Report: Trump Praised His Turkish Business Partner in Call With Turkish President
I’ll note the source so you can ignore the piece and rail against me for linking it. Huffington Post: Trump Touted His Turkish Business Partner In A Call With President Erdogan:
When President-elect Donald Trump spoke to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Nov. 9, he mentioned one of his Turkish business partners as a “close friend” and passed on his remarks that he is “your great admirer.”
The twinned Trump Towers bear the president-elect’s name in Istanbul. Dogan Holding, a massive media and real estate conglomerate in Turkey, owns the conjoined buildings and pays the Trump Organization to license the Trump name and brand. It can now rely on that name and brand to be sitting in the Oval Office and singing its praises to President Erdogan.
In his call with the Turkish leader, Trump passed on praise for Erdogan from Mehmet Ali Yalcindag, son-in-law of Dogan Holding owner Aydin Dogan and former president of the Dogan Media Group. His wife, Arzuhan Dogan Yalcindage, sits on the board of Dogan Holding. He’s friends with the Trump family and had worked closely on the Trump Towers project in Istanbul. On election night, he attended Trump’s shocking victory celebration at the New York Hilton in Midtown Manhattan.
Trump’s praise for Mehmet Ali Yalcindag was first reported by Amberin Zaman in the independent Turkish paper Diken. Zaman’s report has since been picked up by other Turkish newspapers and television stations.
I don’t know anything about the independent Turkish paper Diken. If anyone has any further information on that, let me know. Or you can just dismiss it out of hand because it came from the Huffington Post, ignoring the fact that the story originated elsewhere.
If the report is true, it provides a fairly strong answer to those who say: “What is a businessman supposed to do?” Not praising your business partner would be a nice start.
UPDATE: BfC provides a Washington Examiner link that disputes the above account:
Donald Trump did not heap praise on a Turkish business partner in a call with Turkish President Recep Erdogan right after his election, as reported by the Huffington Post, according to the source cited by the news outlet. Instead, the new American president-elect used his Turkish business partner’s praise of Erdogan as a way of buttering up the foreign leader.
That version of the call comes from journalist and Wilson Center fellow Amberin Zaman in an article originally published in the Turkish newspaper Diken. She claims that her reporting was badly twisted by the Huffington Post to make an erroneous claim about Trump’s use of the presidential office to enrich his business dealings.
“HuffingtonPost got it wrong. Trump did not praise b[usiness] partner. He said b[usiness] partner praised Erdogan,” she wrote on Twitter Wednesday night.
. . . .
Cue the Huffington Post civics lecture: “The praise heaped on his Turkish business partner in the call with Erdogan is just the most recent sign of Trump’s near impossible task in avoiding the significant conflicts of interest his global real estate business presents.”
Wrong, said the author of the original scoop. While it is true that Trump referred to Yalcindaq as “my close friend,” argued Zaman, the purpose of those words was to praise Erdogan, not Yalcindaq. And according to her report, Trump laid it on extra thick, saying his favorite daughter Ivanka was also an admirer of the Turkish strongman.
His daughter Ivanka, let us all recall, will take a leading role in running the Trump Organization.
I appreciate the link. As I said in the post, I was seeking more information, and this link provides some. As a debunking of the facts reported in the Huffington Post piece, it is quite good.
As a “debunking” of conflict-of-interests concerns, however, this does not do the trick. The facts as revealed by the Washington Examiner are that Trump: 1) made an unnecessary reference to his business partner in a call with a foreign leader; and 2) made sure that the foreign leader knew that his business partner — and his child, who will be running his business — are admirers of the foreign leader. And have business interests in the foreign leader’s country.
How this clarification dispels any concerns over conflicts of interest is a complete and utter mystery to me. In fact, it just makes it worse — and reinforces for me the belief that Trump will be mixing business and foreign affairs throughout his presidency, and counting on his fans to defend him.
This is banana republic stuff. But I guess it’s what the American people want. Who am I to argue with their infinite wisdom?
I can’t believe Patterico linked the Huffington Post. He still wants Hillary to be President. What a cuckety cuck. Businessmen have no choice but to praise their business partners. What would you have Trump do, Patterico? Not mention anything having to do with his businesses when talking to foreign leaders? Come on!
