobody will hire them for any important job and they can't even get basic security clearance. Americans love felons, LOL... where are you people living?


A felony is a crime the state deems so severe that your right to political representation (and thus, a large part of your citizenship) is taken away. You are no longer a full American. In the 18th century you would be sent to an Island like Australia so your criminal tendencies would no longer be a threat to the state, sadly today we cannot just exile all the criminal morons in our society.

I have no obligation to respect the views of someone whom the state has deemed an irredeemable criminal.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeah, that's why nobody will hire them for any important job and they can't even get basic security clearance. Americans love felons, LOL... where are you people living?


A felony is a crime the state deems so severe that your right to political representation (and thus, a large part of your citizenship) is taken away. You are no longer a full American. In the 18th century you would be sent to an Island like Australia so your criminal tendencies would no longer be a threat to the state, sadly today we cannot just exile all the criminal morons in our society.

I have no obligation to respect the views of someone whom the state has deemed an irredeemable criminal.

Those deemed irredeemable never get out, at least not until they're old & mostly harmless.

In Texas you can vote 5 years after being released from prison and keeping your nose clean. So since its been 17 years since I've committed my felony I am plenty okay to vote.
Seek some professional help. Seriously. Getting this bent out of shape over online discussions with strangers isn't healthy.

I support the right of all ex-offenders to vote. That would reshape the electorate in some parts of the country, and in a good way.

http://ww2.kqed.org/lowdown/2014/02/26/felon-voting/

 

[Blackjack200]

So back to the "I can't dispute the facts so you're racist" argument?

You didn't offer any facts in your post. So back to the "here's an anecdote that supports my racism, so it's not really racism it's just (made up) facts" argument?

I think most Americans have no issues with felons who have completed their punishment and staying clean regaining their right to vote.

Really? Which party do you think benefits from felony disenfranchisement?

 

[Sunburn74]

Yeah, that's why nobody will hire them for any important job and they can't even get basic security clearance. Americans love felons, LOL... where are you people living?


A felony is a crime the state deems so severe that your right to political representation (and thus, a large part of your citizenship) is taken away. You are no longer a full American. In the 18th century you would be sent to an Island like Australia so your criminal tendencies would no longer be a threat to the state, sadly today we cannot just exile all the criminal morons in our society.

I have no obligation to respect the views of someone whom the state has deemed an irredeemable criminal.

Wow. What a hateful little person you are. God's gift to mankind eh?

 

[repoman0]

Yeah, that's why nobody will hire them for any important job and they can't even get basic security clearance. Americans love felons, LOL... where are you people living?


A felony is a crime the state deems so severe that your right to political representation (and thus, a large part of your citizenship) is taken away. You are no longer a full American. In the 18th century you would be sent to an Island like Australia so your criminal tendencies would no longer be a threat to the state, sadly today we cannot just exile all the criminal morons in our society.

I have no obligation to respect the views of someone whom the state has deemed an irredeemable criminal.

It is not true that you can't get a security clearance with a felony conviction.

If the state has deemed someone irreparable and irredeemable, why are they let out of prison? Isn't the point of prison rehabilitation?

 

[FIVR]

It is not true that you can't get a security clearance with a felony conviction.

I don't know of any defense contractor that will hire a person with a felony conviction. I do know that many big chain fast food restaurants won't hire felons, and that's hardly a job with high responsibility. You may be right, though. Certain states such as Texas have a high population of felons and a low population of intelligent, responsible people... so they may be lax.

If the state has deemed someone irreparable and irredeemable, why are they let out of prison? Isn't the point of prison rehabilitation?

They are let out because it would cost more to keep them imprisoned than it would to just let them run free and limit their rights. It is not because they've achieved "redemption". The point is that you take away their right to vote, and you stop respecting their political views because they are toxic human beings who have proven themselves to be such. That's why they never ever get their national vote back, unless they get a full presidential pardon. Even felons who are wrongfully convicted don't get their votes back when they convictions are vacated, they have to be expunged through a pardon.

 

[FIVR]

Wow. What a hateful little person you are. God's gift to mankind eh?

The felon I quoted expressed the personal view that he could tell from somebodies appearance whether they were "legal" or not, and that it bothered him that these "illegal" people whom he saw had jobs but his felonious acquaintances couldn't find jobs. He would like these "illegals" to be deported. I make the point that it is he who has proven himself to be a danger to the state, and that in the past he would be deported because he offers little to society. He fails to understand that the people whom he saw are likely full citizens, while he himself isn't even a real American.

