With this step, Sears begins its come-back!
Hmmmm… Walter Shaub, the Director of the Government Ethics Office would seem to disagree with you there:
But what the hell does he know about government ethics anyway?
I said it’s never been invoked in such circumstances.
You say the guy disagrees with me.
Can you highlight where he shows it HAS been invoked previously?
It does not appear to me that he does disagree. He appears to be saying that it should be invoked now despite the fact that this would be a novel application.
Right?
Ethics violation – 1000%.
Trump is not the first sitting president to have economic interests that involve friends or associates – he’s the first in a long time who seemingly didn’t want to subject himself and his family to scrutiny. He can’t withhold tax returns and skirt the normal ethics review and then claim he’s just defending his family. He’s had opportunities to do the right thing and basically shrugged said that the normal rules don’t apply to him.
Okay, but the normal rules of public scrutiny do apply, so deal with it.
I think you’re running into a problem with how people communicate.
My observation has always been that, if you don’t explicitly say you don’t support something, your arguments are taken to be the same as your opinion. If you defend someone, then you are assumed to approve of them, unless you say “I don’t approve.”
When you said that she was just giving her opinion and not an advertisement, that is assumed not only to be your personal opinion, but that you approve of her doing so. All because you didn’t say “I don’t approve of what she did, but, legally…”
Even knowing that you like to separate these things, I can’t actually force myself not to make that assumption. Even now, there’s a part of me saying “he approves of what she did.”
So I don’t think this is something you can condition people out of. I think it’s something you have to accept, and just always say it. And, in doing so, it might be less exhausting making these arguments.
Is any of it untrue? Or unjustified? I don’t think so. Every word of that needs to be said.
Yes, quite a lot of it appears unjustified or untrue.
Just days after he got a Navy SEAL killed due to ignorance and lack of planning, Trump is off golfing.
As his own wife has chosen to stick it to the taxpayers and New York in general by refusing to move to the White House and do the job of FLOTUS…
I have no idea how much truth or justification are in the above quotes. I suspect the second quote may be partly justified, but sometimes things are better left unsaid if you don’t wish to appear as a vindictive, petty minded cnt of a journalist.*
And how does it compare to the kind of nastiness that Obama has been subject to for eight years or Clinton for the last 20plus?
Poor little snowflake. Was the article not PC enough for you?