Trump is about draining the swamp, Patterico, and doing shady things that might be technically legal but are ethically dubious is an integral part of that. Get with the program, cuck!
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:05 amLet’s just mark that ^^^^^^^ as read, what was Trump supposed to do, use his friend to denounce the psycho leader in the mid purge?
papertiger (c8116c) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:19 amOr, you can try another news source:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/did-huffpo-flub-report-on-trump-turkey-call/article/2608147
Buttering up people in power by business folks… Pretty standard behaviour (not that I am a fan).
The thing about daughter Ivanka was an admirer of Erdogan. That is something that makes me feel even worse about what is happening in Turkey and the future of that part of the world.
-Bill
BfC (5517e8) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:21 amUPDATE: BfC provides a Washington Examiner link that disputes the above account:
His daughter Ivanka, let us all recall, will take a leading role in running the Trump Organization.
I appreciate the link. As I said in the post, I was seeking more information, and this link provides some. As a debunking of the facts reported in the Huffington Post piece, it is quite good.
As a “debunking” of conflict-of-interests concerns, however, this does not do the trick. The facts as revealed by the Washington Examiner are that Trump: 1) made an unnecessary reference to his business partner in a call with a foreign leader; and 2) made sure that the foreign leader knew that his business partner — and his child, who will be running his business — are admirers of the foreign leader. And have business interests in the foreign leader’s country.
How this clarification dispels any concerns over conflicts of interest is a complete and utter mystery to me. In fact, it just makes it worse — and reinforces for me the belief that Trump will be mixing business and foreign affairs throughout his presidency, and counting on his fans to defend him.
This is banana republic stuff. But I guess it’s what the American people want. Who am I to argue with their infinite wisdom?
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:32 amWhat is Donald Trump supposed to do? NOT tell a foreign leader that his child, who will be running his business and has business interests in the leader’s country, that his child loves that foreign leader?
What is Donald Trump supposed to do? NOT tell foreign leaders: you’d better do my businesses right or you’ll get what’s coming to you? (I am not saying he has done that. I am saying that is the direction in which we are headed.)
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:35 amI’m thankful we won’t have a Hillary Clinton presidency to worry about and contend with. I’m also thankful that we’ll see some intelligent, HONEST folks in cabinet positions and will have some smart picks for SCOTUS.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:36 amSomeone should pass Erdogan the check. Dude’s turning out to be your standard issue Muslim leader.
papertiger (c8116c) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:43 amRuining Islams rep for the other 3%.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha… HAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
‘ “Homeland” Season 6 is coming early next year and fans have just been recently teased on what will happen in the new installment. Actress Claire Danes said the hit TV series will get more intense when it comes back on television in January.
In a teaser for the next season, Danes who plays Carrie Mathison explained that it was exciting to shoot at her hometown in New York City for “Homeland” Season 6. The former CIA agent is now back in the United States in an effort to stop an attack on the first female president of the country.”
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/24/2016 @ 11:54 amthis post is no good
i abjure this post
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:04 pmhttp://www.ebaumsworld.com/images/kramer-turkey-gif/81960476/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:06 pmI am thankful for my honest and supportive commenters.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:06 pmIvanka likes him.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:08 pmHe’s a sapper behind the pre-presidency lines…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:08 pmPainting targets in a target-rich environment.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:09 pmhappy thanksgiving
today’s martini is as follow we have 2.8 or so ounces of a gin called finn’s gin something like .7 ounces of maraschino and several dashes of peychaud’s
so very lovely
no garnish
it’s a sipper!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:11 pmI’m just thankful that Hillary is not the President-elect.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:21 pmThanksgiving dinner is going to be great. Lots of meat, mashed potatoes, corn, and green bean casserole for America!
And for dessert, we’ll have peach pie, because things are looking peachy for America!
Thank you for defeating that nasty Hillary woman, Mr Donald!
“As God is my witness I thought Turkeys could fly.” – Ivanka Trump *
* quote yet to be verified
papertiger (c8116c) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:28 pmGreetings:
I think that somebody has a “bete noir”.