Are you a felon too? If so, I can ignore the rest of your political views also. If the US Gov doesn't respect your political opinions why should I?

 

[MrSquished]

Yeah, that's why nobody will hire them for any important job and they can't even get basic security clearance. Americans love felons, LOL... where are you people living?


A felony is a crime the state deems so severe that your right to political representation (and thus, a large part of your citizenship) is taken away. You are no longer a full American. In the 18th century you would be sent to an Island like Australia so your criminal tendencies would no longer be a threat to the state, sadly today we cannot just exile all the criminal morons in our society.

I have no obligation to respect the views of someone whom the state has deemed an irredeemable criminal.

You are one of the most disgusting regressive human beings I've seen post on these forums. Congrats!

 

[imported_tajmahal]

I think this thread has drifted a bit far afield.

 

[Brainonska511]

Donald John Trump is going ahead with his pick of Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State. http://nyti.ms/2gB21Ea

 

[pcgeek11]

Which departments are "out-of-control"? Why do you think that?


He probably doesn't even know what the DoE does...

The EPA for one.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ncy-protects-itself-more-environment-michelle

After the EPA and officials and their contract workers accidentally spilled 3 million gallons of pent-up toxic sludge on August 5 from a defunct mine in San Juan County that hadn’t operated since 1923, EPA apparatchiks delayed notifying residents for more than 24 hours. They vastly underestimated the volume and spill rate of gunk. Then, while refusing to release data, EPA head Gina McCarthy flew to the glowing river to fecklessly declare that the water “seems to be restoring itself.”

BP oil-spill data doctoring. Former White House director of the Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy Carol Browner and the EPA suffered no consequences after they repeatedly lied and cooked the books in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010. Browner, who pulled the puppet strings of then-EPA head Lisa Jackson, misled the public about the scope of the disaster by falsely claiming that 75 percent of the spill was “completely gone from the system.” Then she falsely claimed that the administration’s initial report on the disaster was “peer-reviewed.”

and

http://hypeline.org/3-rules-that-prove-the-epa-is-out-of-control/

The Clean Water Act Amendment

In late 2015, the EPA finalized a revision to the 1972 Clean Water Act that would allow the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to have total control over puddles, ponds, ditches, and isolated wetlands, many of which exist on our nation’s farmland. While there was a clause in the rule that made ponds for livestock exempt, the EPA continued to fine farmers and ranchers who created new bodies of water, such as Wyoming rancher Andy Johnson. However, Johnson fought back, and on May 9, settled a deal with the EPA to avoid paying the fines. Even more recently, the Supreme Court ruled that any EPA control can be challenged in the court system.

Mercury and Air Toxic Standards

Around this time last year, the EPA created a rule requiring coal plants to cut back mercury emissions. The rule sounded like a good idea, until it was announced that annual compliance costs would be more than $9 billion, and the changes would only result in about $9 million worth of health benefits. Again, the Supreme Court deemed that the EPA had gone “beyond the bounds of reasonable interpretation.”

The Clean Power Plan

In early August of 2015, President Obama authorized the EPA to police carbon emissions from power plants by setting unrealistic carbon emissions goals for the plants. But, on February 9, 2016, the Supreme Court again put the EPA in its place by putting a stay on enforcement of the Clean Power Plan, pending judicial rule. This Supreme Court action was in part because the legislation failed in Congress in 2015, but the president signed the Plan anyway. On June 9, Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla) voiced his concerns with the EPA’s overreach, stating “If [the] EPA can convince the courts to uphold their approach to regulating the utility industry through the means Congress never authorized, then they will take those arguments and use them to restructure every industrial sector in the country.”

 

[ivwshane]

The EPA for one.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ncy-protects-itself-more-environment-michelle

After the EPA and officials and their contract workers accidentally spilled 3 million gallons of pent-up toxic sludge on August 5 from a defunct mine in San Juan County that hadn’t operated since 1923, EPA apparatchiks delayed notifying residents for more than 24 hours. They vastly underestimated the volume and spill rate of gunk. Then, while refusing to release data, EPA head Gina McCarthy flew to the glowing river to fecklessly declare that the water “seems to be restoring itself.”

