The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!

[Route 45]

Wait...this is from John Podesta. When did INGO start believing anything that dude says?

He didn't know what was going on with his own White House staff, but you'll believe he speaks with authority about Trump's?

This is just the left celebrating prematurely. Nothing changed just because someone published an op-ed and used a word that Mike Pence likes. This reads like so much political theatre to me.

I was under the impression that he was kind of a prominent figure and key player in the Democrat party, but if you say so.

 

[Trigger Time]

Sure. Internally. Hire an outside firm or whatever. I'm curious if there's an INGOstablished opinion on whether he should use the DOJ or other LE agency to investigate.

What was determined when president Nixon had J edgar Hoover do it?
The president should always follow the law. Now, do we truly know what presidents can legally do with all of these secret powers they've delegated to the office over the years and also Congress has delegated more power to the executive branch as well.
I do not like secret ****. I do not like hidden powers. And I do not like one branch of government being more powerful than another. That is not how this is supposed to work.
So, I'm not trying to not answer your question, instead my answer is; whatever the law deems legal, I think the president should exhaust all legal options to find this coward.

 

[T.Lex]

Bad employee? That is one way to sugar coat subverting the President of the United States.

Not really.

Trump promised to hire only the best. Either he did or he didn't.

If this person is a senior member of the administration, then they are a bad employee. Not much more than that.

 

[T.Lex]

Anyone remember the movie No Way Out? Back when Sean Young was more hot than crazy.

 

[Trigger Time]

Not really.

Trump promised to hire only the best. Either he did or he didn't.

If this person is a senior member of the administration, then they are a bad employee. Not much more than that.

No boss ever anywhere has ever hired an employee they had to fire right?
People have clearly lied and misled the president or I'm sure he wouldn't have hired someone who opposes him. I wouldn't.

Can you imagine having to hire showboats?? Beurocrats who have a lifetime of pampering and laziness (public service).
We need term limits not only for Congress but also government appointees.

 

[PaulF]

I was under the impression that he was kind of a prominent figure and key player in the Democrat party, but if you say so.

Yeah, my issue isn’t with his title, it’s with his access. You don’t think it’s a stretch that Podesta knows more about the inner workings of Trump’s administration than Trump does?

My point is that the guy always seemed slimy, and I see no reason to read that tweet as anything more than chest-thumping now.

Thanks for the eye-roll and the zero-thought relply, though!

 

[Alpo]

Any rational human being can read the tweets issued by the president and recognize his unfit mental state. It doesn't take a senior staff member to report same in the NY Times.

 

[Trigger Time]

Yeah, my issue isn’t with his title, it’s with his access. You don’t think it’s a stretch that Podesta knows more about the inner workings of Trump’s administration than Trump does?

My point is that the guy always seemed slimy, and I see no reason to read that tweet as anything more than chest-thumping now.

Thanks for the eye-roll and the zero-thought relply, though!

Exactly right. Podesta is a slimeball. How he isnt under indictment too is very concerning

 

[Route 45]

Yeah, my issue isn’t with his title, it’s with his access. You don’t think it’s a stretch that Podesta knows more about the inner workings of Trump’s administration than Trump does?

My point is that the guy always seemed slimy, and I see no reason to read that tweet as anything more than chest-thumping now.

Thanks for the eye-roll and the zero-thought relply, though!

Seems to me that even a zero-thought "relply" (lol) is worth more than the opinion of someone who is naive enough to think that prominent players, both former and current, have no access to information regarding the inner workings of government, regardless of party.

 

[PaulF]

Seems to me that even a zero-thought "relply" (lol) is worth more than the opinion of someone who is naive enough to think that prominent players, both former and current, have no access to information regarding the inner workings of government, regardless of party.

So, just to be clear: you understand that you just made the argument that Obama’s disgraced COS knows more about the inner workings of the Trump administration than Trump himself.

You see that, right?

 

[ATOMonkey]

How many people work at the White House??

about 1900.

Do you think Trump hired each one when he took office? No. There are quite a few people who work in the White House that stay on regardless of who is elected.

 

[Alpo]

Excluding nepotism, here's a brief list.

And....more: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/list-officials-left-trump-administration/story?id=49334453

 

[Route 45]

How many people work at the White House??

about 1900.

Do you think Trump hired each one when he took office? No. There are quite a few people who work in the White House that stay on regardless of who is elected.

Apparently, some people don't understand this.

 

[foszoe]

Excluding nepotism, here's a brief list.

And....more: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/list-officials-left-trump-administration/story?id=49334453

Provide some context for me. Is this significantly higher than past administrations?

 

[ATOMonkey]

There is an army of bureaucrats that work behind the scenes of every administration since ever. That is why government, at any level really, is never reduced and only grows.

 

[Alpo]

Provide some context for me. Is this significantly higher than past administrations?

You know the answer to this. Don't play the dunce.

 

[ATOMonkey]

There are nearly 3 million civilians employed by the Federal government. Some of them are not subject to any rules, laws, or oversight, except for those which they create themselves.

Just let that sink in.

Then talk to me about Republicans and Democrats.

 

[Leadeye]

I'm still not sold that this staffer even exists, what's to say that somebody at the NYT didn't just create the person, and the story. Journalistic integrity? We're long past that in this day and age.

 

[Trigger Time]

You know the answer to this. Don't play the dunce.

Resign typicly means, asked to leave. You turn in your resignation on the day you are hired in the event your services are no longer needed.

If someone isnt doing the job they need to do, meshing with other staff, a host of other reasons, then they need to find new employment. This is good. I've seen too many times employers push problem employees into other positions and even promostions because they suck at the job they do and sometimes are even an embarrassment to the company or liability. But the company doesnt fire them when they should because they dont want the fight.
Trump is not a *****. But in reality, Trump isnt doing MOST of the hiring and firing within the white house it is his chief of staff and his staff. Even within the administration it is advisors who make recommendations to the president on appointments and firings.

 

[T.Lex]

No boss ever anywhere has ever hired an employee they had to fire right?
People have clearly lied and misled the president or I'm sure he wouldn't have hired someone who opposes him. I wouldn't.

I think its important to keep the NYT piece in context: at a certain level, to me, it is a big meh. Every administration with more than a dozen employees will have factions. The author specifically said that they tried to thwart irrational or wrong-headed behavior. Well, yeah, that's part of the job. Ultimately, though, when the boss says do something, they either need to do it or not do it (either by quitting or getting fired).

If Trump finds out who wrote that, I support firing that person. Mostly for putting their own righteousness in the spotlight above their boss's. That's the part that really irks me. That this is being done should not have been on the front page. That people are working to make the Trump administration do the right thing - sometimes perhaps in spite of Trump himself - should be assumed. But if the boss gives an order, it either needs to be carried out or the person needs to be gone.

Some INGOers may recall a certain situation where a certain person in a certain administration did something that might sound very similar to that scenario.

It was a prideful chicken**** thing for the author to do this. But, it was not "treason" or a crime. IMHO