11B40 (6abb5c) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:28 pmDo we have an actual transcript of the call, even someone as trustworthy as zaman appears to be, I’m not going to buy get spin.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:36 pmDr colleAgue at foreign policy, Stephen Walt, for instance, has the obligatory ’10 ways to tell your presidents a dictator. Well he cribbed it from Naomi wolf
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 12:40 pmPatterico–
Yes, a different wing of the GOP, long dormant since Reagan, has seized the reins. Main Street. Car dealers. Businessmen. The new President actually runs companies. Unlike the coupon-clippers and stockholders we’ve had, you cannot put the running of an entrepreneurial company into the hands of a committee of bankers and accountants.
Now, sure, I’d hope that our relations with country X are not based on whether Trump gets to build a casino, but the only check on that is impeachment. Unlike Clinton, however, he’d actually be building a casino, not just shaking people down for money to her “Foundation.”
And the fact that you know about this argues that he’s at least being open about it. Hillary would obfuscate and lie.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/24/2016 @ 1:13 pmIf Romney is Secretary of State, I very much doubt there will be a lot of this.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/24/2016 @ 1:16 pmWe’ve already seen how Secretary of Mistakes Hillary Clinton dealt with Turkey, Syria, Libya, Iran, Russia, as well as the bundlers in Saudi Arabia who contributed to her “Foundation.”
Let’s give Trump a chance to be sworn in as President before we decide to impeach him. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/24/2016 @ 1:25 pmLet’s talk turkey, not Turkey.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/24/2016 @ 1:38 pmThis what add back channels, now recep isn’t someone I would invite to sinner, but as with volodya he is a reality to take into account.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 1:38 pmhe can’t come to dinner cause he’s a nasty turk but he can join us in the drawing room for some milk frothed with a healthy amount of b&b, served in an elegant old school china tea cup with a splash of warmed cold brew over hazelnuts
we don’t do prejudice on people it’s the holidays
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/24/2016 @ 1:51 pmShorter answer:
He may be a crook, but he’s our crook. Better than their crook.
These are the cards we were dealt.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/24/2016 @ 1:59 pmi like the googletard logo thingy today
that doesn’t happen super-often, but this one’s kinda pleasantly inoffensive except for the google part
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/24/2016 @ 2:15 pm@17– I can’t help with the authenticity of the quote, but turkeys can and do fly; the wild ones, that is, not the Butterball version.
Gramps (8a87b4) — 11/24/2016 @ 2:16 pm#28 Mr happyfeet, once Google figures out that Thanksgiving is a uniquely American holiday predicated upon giving thanks to Our Providence, they’ll change the logo in order to reflect the recently-discovered Muslim influence upon the Pilgrims.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/24/2016 @ 2:24 pmSalaam! (LOL)
With Erdogan locking people up left and right, telling that tyrant that your biz partner is a fan and not a foe is simple human decency.
Frank Skog (0d51b9) — 11/24/2016 @ 2:24 pm#31 Frank Skog,
Turkey’s devolved into a mess, but we may need to rely upon Erdogan for some help in sorting out the Jihadi problem. And the Iran problem.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/24/2016 @ 2:37 pmDuring WW1, we allied with Stalin. That doesn’t mean we loved him. But we did need his help for a little while.
The daily mail, fwiw, points out dogan was a rival of erdogan as recently as 2009, since he retired and left his business to his daughter, he may have accommodated himself to the regime. there are many houses in westeros.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 3:14 pmA world affairs piece from 2013, might be instructive, Carlos slim, bozos, this could be you.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 3:23 pmI am not a huge Trump fan, but rather a reluctant voter. However, I think you are going overboard here. I suspect the President of Turkey is already pretty well aware of Trump’s partners in Turkey seeing as they have an intelligence service and all in Turkey.
And I bet the fact that Trump’s business partners are not in jail after the coup means the President of Turkey already knows they are big fans. I don’t think Trump spilled any national security secrets here, nor engaged in anything that amounts to a “conflict of interests” here.
Sometimes, you need to step back and not get drawn into hyperbolic drama because the MSM is obviously out to blow everything out of proportion and invent the news they want to print. They were lying before and during the election. Why is it so difficult to see they are continuing to lie after the election. And the lies won’t stop over the next four or eight years either. Just a heads up there.
Don’t fall the “someone’s wrong on the internet” meme here….
