WWTBAM Bored

A home for the weary.
It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:05 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 20638
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Don't let the private jet hit you on your way out!

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 20638
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
David Shulkin is next!

Quote:
Less than two weeks after Trump’s Veterans’ Affairs Chief signed a memo instructing VA staff to cut down on nonessential travel, he took a 10 day taxpayer funded trip with his entourage to Europe that included a River Cruise and visiting palaces, the Washington Post reports.

More: http://www.politicususa.com/2017/09/29/trump-cabinet-travel-woes-grow-va-chief-entourage-european-cruise-visited-palaces.html

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 2923
Location: Lacey, Washington
A breath of fresh air. When democrats are found to have engaged in unethical behavior, they seem to face no consequences, and are many times rewarded.

_________________
Arkansas Gulls -2007 BBBL Champions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 7:13 pm
Posts: 328
Game show writer Adam Nedeff made a humorous observation on his Facebook. Tom Price is tentatively being replaced by Don Wright as acting secretary. This means that... wait for it...

The New Price is Wright.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 20638
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
A breath of fresh air. When democrats are found to have engaged in unethical behavior, they seem to face no consequences, and are many times rewarded.

Ha, ha! Every member of Trump's administration has engaged in unethical behavior; Price is just the first to face consequences.

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob Juch wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
A breath of fresh air. When democrats are found to have engaged in unethical behavior, they seem to face no consequences, and are many times rewarded.

Ha, ha! Every member of Trump's administration has engaged in unethical behavior; Price is just the first to face consequences.


Just like the previous administration.

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:20 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 15694
Location: By the phone
BackInTex wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
A breath of fresh air. When democrats are found to have engaged in unethical behavior, they seem to face no consequences, and are many times rewarded.

Ha, ha! Every member of Trump's administration has engaged in unethical behavior; Price is just the first to face consequences.


Just like the previous administration.
False. Just false. Starting at the very top, where President Obama, unlike Donny, complied with the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob78164 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:
Ha, ha! Every member of Trump's administration has engaged in unethical behavior; Price is just the first to face consequences.


Just like the previous administration.
False. Just false. Starting at the very top, where President Obama, unlike Donny, complied with the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. --Bob


Bobbie, notwithstanding your blindness to the Clintons regarding the clause you seem to think so important, you are confusing ethical with legal. Lots of overlap there. I was responding to the word "ethical".

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:30 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 15694
Location: By the phone
BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:

Just like the previous administration.
False. Just false. Starting at the very top, where President Obama, unlike Donny, complied with the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. --Bob


Bobbie, notwithstanding your blindness to the Clintons regarding the clause you seem to think so important, you are confusing ethical with legal. Lots of overlap there. I was responding to the word "ethical".
Perhaps you've forgotten but there have been two intervening Administrations since the Clinton Administration. President Obama's Administration was one of the cleanest in history. A joke ending in the phrase "backwards and in high heels" comes to mind.

If you're referring to Secretary Clinton's handling of e-mail, Donny's utter disregard for state secrets and national security completely dwarfs anything Secretary Clinton was even accused of doing. It was legal because it's basically impossible, legally, for the incumbent President to improperly disclose classified information, but it was damaging to national security, yet no one in Congress (or the party that elected him) seems particularly interested in exacting so much as a political price for what would be espionage if conducted by anyone else. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob78164 wrote:
President Obama's Administration was one of the cleanest in history. A joke


For once we agree.

And re: the Clintons, I was referring to the Clinton Foundation For Governmental Access.

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 2923
Location: Lacey, Washington
When Obama and the Clintons come to mind, so does Big Jule's quote from Guys and Dolls: "... as has been proved by my record: Thirty-three arrests and no convictions!".
Trump is right about at least one thing: The swamp protects it's own.

_________________
Arkansas Gulls -2007 BBBL Champions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 13782
BackInTex wrote:

And re: the Clintons, I was referring to the Clinton Foundation For Governmental Access.


You mean the same Clinton Foundation that has done millions of dollars of charitable work in Africa and other third world areas while Donald Trump was golfing and hawking Trump steaks?

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com
Our Silver Screen Central blog is now live. Check it out (and join the discussion): http://www.silverscreenvideos.com/central


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:16 am 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 15694
Location: By the phone
silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote:

And re: the Clintons, I was referring to the Clinton Foundation For Governmental Access.


You mean the same Clinton Foundation that has done millions of dollars of charitable work in Africa and other third world areas while Donald Trump was golfing and hawking Trump steaks?
I'm still wondering why we haven't heard a word from BiT and Flock about Donny's actual acceptance of profits stemming from foreign governments, in clear violation of the Constitution's Emoluments Clause. That's outright bribery and clearly unconstitutional, yet they seem curiously focused on the imagined misdeeds of a private foundation run by people who, at that time, were private citizens.

Perhaps, sss, you can shed some light on this curious phenomenon. Any idea what Hannity and Rush are saying about these things? --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote:

And re: the Clintons, I was referring to the Clinton Foundation For Governmental Access.


You mean the same Clinton Foundation that has done millions of dollars of charitable work in Africa and other third world areas while Donald Trump was golfing and hawking Trump steaks?


No, I'm not in Fantasyland.

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob78164 wrote:
That's outright bribery


Typical. You equate commerce to bribery. They are different. What law school did you say you went to?