BP oil-spill data doctoring. Former White House director of the Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy Carol Browner and the EPA suffered no consequences after they repeatedly lied and cooked the books in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010. Browner, who pulled the puppet strings of then-EPA head Lisa Jackson, misled the public about the scope of the disaster by falsely claiming that 75 percent of the spill was “completely gone from the system.” Then she falsely claimed that the administration’s initial report on the disaster was “peer-reviewed.”

and

http://hypeline.org/3-rules-that-prove-the-epa-is-out-of-control/

The Clean Water Act Amendment

In late 2015, the EPA finalized a revision to the 1972 Clean Water Act that would allow the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to have total control over puddles, ponds, ditches, and isolated wetlands, many of which exist on our nation’s farmland. While there was a clause in the rule that made ponds for livestock exempt, the EPA continued to fine farmers and ranchers who created new bodies of water, such as Wyoming rancher Andy Johnson. However, Johnson fought back, and on May 9, settled a deal with the EPA to avoid paying the fines. Even more recently, the Supreme Court ruled that any EPA control can be challenged in the court system.

Mercury and Air Toxic Standards

Around this time last year, the EPA created a rule requiring coal plants to cut back mercury emissions. The rule sounded like a good idea, until it was announced that annual compliance costs would be more than $9 billion, and the changes would only result in about $9 million worth of health benefits. Again, the Supreme Court deemed that the EPA had gone “beyond the bounds of reasonable interpretation.”

The Clean Power Plan

In early August of 2015, President Obama authorized the EPA to police carbon emissions from power plants by setting unrealistic carbon emissions goals for the plants. But, on February 9, 2016, the Supreme Court again put the EPA in its place by putting a stay on enforcement of the Clean Power Plan, pending judicial rule. This Supreme Court action was in part because the legislation failed in Congress in 2015, but the president signed the Plan anyway. On June 9, Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla) voiced his concerns with the EPA’s overreach, stating “If [the] EPA can convince the courts to uphold their approach to regulating the utility industry through the means Congress never authorized, then they will take those arguments and use them to restructure every industrial sector in the country.”

Looks like once again, you stupid fucks, got duped.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/productio...ts/fact_sheet_fact_check_clean_water_rule.pdf

Oops, looks like all the coal plants are already compliant. The SC originally rule against the EPA because they didn't do a proper cost analysis.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/susandu...flouts-supreme-court-and-harms-public-health/

I'm not sure how to fact check the hyperbole found in your last cut and paste paragraph other than to say you have put your faith into a climate denier, aka mr snowball.

So at best you have an EPA employee who made a major fuck up with that mine spill.

Lol

 

[pcgeek11]

Tell that to the people that were screwed by the EPA.

 

[ivwshane]

Tell that to the people that were screwed by the EPA.

Sure, right after you tell the people who were screwed by businesses and their willingness to screw up the environment (perhaps the Midwest where earthquakes seem to happen more than they do in California).

 

[pcgeek11]

Sure, right after you tell the people who were screwed by businesses and their willingness to screw up the environment (perhaps the Midwest where earthquakes seem to happen more than they do in California).

Yeah and the ones that have flammable water....

BS.

 

[ivwshane]

Yeah and the ones that have flammable water....

BS.

Can I assume the "BS" at the bottom of your post is your middle name? Or were you preemptively calling bullshit on your own post?

 

[K1052]

Tell that to the people that were screwed by the EPA.

I know right. Coal heavy utilities can't externalize a bunch of their costs onto the average human with lungs anymore. What a travesty of justice.

 

[nageov3t]

Trump picks ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state

Tillerson and Bolton are the only two candidates I can see Trump having an problem getting confirmed (not that everyone else won't be subject to bruising Confirmation Hearings, but these are the only two I could see Republicans breaking ranks on)

we've also got:

Trump Expected to Name Rick Perry as Energy Secretary

 

[Brainonska511]

Bolton ....

Color me shocked that Trump, who claimed he was against the Iraq war and would later call a disaster, would seek to appoint one of the Iraq War's champions...

 

[nageov3t]

the only remaining Cabinet spots look to be Agriculture and Veteran's Affairs.

it's been reported that vets have been lobbying hard for Trump to keep the current VA Sec in place. we'll see if anyone listens to them.

it also sounds like Trump wants to put Joe Manchin (D-WV) or Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) somewhere in his administration, which would cost the Democrats a seat in the Senate but both of whom are facing extremely touch reelection prospects in 2018.

Carly Fiorina is under consideration for National Intelligence Director (for reasons?), but nothing confirmed yet.