WarEagle82 (641089) — 11/24/2016 @ 3:26 pmGreetings:
Erdogan’s into “Short Marches through the Institutions”.
11B40 (6abb5c) — 11/24/2016 @ 3:44 pmYou could think of it, more like a Conrad black type situation.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 3:46 pmAn economist piece from 2009 also provides context.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:02 pmDo i have to point all of the puzzle pieces that don’t fit
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:10 pmDon’t hurt my mules. [YouTube]
papertiger (c8116c) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:10 pmWarEagle82,
It’s not about what Erdogan already knows about his citizens and country. It’s about what Erdogan knows matters to Trump. Trump is showing Erdogan that Trump will use his business interests and contacts in his dealings with foreign governments.
How many foreign governments will use that knowledge to use Trump’s business interests and contacts to pressure Trump when they want something? My guess is most of them.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:18 pmAnd you don’t seem to realize that outfits like dogan’s operate on a tightrope in turkey, so trump was vouching for him, zalcondag recently stepped down, btw
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:27 pmIt does?
And if he pulls crap like this all the time, as I expect he would, I would be peachy-keen with impeachment. President Pence would be far preferable.
This is not drama but genuine concern about undue influence. It does not surprise me that it is being shrugged off by most, though.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:40 pmIn light of the dogan’s strained relation with erdigan, it seems ivanka was vouching for them, apres le coup.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:48 pmIt does not surprise me that it is being shrugged off by most, though.
Right now, with the hissy fit the MSM and others are throwing about the election results, sure it’s shrugged off as “more of the same microscopic BS.”
Let this become the pattern and things will change. Especially if he can’t get stuff done.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/24/2016 @ 4:59 pmA note about crying “Wolf!”:
If everyone and his brother are falsely crying “Wolf!” because they think it might harm Trump, then for me to cry “Wolf!” — even if there is a wolf — makes me sound like one of the false criers.
So, I should wait until they all shut up and then keep an eye out for wolves. That way when I do see one, I’m not taken for one of the lying wolf criers.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/24/2016 @ 5:04 pmAnd when the evidence for the wolf is a HuffPo article quoting some Turkish newspaper of unknown (i.e. far left) perspective, and other sources say they are full of it, it’s probably not a wolf.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/24/2016 @ 5:08 pmDRJ — overwrought and over-analyzed.
So far we have a phone call.
And…
Nothing.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/24/2016 @ 5:36 pmIn #32 I meant to say WW2 — not WW1.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/24/2016 @ 5:39 pmDid you miss my update? I made several arguments about how the “other sources” do not remotely dispel the conflict issue.
I see the argument for waiting to see if this becomes a pattern. I do NOT see the argument for saying this would not be part of the pattern if a pattern developed.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 5:43 pmIn so far as one can.ascertain they are vouching for erdigan, the itijihad after the coup attempt, ergonokon two electric boogaloo has been rather severe. dogan’s was fined heavily in 2009, they didn’t take his publications away like volodya has done, so is it playing favorites, one could look at it that way, but not for the reasons suggested.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 5:56 pmTrump needs to sell all his buildings. Fire sale. I’d say that even if he hadn’t already demonstrated a cowardly tendency to offer enemies, like nevertrumpers, things they want to smooth things over.
Jcurtis (7ff51b) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:00 pmHow am I overwrought and overanalyzing (wait, isn’t analysis a good thing?).
By the way, foreign governments are already booking the Trump hotel in DC to gain influence.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:01 pmConrad black, who knows how even in the free world, your property is nit safe nor your liberty, if there is something at stake for the larcenist, has some thoughts.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:05 pmIs this another famous Trump supporter “binary choice”? Trump beat Hillary so that’s no longer an issue. The issue now is that he’s adopting all her tactics.
What if Hillary won and then said Chelsea would be running the Clinton Foundation and sitting in on meetings with foreign governments? I know all the people saying it’s no big deal for Trump to do this would be screaming if Hillary did it.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:06 pmWell lets see what becomes of it, but an outfit like the puffington that refuses to show the context of communications, I’m looking askance at.
