Corruption on a scale we haven't seen in WH for Centuries

[jj22]

We American tax payers just bailed out China's ZTE Company all so Trump's family and personal business (Property) can get approval in Indonesia. We Americans will end up paying Billions while the Trump family makes Millions from deal that only helps China and the Trumps.

Time for Trump supporters to stop claiming America first. Only thing first for this Admin is the Trump family business.

If this was Hillary/Obama or any Dem....... (but we know they'd be impeached by now with all the corruption in this WH).

[XenoMorph]

(06-07-2018, 12:01 PM)jj22 Wrote: We American tax payers just bailed out China's ZTE Company all so Trump's family and personal business (Property) can get approval in Indonesia. We Americans will end up paying Billions while the Trump family makes Millions from deal that only helps China and the Trumps.

Time for Trump supporters to stop claiming America first. Only thing first for this Admin is the Trump family business.

If this was Hillary/Obama or any Dem....... (but we know they'd be impeached by now with all the corruption in this WH).

And where did all that money Obama borrow go?  most of it overseas....


Find it funny Dems cry wolf so much while doing the same or worse....

[Millhouse]

(06-07-2018, 02:40 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: And where did all that money Obama borrow go?  most of it overseas....


Find it funny Dems cry wolf so much while doing the same or worse....

Money is wasted or not spent on the taxpayers under all administrations going way back. One of the ones I remember under Obama was the $500 million loaned to a solar panel company or something in California, only for them to go bankrupt soon after.

But what jj22 is referring to is when deals like this happen for personal gain of the politician. Kind of like the scene in Shawshank when the warden gives the contractor a pie with cash in it, so he can get more kickbacks for his prisoners doing the work instead.

Now there is no proof this has happened, though a lot of rumors that include some coincidences of it being a possibility. Now if his family business is making a profit directly from his presidential decisions with a direct connection involved, then to me that is impeachable. I dont care what party that politician is in.

[jj22]

Obama wasn't making deals with our money selling our secrets and bailing out other country's for doing business with the Obama family. If he was I'd say the same.... You?

So much for being tough on China right? Looks like folks were conned again. Sounds like the only country's he's tough on is those who don't do business with his family. Or our ally's like Canada.

[Yojimbo]

You left out the 5 Chinese patents that were fast tracked for Ivanka at the same time.

[jj22]

Seems like Trump supporters have to make up lies, conspiracy theories, and innuendo's to slam Obama for "doing" what they turn a blind eye on Trump doing. So they hate Obama based off of fake news, conspiracy theories etc. for things Trump does shamelessly right in front of their face. We must be better than that as Americans. Call a spade a spade regardless of party. Or how can we believe they really care about these issues (hint: They don't)?

[BmorePat87]

I think it's fair to question the past actions of Presidents doing shady monetary things with other countries. A recent allegation is Obama fast tracked some use of US financial systems to let Iran convert US dollars to Euros as part of the nuclear deal.

As jj22 pointed out, though, is something like that, which was done to further American foreign policy and national security interests and not family profit, truly comparable to making deals that cost the US billions to potentially give the President's family millions?

[Belsnickel]

(06-07-2018, 02:40 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: And where did all that money Obama borrow go?  most of it overseas....

That's a rather common misconception. Most of our public debt is held by American citizens. China holds the largest chunk of foreign held debt, but most of our debt is held domestically.

[Millhouse]

(06-07-2018, 04:31 PM)jj22 Wrote: Seems like Trump supporters have to make up lies, conspiracy theories, and innuendo's to slam Obama for "doing" what they turn a blind eye on Trump doing. So they hate Obama based off of fake news, conspiracy theories etc. for things Trump does shamelessly right in front of their face. We must be better than that as Americans. Call a spade a spade regardless of party. Or how can we believe they really care about these issues (hint: They don't)?

I consider myself an extreme moderate, meaning some issues I agree with Dems or progressives on like equality rights, others I tend to go with the Repubs like border security. 

So I do find it fascinating with those that support and defend Trump view him with far less scrutiny than that they held Obama under. Some people should understand that just because they voted for a person doesnt mean they have to keep defending their vote as time rolls on.

