Trump: Worst President Ever? Topic

Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 9:39:00 PM (view original):
18 US Code 227

Pretty sure that's specific enough.
very good specificity ... So - What EXACTLY did anyone say that could be prosecuted by that law?

Remember --- All the administration has said is they 'think' its a terminable offense when being asked about it by reporters.
9/17/2017 9:45 PM (edited)
And let me ask you this.... if they did violate the law why aren't they being prosecuted?

9/17/2017 9:46 PM
The press secretary called it a fireable offense.

Without a doubt can be seen as trying to influence a private companies employment decisions.

A complaint has already been filed, we'll see where it goes.
9/17/2017 9:48 PM
Posted by moy23 on 9/17/2017 9:46:00 PM (view original):
And let me ask you this.... if they did violate the law why aren't they being prosecuted?

If ESPN actually did fire her, then I think you would see at least an attempt at prosecution. As it is, only the ethics complaint will be filed I'm sure. Not that the Trump administration really cares about ethics.
9/17/2017 10:07 PM
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 9:48:00 PM (view original):
The press secretary called it a fireable offense.

Without a doubt can be seen as trying to influence a private companies employment decisions.

A complaint has already been filed, we'll see where it goes.
"without a doubt"...... "can be seen"....

the complaint will go nowhere because he who controls the AG and the DOJ directs what gets prosecuted. I learned this from watching Obummer.
9/17/2017 10:12 PM (edited)
Posted by moy23 on 9/17/2017 10:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 9:48:00 PM (view original):
The press secretary called it a fireable offense.

Without a doubt can be seen as trying to influence a private companies employment decisions.

A complaint has already been filed, we'll see where it goes.
"without a doubt"...... "can be seen"....

the complaint will go nowhere because he who controls the AG and the DOJ directs what gets prosecuted. I learned this from watching Obummer.
AG and DOJ have no say in ethics complaints. It goes to the independent Council of the Inspectors General.
9/17/2017 10:16 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
who gives a **** what Jemele Hill or Curt Schilling or any other dumbass sportscaster says? If you form your opinion based on what sportscasters say, you're an idiot.
9/18/2017 12:07 AM
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 10:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 9/17/2017 10:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 9:48:00 PM (view original):
The press secretary called it a fireable offense.

Without a doubt can be seen as trying to influence a private companies employment decisions.

A complaint has already been filed, we'll see where it goes.
"without a doubt"...... "can be seen"....

the complaint will go nowhere because he who controls the AG and the DOJ directs what gets prosecuted. I learned this from watching Obummer.
AG and DOJ have no say in ethics complaints. It goes to the independent Council of the Inspectors General.
Who appoints the IG?


And btw... OMG an ethics complaint?!?! Must be a big deal.... Like when Conway tried to sell ivankas line on live TV? #busted
9/18/2017 12:41 AM (edited)
Seriously, I don't bet but if I did I'd bet NOTHING comes out of this. NOTHING!!!
9/18/2017 12:45 AM
Posted by bagchucker on 9/17/2017 10:13:00 AM (view original):
i have to say, my favorite poster these days is bad_luck

he just keeps on kickin all yalls *****
Your subjective opinion is irrelevant. Sort of like you.
9/18/2017 8:29 AM
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 8:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 9/17/2017 8:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 8:01:00 PM (view original):
Kinda like the White House having a conniption over Jemele hill. Hilarious.
Actually.... I don't think that was a conniption... I think they just want her fired to set an example for others. If they keep the story alive it could happen.
You do realize that is an absolute attack on her first amendment rights? Them trying to get her fired is exactly the kind of thing the first amendment was designed for.
They fired Ditka and Schilling for the same thing...hypocritical it seems
9/18/2017 8:31 AM
Posted by wylie715 on 9/18/2017 12:08:00 AM (view original):
who gives a **** what Jemele Hill or Curt Schilling or any other dumbass sportscaster says? If you form your opinion based on what sportscasters say, you're an idiot.
The debate is whether or not ESPN is a hypocritical employer not whether they influence an opinion.
9/18/2017 8:33 AM
Posted by sjpoker on 9/17/2017 10:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 10:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 9/17/2017 10:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 9/17/2017 9:48:00 PM (view original):
The press secretary called it a fireable offense.

Without a doubt can be seen as trying to influence a private companies employment decisions.