As with fausta’s post re Argentina, there is more than meets the eye. Under sra kirschner, the regime took control of the newsprint, making g ‘speaking truth to power’ a risky proposition.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:14 pmThey have raised similar arguments against guiliani. Actually the memo is even older, Ron brownstein as a young naderite compiled ‘Reagan’s ruling class’ there wAS no subsequent analysis against clinton or Obama, going even further back, Jeff gerth stretched to find mob ties to Nixon, in said vicious early monograph ‘govt by gunplay’
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:37 pmAh Larry lessig, bless his heart is sticking up for red queen, a special kind if fool.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:42 pmNeverTrump people will agree Trump is doing good things when they see it. For example.
But when he does questionable things, apparently no one else wants to see it. It’s like the way people reacted to Obama. And we wonder why politicians can’t take criticism and don’t have a clue about real problems.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:49 pmAnd true to form, erickson bobbles the ball, she is not the worst choice, but she is barely adequate to restoring knowledge based education.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 6:56 pmDRJ — foreign diplomats can book rooms from now till the next century in an effort to gain influence. So what?
If they gain influence, that’s a different question.
Why not wait until there is even a SPECK of evidence that something untoward has taken place as a result.
The INESCAPABLE facts are that Trump is a rich guy with a wide-ranging business empire, and he’ll likely be richer still when his time in the Oval Office is done. That’s likely unavoidable.
But how about WAITING until he does SOMETHING. Mentioning “Hey, I know a guy …..” isn’t “Something” IMO.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/24/2016 @ 7:02 pmAfter a contentious primary and general election season, I think the whole country needed to drive over the hills and through the woods to Grandmother’s house for a good Thanksgiving dinner with all the trimmings.
Half the country deserved to eat some crow instead of turkey, but that’s still better than the crusty bread line that too many Americans have been standing in as a result of Barack’s food stamp economy.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/24/2016 @ 7:04 pmBut now that Mr Donald has defeated that nasty Hillary woman, America can enjoy some gravy with their mashed potatoes!
And when Christmas rolls around, there will be pudding and egg nog!
Forget it CS, they are still after macho grande. Devon’s selection is problematic as is romney’s they were the shadow party,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 7:08 pmTrump can praise anyone he wants. If he praise God or the Pope is he mixing church and state?
What he can’t do is use his authority as POTUS to travel to Turkey and sign a hotel deal that he profits from potentially.
His kids can all get Top Secret security clearances if they need them. If they are running Trump businesses though they probably don’t want them.
If Trump occupies the Eiffel Tower for Trump Inc. and threatens military repercussions on the French we can impeach him then.
jd2 (bc1815) — 11/24/2016 @ 7:12 pmI dont trust erdogan, he was sheltering Islamic state fighters, while hunting kurds, the latter is still his priority.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/24/2016 @ 7:30 pmWe could have had Bill Clinton calling up Trump’s partner saying, “You know my wife, the President-elect is going to be talking to Erdogan on a regular basis. Are you familiar with the work our Foundation does? Let me tell you a little bit about it.”
nk (dbc370) — 11/24/2016 @ 7:39 pmJudging by your use of CAPS, it’s you that is overwrought on this topic.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/24/2016 @ 7:51 pm
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/24/2016 @ 8:14 pmBarbarosa!!!Trump!!!!!!!Bribery is fine as long as the bribee doesn’t nothing for the briber.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/24/2016 @ 9:39 pmR.I.P. Florence Henderson.
Broadway star; America’s TV Mom.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/24/2016 @ 10:03 pmYou should probably invest in a fainting couch.
John (fa7cff) — 11/24/2016 @ 10:17 pmPatterico,
What would you have Trump do? Put lawyers and accountants in charge of his companies? He might as well close them. His stuff is project-oriented and all about contacts and influence — that’s the way these things are done, whether in Turkey or Los Angeles. Go watch Chik-fil-a try to get a building permit and then tell me it’s about the even application of rules.
The fact that he is President of the USA is going to affect his projects no matter what he says or does. Sure, he probably should respect the Chinese Wall and I’m saddened that he doesn’t. But it’s just his tackiness showing through, not the end of the Republic.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:50 amBribery is fine as long as the bribee doesn’t nothing for the briber.