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 2923
Location: Lacey, Washington
Bob78164 wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote:

And re: the Clintons, I was referring to the Clinton Foundation For Governmental Access.


You mean the same Clinton Foundation that has done millions of dollars of charitable work in Africa and other third world areas while Donald Trump was golfing and hawking Trump steaks?
I'm still wondering why we haven't heard a word from BiT and Flock about Donny's actual acceptance of profits stemming from foreign governments, in clear violation of the Constitution's Emoluments Clause. That's outright bribery and clearly unconstitutional, yet they seem curiously focused on the imagined misdeeds of a private foundation run by people who, at that time, were private citizens.

Perhaps, sss, you can shed some light on this curious phenomenon. Any idea what Hannity and Rush are saying about these things? --Bob

So the Constitution prohibits any business person from becoming President? I never saw that one. What is it? Article VII.7.2? It certainly is not this:
"No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state."
That seems to me to apply more to Ms. Clinton and her Foundation than it does to Trump, who did business not gift acceptance for favors, as Ms Clinton seems to have done from several kings, princes and foreign states, if anyone would care to investigate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... eae631b814

_________________
Arkansas Gulls -2007 BBBL Champions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:43 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 15694
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:

You mean the same Clinton Foundation that has done millions of dollars of charitable work in Africa and other third world areas while Donald Trump was golfing and hawking Trump steaks?
I'm still wondering why we haven't heard a word from BiT and Flock about Donny's actual acceptance of profits stemming from foreign governments, in clear violation of the Constitution's Emoluments Clause. That's outright bribery and clearly unconstitutional, yet they seem curiously focused on the imagined misdeeds of a private foundation run by people who, at that time, were private citizens.

Perhaps, sss, you can shed some light on this curious phenomenon. Any idea what Hannity and Rush are saying about these things? --Bob

So the Constitution prohibits any business person from becoming President? I never saw that one. What is it? Article VII.7.2? It certainly is not this:
"No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state."
That seems to me to apply more to Ms. Clinton and her Foundation than it does to Trump, who did business not gift acceptance for favors, as Ms Clinton seems to have done from several kings, princes and foreign states, if anyone would care to investigate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... eae631b814
What do you think an emolument is? It's payment of any form from a foreign government.

As for Secretary Clinton, she didn't hold an office of trust or profit under the United States after stepping down as Secretary of State. And she never personally profited from the family's charitable foundation.

Businesspersons can become President, but they can't accept any revenues from foreign governments. That's why they have put their assets into a blind trust. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:44 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 15694
Location: By the phone
BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
That's outright bribery


Typical. You equate commerce to bribery. They are different. What law school did you say you went to?
No. I equate "emolument" to payment. Federal officials don't get to accept payment of any form from foreign governments without Congressional permission.

I went to a law school where we read the Constitution. Where did you get your legal training? --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob78164 wrote:
I went to a law school where we read the Constitution. Where did you get your legal training? --Bob


With respect to bribery, I've been in the trenches with the DOJ and SEC, having worked for a company that was almost given a death penalty due to bribery (which occurred years before I joined). Believe me, I'm very knowledgeable of what is, and what is not, bribery. Not only from a moral, but also from a legal, and specifically an FCPA perspective.

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Last edited by BackInTex on Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob78164 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
That's outright bribery


No. I equate "emolument" to payment.


Sorry Bobbie. You don't get to change the story. You not only called it bribery, you doubled down calling it "outright bribery". That is pretty clear. And absolutely incorrect.

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:46 am 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 15694
Location: By the phone
BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:


No. I equate "emolument" to payment.


Sorry Bobbie. You don't get to change the story. You not only called it bribery, you doubled down calling it "outright bribery". That is pretty clear. And absolutely incorrect.
Oh, I absolutely believe that Donny's personal financial interests are affecting his official decisionmaking, and that these payments are being made for that purpose. But whether that's true or not, it's a constitutional violation that you seem curiously uninterested in. The whole point of the Framers drafting the Emoluments Clause so broadly was to draw a bright line rule that would avoid potentially difficult questions of proof regarding intent.

It disappoints me, but doesn't surprise me, that a Republican Congress has been completely unwilling to investigate this clear constitutional violation. Perhaps after 2018 we'll have at least one House of Congress that's willing to take its oversight responsibilities seriously. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 8881
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob78164 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:

No. I equate "emolument" to payment.


Sorry Bobbie. You don't get to change the story. You not only called it bribery, you doubled down calling it "outright bribery". That is pretty clear. And absolutely incorrect.
Oh, I absolutely believe that Donny's personal financial interests are affecting his official decisionmaking, and that these payments are being made for that purpose. But whether that's true or not, it's a constitutional violation that you seem curiously uninterested in. The whole point of the Framers drafting the Emoluments Clause so broadly was to draw a bright line rule that would avoid potentially difficult questions of proof regarding intent.

It disappoints me, but doesn't surprise me, that a Republican Congress has been completely unwilling to investigate this clear constitutional violation. Perhaps after 2018 we'll have at least one House of Congress that's willing to take its oversight responsibilities seriously. --Bob


What will be interesting is to see the trend in donations to the Clinton Foundation for 2018 and 2019 compared to when she was SOS and considered to be the next POTUS.

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jarnon and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Americanized by Maël Soucaze.