Personally for me it's not even Trump's policies that I despise him for. But I simply do not like him as a human being. Even though I disagreed with quite a few things Obama and Bush did, at least I liked them as a person overall, like they seem likeable to be around in a social setting. And they both seem to have a decent moral compass about them, even with the spying and wars going on. Trump's moral compass on the other hand only points to a picture of himself.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(06-07-2018, 05:30 PM)Millhouse Wrote: I consider myself an extreme moderate, meaning some issues I agree with Dems or progressives on like equality rights, others I tend to go with the Repubs like border security. 

So I do find it fascinating with those that support and defend Trump view him with far less scrutiny than that they held Obama under. Some people should understand that just because they voted for a person doesnt mean they have to keep defending their vote as time rolls on.

Personally for me it's not even Trump's policies that I despise him for. But I simply do not like him as a human being. Even though I disagreed with quite a few things Obama and Bush did, at least I liked them as a person overall, like they seem likeable to be around in a social setting. And they both seem to have a decent moral compass about them, even with the spying and wars going on. Trump's moral compass on the other hand only points to a picture of himself.

This.


Also......we haven't really had a president that truly represented the people since T.R., and he had to become pres via assassination of another bought and paid for lackey.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

"In centuries:"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/role-of-hillary-clintons-brother-in-haiti-gold-mine-raises-eyebrows/2015/03/20/c8b6e3bc-cc05-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3927a98a88f6

It's hardly a Trump-specific issue, it's a wide spanning govenment issue. You do people favors while in office, and then later they remember the favor and they arrange a $3m/yr position as "Honorary Vice President" of some college, or pay you $500k per speech.

Bill Clinton entered office $1m in debt.
A week after leaving office, he bought a $2.85m home.
A US President earns $400k/yr.
$1m + $2.85m = $3.85m
$400k/yr x 8yrs = $3.20m

Even if he didn't spend a single dime of his salary for 8 years, and had zero interest on his $1m in debt, that would still leave him $650k short.

I'm not trying to be the "but Clinton!" guy here, but pretending that literally every single President in modern times (and probably almost always) hasn't been corrupt and gotten rich from the office is downright silly. I can't think of a single poor US President since Truman, and he stopped being President 73 years ago, and died 65 years ago.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2015/10/13/how-the-clintons-made-more-than-230-million-after-leaving-the-white-house/#4a3f19162ae3
Hillary Clinton made $9m in speaking fees during the year after she stopped being Secretary of State.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


If you want to make an article about how everyone is corrupt and making money through favors and political power, by all means I will hop right on in there on your side, because it's an awful problem and it needs to be changed, though I don't particularly see a way to do so when the people who could change it are the ones who are profiting from it.

If you want to make a "OMG TRUMP!" article about how he's somehow unique in his corruption, I am going to laugh in your face and treat your thread with the general disdain it deserves.

Best as I can tell, it's the same-'ol-same-'ol, just Trump is either more incompetent at pretending to hide it, or just doesn't give AF to hide it. Neither is *good*, but hardly "IN CENTURIES!"

[hollodero]

(06-07-2018, 08:17 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: If you want to make a "OMG TRUMP!" article about how he's somehow unique in his corruption, I am going to laugh in your face and treat your thread with the general disdain it deserves.

It really appears Trump pressured Qatar into buying a Kushner skyscraper. That's uniqueish. If true of course, which I can only assume.


-
As for money in politics, isn't a blue vote slightly less devastating than a red vote in that regard. One party at least admits it needs reforms. The other one blocks them. (At least that's what the legend says in my lands.)

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-07-2018, 08:56 PM)hollodero Wrote: It really appears Trump pressured Qatar into buying a Kushner skyscraper. That's uniqueish. If true of course, which I can only assume.


-
As for money in politics, isn't a blue vote slightly less devastating than a red vote in that regard. One party at least admits it needs reforms. The other one blocks them. (At least that's what the legend says in my lands.)

Ehhh... I don't know, probably not? They're pretty much all terrible.

I don't have any hard numbers to back it up, but at least the last four Presidents we have had, two have been Republican, and two have been Democrat. The two Republicans were already rich when they came into office. The two Democrats were not. All four (well three, plus Trump blatantly using his office for $) are rich coming out of office.