A bribe requires a contract, however stated. A contract requires both parties get something. So, yes.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:52 amLittle wonder many muslims voted for Trump, they know him via his business partnerships. He is only insisting on vetting muslim immigrants and keeping terrorists out. No muslim country wants jihadists as permanent citizens and passes them along to stupid Europeans.
dunce (ce5e2d) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:32 amR.I.P. Florence Henderson
Icy (7fb2b3) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:38 amThe dangers of foreign influence have been recognized since The Federalist Papers and Washington’s Farewell Address. They are just as real today. Trump and his supporters should have thought about how being President might affect his businesses before he ran.
Also, it’s ironic to see some of the same people who were concerned whether Cruz was a natural born citizen — because we must have someone who is loyal to and puts our nation’s interests first! — now not care whether Trump’s first loyalty is to his nation or his businesses.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:33 amIts not “bribery” to choose the Trump Hotel rather than the Hilton Hotel.
They pay the room rate, they get a hotel room.
The Hotel is open for business to the public. Foreign businessmen and diplomats are members of the public. So long as they are treated like any other guest seeking accommodations, there is no ethical issue.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:39 amThe foreign governments are legally seeking to buy influence by choosing Trump properties over other competitors. The question becomes whether or how Trump elects to return the favor. It’s a legitimate issue as long as Trump has businesses the foreign governments can use for that purpose. This is why it’s a good idea for Presidents to divest themselves of business interests that open them up to concerns like this. It puts his loyalty and motives in question, for no national purpose.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:18 amThis is Trump being Trump. He wants it all and doesn’t care what people think, and his supporters love that “screw you” attitude because they are so fed up with politicians and lawyers.
I get it and nothing I say will change anything, but I’m still going to say it. Trump’s attitude may be popular but that doesn’t make it right.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:23 amSo what happens, swc, when the Saudis discuss with President Trump how pleased they are to have rented multiple floors of the Trump Hotel for a month or more — at an vastly inflated rate because it hinders the hotel’s ability to have enough rooms available for conferences — and also mention how they want to continue doing this? Do you think that might make Trump or the people negotiating for him think twice about pushing the Saudis about their oil or the dangers of Wahhabism?
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:35 amAnd Ron brownstein, is true to form, playing concern troll in the dig trainer.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:41 am“Seeking” to buy influence?? Welcome to the real world.
“Whether or how Trump elects to return the favor”?? Yes — but how about waiting until there is something to wring our hands over.
“Puts loyalty and motives in question” — How?
Who is questioning? Foreign governments? So what?
Political opponents?? They are going to question his motives regardless of what he does, and regardless of what steps he does or does not take to address these issues.
Obama didn’t come to the Presidency with any business interests. That didn’t stop his political opponents from questioning his loyalty and motives from day one.
Its all part of the permanent campaign. Right now — until and unless there is something else — its just background noise.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:43 amYes, this is the real world where foreign governments seek to use everything they can to influence our government. In a democracy, the only safeguards we have are transparency and the character of our leaders. There is no transparency when the leader may also be the conspirator. This is especially troublesone where the leader also doesn’t seem to care about character.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:47 amNo Obama had funny money coming out the west bank and every tributAry of scum and villainy, arianna nestegg comes from dirty Indonesian and Venezuelan crude that Jerry brown’s father, pat lobbied in favor or us. Rude probably, the medicos had long standing ties to the gulf from his oil biz, his time at the un and even the stint at the company. Bill Clinton had more than a few sponsors in high places
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:50 am“At a vastly inflated rate”??
How is it “vastly inflated” in the purpose of the higher rate is to account for the fact that the hotel cannot host conferences due to the unavailability of hotel rooms due to the Saudi’s renting out whole floors of the hotel? Are the rooms empty?
Do the Saudi’s use room service and order $50 hamburgers? Would that be bribe since they could go to Burger King on the corner and get a Whopper w/cheese for $7?
Do they order $250 bottles of champagne even though they don’t drink, and use it to rinse their keffiya in the sink at night?
How much time and mental energy are you going to waste dreaming up
How many hours are you going to spend inventing make-believe scenarios to test how “weak minded” and greedy Trump must be?
