How many of you still admit to supporting the Clown, Trump?

I equate Trump's position to Obama's as he entered the job.

 

Move on is all im saying. Harping on the same shit gets old...

 

That's just it. I'm not harping on the same old shit. Only responding when the same old shit is brought up.
If the shoe fits.............

 

Every time someone brings up anything about Trump, you bring up Obama.
He's living the life right now, while you and others in here keep bitching about him.

 

I do?
To be clear. I'm not bitching about Obama. I'm just pointing out all the libtard hypocrisy and double standards that are being applied with liberal logic. I'm sorry if it offended you.
Perhaps, you should be the one to move on.

 

What position is this. What exactly are you equating?

 

Yea all you do is bitch about the Dems.

Contrary to what you believe, all the problems that's going on in the US isn't the fault of the Dems. It's both sides of the isle.

Like i've said before, and will keep saying. All this fighting does nothing to help anyone!

 

The issue is emoluments and CoI. Obama dealt with it. Trump has, in my opinion (and that of many folks, including presidential ethics attorneys) not. If you were paying attention carefully, you'd note I acknowledged the process would be complex. Like I said, it is patently clear he has no plans to do any such thing (nor ask Congress if it gives him a pass, which is spelled out in the constitution as a viable alternative), and hence my comment about the ultimate disposition of the lawsuits.

 

Oh, i have. And was told to give it rest.

 

I didn't get that memo...
G Dub was the debil. He strung a man up at a frat party, skinned him alive, then threw salt at 'im. They all had a good laugh..except the guy writhing in pain.
I tell ya, the rumors I've heard about that good ol' boy...makes me wonder what former NY Dem/businessmen did for entertainment prior to public office.
Any ideas?

 

Having trouble with English today? Maybe go practice your guncraft and it will come to you.

 

I'd like you to really explain how this is possible. Nobody of any consequence has ever been able to do so.

1) Let's talk about liquidating assets. An utter, complete and total bullshit suggestion. To even attempt to do this with holdings as large would probably take the entire 4 years to get done. And, at the same time you'd have liberal hacks then pointing at the purchase/sales prices and making claims that Trump was using his office to get a higher price in return for political favors. You know this is true. It's totally bullshit.

2) Painter and Eisner did no such thing - even though that political hack Cummings would like you to think so. For many reasons anything short of complete divestiture (mentioned in item 1 above) still result in some sort of compromise. There is zero solution offered by either Norm Eisen or Richard Painter. Not one. A complete and true Blind Trust, managed by a completely disinterested party not in any way related to the Trump family or the Trump "organization" and/or administration does not solve such a problem. Because Trump cannot "un-know" facts. He can not magically forget that there are physical buildings, businesses, hotels, resorts, etc that his business has interest in. Even if he is completely separate from any knowledge about their business strategy or day to day operations and/or investments, he can't "not know" that they exist, so even if a third party manages them it doesn't completely preclude the idea that some actions may either benefit or harm his personal interests.

This entire issue is only about Trump because he's the first one that has made this so abundantly clear. Nobody else been elected that has business holdings that are so closely tied to his family, and his name. The people attacking him about this are simply alienating any really successful business person. The Emoluments clause has never really even been discussed before. One reason is because rather than having to worry about Presidents coming in with scads of business ties, we instead happily watch them steal from us and become incredibly wealthy as a result of the office.

 

Again to be clear....Not Dems specifically but liberal logic to be exact. And I'm far from the lead Dem Bitcher on the BBS. In fact, I rarely even talk in terms of Dems or Republicans. I do talk in terms of libs, conservatives and libertarian.

I don't seem to recall you offering anything constructive towards the way of improving things either. So I guess using lib logic, bitching about others bitching is deemed as productive. It's ironic to me that the libs never once cared about getting along with the other side - outside of their own agenda but now that the shoe is on the other foot, libs are crying about how the conservatives need to compromise and meet them half way etc.

I've seen more Trump bashing from libs in the past 100 days than I saw of Obama during his entire term already. So please don't cry to me about who is bashing who.

 

Can't answer a simple basic question today?

I will, I just picked up a new Sig and I plan on getting a couple hundred rounds thru it yet today. Thanks for your concern.

 

Actually, you are doing what you do so well and so often: arguing for argument sake. The basics of the issue are quite apparent and have been explicitly stated.
Obama turned all his wealth holdings into T-bills, and put it in a blind trust. Most folks that become president don't have a lot of other stuff going on, and probably think the job supersedes other interests. Trump is different that way. He has a multinational company, hasn't materially separated himself from its decisions, and now he is in a position to leverage law and policy to his company's advantage. That is a conflict of interest to most paying attention. The emoluments is a somewhat other, but related matter, independent of his actions within the company.

 

No, I am not arguing for arguments sake. I'm being honest. And remember, I DON'T LIKE THE GUY.

I am not asking what Obama did with respect to the Blind Trust. I asking you specifically for answers. He owned all of those businesses before becoming President. He has separated himself by not being privy to the daily operations of the business.

I was very very specific with respect to the issues around suggesting he should either liquidate, or the Blind Trust. All you did was parrot back why it's a problem that he owned a global business. You never once even acknowledge the accuracy of the problems with liquidation or true Blind Trust.