Democrats have actually massively outspent Republicans over the last 3 elections.




Interesting/disgusting facts:
In 1996, Bill Clinton outspent Bob Dole... $115.4m to $66.8m
In 2000, George W Bush outspent Al Gore... $186.5m to $120.3m
In 2004, George W Bush outspent John Kerry... $355.0m to $332.7m
In 2008, Barack Obama outspent John McCain... $760.4m to $239.7m
In 2012, Barack Obama outspent Mitt Romney... $737.1m to $483.1m
In 2016, Hillary Clinton outspent Donald Trump... $639.6m to $302.5m

Those numbers I don't believe include all of the outside spending.

To give you an idea if you were wondering about inflation, $1m in 1996 is worth $1.606m today. There's just rampant and out of control spending in elections now, and that money comes from somewhere. Heck, this last election is actually the first one since 1976 to have the person who spent less win (Jimmy Carter won spending $33.4m to Gerald Ford's $35.8m).

That money comes from somewhere, and the corporations/millionaires/billionaires don't give it without any self interest, and you can't win unless you are one, or you have a LOT of them supporting you.

Our campaign finance system is just wrecked, and the unintended financial incentives our Presidents get is troublesome.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(06-07-2018, 08:56 PM)hollodero Wrote: It really appears Trump pressured Qatar into buying a Kushner skyscraper. That's uniqueish. If true of course, which I can only assume.


-
As for money in politics, isn't a blue vote slightly less devastating than a red vote in that regard. One party at least admits it needs reforms. The other one blocks them. (At least that's what the legend says in my lands.)

Don't buy the hype.....that's just lip service. It's not called the duopoly of corruption for nothin'.  The "blues" just rigged a presidential primary.

[hollodero]

(06-07-2018, 10:13 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Ehhh... I don't know, probably not? They're pretty much all terrible.

(06-08-2018, 04:12 AM)Wyche Wrote: Don't buy the hype.....that's just lip service. It's not called the duopoly of corruption for nothin'.

Fair enough, I'm certain they both behave quite equally. Both probably want to, but sure also probably have to exhaust all shady possibilities, the other one does it too and such. The problem are the rules, not those doing what the rules allow... and that's my only point, the cliché would tell me that the Dems would want to change the rules, while republicans, if any, want to keep the status quo or make things even more grim. Citizens united and such.
But sure that's quite the superficial perspective. But isn't there a little bit to it.

(06-08-2018, 04:12 AM)Wyche Wrote: The "blues" just rigged a presidential primary.

Yeah, that's one more of these things... isn't that primary process semi-democratic at best to begin with. I'm not an expert on those rules, but as I saw it, there are elections in the states, resulting in delegates for candidates, but not quite proportional, there are super-delegates that can do as they please anyway, and than there's a convention where all delegates are not really bound by anything. I don't care if they "rig" their own nomination within that strange process, and part of me even understands that they prefer the Democrat over the Independent. I don't really take issue with that and wonder why someone who isn't pro-Sanders would.

[BmorePat87]

(06-07-2018, 08:17 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: "In centuries:"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/role-of-hillary-clintons-brother-in-haiti-gold-mine-raises-eyebrows/2015/03/20/c8b6e3bc-cc05-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3927a98a88f6

It's hardly a Trump-specific issue, it's a wide spanning govenment issue. You do people favors while in office, and then later they remember the favor and they arrange a $3m/yr position as "Honorary Vice President" of some college, or pay you $500k per speech.

Bill Clinton entered office $1m in debt.
A week after leaving office, he bought a $2.85m home.
A US President earns $400k/yr.
$1m + $2.85m = $3.85m
$400k/yr x 8yrs = $3.20m

Even if he didn't spend a single dime of his salary for 8 years, and had zero interest on his $1m in debt, that would still leave him $650k short.

I'm not trying to be the "but Clinton!" guy here, but pretending that literally every single President in modern times (and probably almost always) hasn't been corrupt and gotten rich from the office is downright silly. I can't think of a single poor US President since Truman, and he stopped being President 73 years ago, and died 65 years ago.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2015/10/13/how-the-clintons-made-more-than-230-million-after-leaving-the-white-house/#4a3f19162ae3
Hillary Clinton made $9m in speaking fees during the year after she stopped being Secretary of State.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


If you want to make an article about how everyone is corrupt and making money through favors and political power, by all means I will hop right on in there on your side, because it's an awful problem and it needs to be changed, though I don't particularly see a way to do so when the people who could change it are the ones who are profiting from it.