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:50 amAlso, as a prosecutor, you must wait until the crime has occurred before making decisions. I don’t think it’s helpful to rely on hindsight when we are evaluating politicians because the damage is done. I prefer to spot problems in advance and try to avoid them whenever possible.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:51 amI like to “waste time” (in your words) here, and apparently you do, too.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:52 amAnd I provide specific examples to try to demonstrate why we should be concerned. It makes it easier to analyze than abstract concepts like the dangers of foreign influence that don’t seem to bother you.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:56 amTo shop, or not to shop: that is the question:
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:57 amWhether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of teh grimy multitudes
Or to take arms against a sea of parking spaces,
And by opposing occupy them? To dine: to eat;
Food Court; and by a meal to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand turkey sammiches
As Caleb Howe says, “I appreciate being hopeful, but giving him a chance doesn’t mean giving him a pass.”
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:58 amThe puffington piece suggested the dogan’s are in good standing with erdogan, they really havEnt been, the parallel is more like with hollinger, the same with yy development who were probably on the outs with the kirschner, who had their own rentamob, the campora, think militarized sjw’s
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:04 am
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:04 amMendoooooozzzzaaaaaaaa!!!Trummmmpppppp!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!The guy is 15 days removed from having been elected, and you’ve already concluded there is a lack of transparency?
I can accept that critics have made a judgment about his character. He’s been a public figure for 4 decades, and there is plenty of information available in the public arena upon which opinions have been formed. All he can do in that regard is ask that people await his performance in office before forming a judgment about him as President.
As for any lack of “transparency”, almost nothing a President does is out of earshot of third parties.
I don’t think Trump is subtle enough to slip through policy positions with a hidden personal agenda that would escape detection.
But I think its an open question on whether he’s simply brazen enough to put them through right out in the open, and argue that any collateral benefit to him is outweighed by the fact that the policy advances US interests.
When Bush pushed through a big tax cut, was it a conflict of interest that he had to file a tax return himself, and would pay less taxes as a result?
If Trump pushes through a tax amnesty measure that repatriates taxes from earnings held by corporations abroad, and cuts the corporate tax rate, will that be a conflict of interest for Trump since he will likely have business interests that will benefit?
These are problems to be managed. And there will be no shortage of critics with regard to whatever steps are taken to manage them.
But they do not require “divestiture”. And since “divestiture” would never include the business interests held by his adult children and siblings in the family “empire”, the claims of “conflict” are never going to go away regardless of what actions he takes personally.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:09 amHis very name, coronello, like mua’dib is a killing word
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:10 amNo doubt, narciso. He’s occupying the minds of many and he’s doing it rent-free, which as a real estate magnate, is totes awesome!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:14 amTake yy development, four years after the previous election, they tried to put this project together. Like transcanada they didn’t find it easy going.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:16 amHow can Trump be transparent when both he and his family are still conducting family business while meeting with foreign leaders as President-elect?
Transition is the time to set aside other interests and devote himself to the national interest, but Trump shows no signs of doing that. In fact, by bringing in his children (his chosen business replacements) and discussing business partners with foreign leaders in his meetings as President-elect, Trump is muddying the water instead of making it more transparent.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:17 amWhen Black Friday comes
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:21 amI stand down by teh door
And catch the #NeverTrumps when they
Dive from teh fourteenth floor
When Black Friday comes
I suspect everything I read
And take it with a grain o’ salt
When they bottom feed
When Black Friday falls you know it’s got to be
Don’t let ’em fall on me
It’s wonderful that the author of this post has the power of precognition: “…this is where we are headed”. There is a compelling argument to be made that Trump must, must build a firewall between he and his business enterprise. I have no quibble there. But I do wonder about the nature of this latest broadside. I am not quite certain how I would go about building relationships with foreign leaders prior to the task of leading the nation. I do believe Trump is approaching it as best he knows how, which is as a business man might. This is who he is, and what he knows, for better or ill.
Tricky business this, for Trump and the oh so deplorable, illiterate and unwashed masses who voted him into office. The gawking rubes, how dare they! And it won’t matter how many articles sourced from such fair and impartial sources such as the venerable Huffington Post that the proprietor of this establishment uses to attempt to educate the yokels, because, indeed, they are yokels! Perhaps crafting a rant based on wisdom gleaned from Think Progress will do the trick. Or the LA Times!