A complaint has already been filed, we'll see where it goes.
"without a doubt"...... "can be seen"....

the complaint will go nowhere because he who controls the AG and the DOJ directs what gets prosecuted. I learned this from watching Obummer.
AG and DOJ have no say in ethics complaints. It goes to the independent Council of the Inspectors General.
That's correct. One again Moy speaks out of his ***.
Having that ability would explain his high income. Probably a Vegas act.
9/18/2017 8:50 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/17/2017 10:40:00 AM (view original):
Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2017 10:06:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/16/2017 8:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by cccp1014 on 9/16/2017 12:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/15/2017 9:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by cccp1014 on 9/15/2017 9:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/15/2017 5:35:00 PM (view original):
Now I remember why I blocked you cccp. You're literally too dumb to argue with.
LOL - so you give up again I see. You are a coward and your candidate lost. Grow up.
cccp: Obama should have cut the debt

me: no, that would have been bad during a recession/recovery

cccp: old people buy too many pills!!!!!!

me: uh, yeah, you're dumb.

cccp: ha! You give up? Coward. I'm the king of the world. Where's my shopping cart and my drugs?!?!??
BS- I said he should not have increased by as much as he did. Find one post where I said "cut"

You are a lying bi-polar bad person.
My point stands even if you replace "debt" with "deficit" which is what would have to happen to reduce the debt. You'd have to cut the deficit.

Let's say you graph federal outlays over time:



Then you draw a line for revenue with it:


That's a deficit. Then the recession hits. Outlays keep going as scheduled:


But revenue doesn't:

If you cut outlays to only increase the debt by X instead of Y, you damage the economy at a time when other things—employment, growth, etc—are MUCH more important than the deficit.
Is this the sane bad_luck or the insane one. Since you are bi-polar it is tough to gauge. We came out of the recession in his first term yet the debt kept rising. He did nothing except for cut military spend as I could see. Never addressed entitlements, never addressed corporate inversions, never addressed tax loopholes for corporations, kept the interest rates very low so that the stock market would be artificially inflated. I will acquiesce that during his first term his hands were somewhat tied due to Bush but are you defending his 2nd term when all he accomplished was highly flawed Obamacare? My point that you ignored the fact that he did not create a plan for a surplus for the next POTUS, who was supposed to be HRC, he just left the country with a deficit after eight years. In business you cannot balance a budget by just throwing more debt on the balance sheet and crossing your fingers.

Now let's see which bad_luck responds. The rational debater or the irrational insult thrower and cowardly blocker.
A) If you want to argue that Obama should have stopped corporate inversions somehow or that he should have worked for policies that would have pushed the majority of the recovery benefits to the middle and lower classes instead of the wealthy, I won't disagree. But those are separate issues (sort of) from the deficit.

B) Even after the recession was officially over, growth was still slow, wages were still low, and the economy was still somewhat fragile. Removing a trillion or $500 billion dollars from the economy at that time would have been dumb. It would have contracted the economy and possibly put us back into a recession.
So you agree on point A with me. It is a start.

On point B why was there not a plan to increase growth and drive wages up. People argue that unemployment was low and the stock market was moving in the right direction but to your point the economy was fragile. My point was instead of implementing Obamacare, which is a disaster because healthy people now have to pay more for sick people hence the rise in monthly fees he should have left well enough alone and instead tried to somehow fix entitlements.

How about setting firm budget caps for Medicaid, Medicare and SS?

Medicare: Establish a contribution system where new retirees, just like federal workers now btw, would receive a government contribution to purchase the health insurance that best meets their needs. The contribution should be capped and reviewed periodically. An individual’s contribution would be adjusted according to income and medical condition / situation, etc. -- Now its open ended. Stupid.

Medicaid: Everyone is treated the same and the program is costly and unmanageable. Medicaid’s long-term care benefit should be amended from an open ended and unregulated entitlement to an insurance-based model of private coverage. More private less government and more oversight.

SS: The system as a whole should be made redone to help those that actually need the help vs. treat everyone the same. Trump should not get the same benefits as his driver for example. The less fortunate should have a safety net and that is where the monies should flow. We need to acknowledge that people live longer so we need to raise the retirement age and indexed per actuaries accordingly.

If Obama addressed just one of these in his eight years it would have been encouraging. He addressed NONE of them, while weakening our military, dividing the country even more based on racial tensions and Obamacare sucks.
9/18/2017 9:34 AM (edited)
◂ Prev 1...552|553|554|555|556...1096 Next ▸
Trump: Worst President Ever? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.