If you want to make a "OMG TRUMP!" article about how he's somehow unique in his corruption, I am going to laugh in your face and treat your thread with the general disdain it deserves.

Best as I can tell, it's the same-'ol-same-'ol, just Trump is either more incompetent at pretending to hide it, or just doesn't give AF to hide it. Neither is *good*, but hardly "IN CENTURIES!"

Wait, you mean politicians people are paid to write books and go on speaking tours after leaving office? How corrupt! Definitely the same as enacting policies while in office to benefit financially.


The Clintons were roughly $12m in debt when they left the White House, most of that being legal debt, but that doesn't mean they didn't have cash, they were just in debt. They also didn't buy their home outright in cash. You're better off sticking to the Clinton Foundation criticism than this strange attempt to suggest debt means you have no cash and everyone buys homes outright. 

[jj22]

(06-07-2018, 05:30 PM)Millhouse Wrote: I consider myself an extreme moderate, meaning some issues I agree with Dems or progressives on like equality rights, others I tend to go with the Repubs like border security. 

So I do find it fascinating with those that support and defend Trump view him with far less scrutiny than that they held Obama under. Some people should understand that just because they voted for a person doesnt mean they have to keep defending their vote as time rolls on.

Personally for me it's not even Trump's policies that I despise him for. But I simply do not like him as a human being. Even though I disagreed with quite a few things Obama and Bush did, at least I liked them as a person overall, like they seem likeable to be around in a social setting. And they both seem to have a decent moral compass about them, even with the spying and wars going on. Trump's moral compass on the other hand only points to a picture of himself.

I'm with you on being a moderate. There is plenty I agree with on the Democratic side and the Republican side. That's one of the reasons why I am so disappointed in Trump supporters who acted like they cared about some of the core Republican principles I agreed with, but are showing they really don't. They aren't Republicans, they are something else new to American Politics. Pro Russia/Putin, Pro Kim Un, against American long standing ally's (like Canada/Europe), anti law enforcement, anti Vets, they claim to be American first, but support a POTUS who has over 80% of his businesses overseas. Claim to be anti illegal immigration, but support a POTUS that employs majority illegal immigrants to build and work his real estate property's. ... They consider black Athlete's SOB's for kneeling, but Nazi's and Klan members who killed folks while they protested "very fine people". Something just isn't right with them. They don't represent the core principles, and character of this great Nation. Disappointing to say the least.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(06-08-2018, 08:52 AM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah, that's one more of these things... isn't that primary process semi-democratic at best to begin with. I'm not an expert on those rules, but as I saw it, there are elections in the states, resulting in delegates for candidates, but not quite proportional, there are super-delegates that can do as they please anyway, and than there's a convention where all delegates are not really bound by anything. I don't care if they "rig" their own nomination within that strange process, and part of me even understands that they prefer the Democrat over the Independent. I don't really take issue with that and wonder why someone who isn't pro-Sanders would.

Read up on the emails between the Clinton campaign and the DNC

[hollodero]

(06-08-2018, 12:06 PM)Wyche Wrote: Read up on the emails between the Clinton campaign and the DNC

Yeah I'm certain those are quite shady. And I'm anything but a Hillary fan. I still see it as an internal DNC struggle that doesn't really need to bother anyone outside the party, and I don't consider primaries a sacred election to begin with.

But yeah, I have to stop argueing this case because it's turning me a bit sick myself. Awful Clinton network. Can't say I don't understand where you're coming from :)

[BmorePat87]

(06-08-2018, 12:15 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah I'm certain those are quite shady. And I'm anything but a Hillary fan. I still see it as an internal DNC struggle that doesn't really need to bother anyone outside the party, and I don't consider primaries a sacred election to begin with.

But yeah, I have to stop argueing this case because it's turning me a bit sick myself. Awful Clinton network. Can't say I don't understand where you're coming from :)

He refused to play with the party for years and then wanted to use their resources to help him become President.