Strange times make for strange bedfellows, I suppose. I cannot wait for the breathless inanities that are surely to spring forth from a particular keyboard once Trump, you know, actually assumes office. I will read back through the archives to see the detailed posts covering how other Presidents-elect went about this business. Hope I am able to find them, otherwise I might suspect the jockey of whipping the horse an hour before the start of the race.
Estarcarus (cd97e1) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:21 amI don’t see how we can possibly know whether Trump uses government to advance his businesses. We wouldn’t have known about the contacts so far, except the other governments disclosed them. And Presidents generally keep foreign discussions private, citing national security, and Trump can do the same. Past Presidents understood the conflicts and voluntarily divested or established blind trusts.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:23 amEstarcarus,
Hostility comes from fear. Why are you afraid of a blog post just because you disagree with it?
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:27 amWonderful but I don’t think Trump’s gonna do that so get over it. He happens to be an actual businessman not some clown that happens to own stuff. He can’t “divest” his name nor put it in a blind trust. Trump is his name and his brand. Too f’n bad, you should have thought of that before you elected him.
Rev. Hoagie® (785e38) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:40 amWe know Obama used his office to promote his own “business” of diminishing the footprint of the US in the world,
we know Clinton had already used her office of SoS to promote her own business and would do more of the same in the WH.
If Trump being in office means some of his real estate deals are indirectly promoted, it could be much worse.
There was always such a fuss about the amount of money that big pharma spent on coaxing doctors to use their products. I don’t know just what that impact was, I never used a drug because the rep paid for a mean or something.
I loved a lot of beer commercials, the frogs and chameleons and the “hit ferret” and all of that,
never bought that brand in my life.
Yes, I know this is different, but still, unless Trump does things as President against the interests of the US for the sake of his business, it has been much worse.
On election day I was for Trump for one reason, I did not want another Democrat especially HRC overseeing a corrupt DOJ, FBI, IRS, etc. The hope for better SCOTUS and cabinet picks was also a feature.
We know how they project, they have been squawking about “fake news” for the last week, which signals that we need to not fall prey to the Gell-Mann Amnesia Syndrome every other day, or more frequently.
I have no idea of what to expect. Hopefully Trump continues to appoint reasonable people to posts, and if he starts firing them for insubordination it will hopefully signal be the end to his presidency.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:50 amOther than that, politics is downstream of society, some say, and society is the problem.
“mean”=>meal
Hoagie, DRJ didn’t elect Trump.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:52 amI only wish we were as interested in this type of corruption four years ago. Thanks media.
AZ Bob (f7a491) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:54 amThey come not to praise Trump, but to bury him.
Give it a rest, this pre-presidency guerrilla warfare can be tedious.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:07 amSo much clutching of pearls here…
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/barack-735178-recession-great.html
If Trump “owned/managed” every manufacturing job in the US, he would be swamped by Obama/Clinton/every big government type out there for the ability take bribes and direct “other peoples” blood/money/tears outside of the private sector and into “government”.
If I don’t like Trump, I can avoid his hotels/golf courses/tie line.
If I don’t like ACA health insurance–I get to pay a “penalty” to the government or pay the privileged of seeing my family premiums go from $250-$400 per month to $2,200 per month and deductibles go from $2,000/$4,000 to $9,500/$19,000 (individual/family deductible) per year in the Obama/Democratic Party less than 2 year throat hold after Obama came into power. Hurrah! I get a “free” checkup every year (if I could find a doctor that accepts ACA).
Homeschooling–Paid taxes to school my two kids, and paid to school them ourselves (heck of a lot cheaper than $10,000+ per year that California pays per student). No way for me to opt-out of government services here either.
Give me a corrupt business person that will be attacked by every newspaper in the nation vs a corrupt politician that gets “free passes” from the FBI (and, possibly Trump) because “healing” (I would not put it pass Trump that he is avoiding Obama pardoning the Clintons before he leaves office):
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-email-prosecution
Not so much healing from others–Just search “trump impeachment” and see what is wished/planned.
Given that we where supposed to have an elected government rather than a professional ruling class–It should not be a requirement that any “working class” person or business owner would have to give up everything to go into an elected job. What was the Clinton Foundation other than a pay for play / Clinton slush fund tax avoidance scheme with a ~5% payout to charitable purposes. Everything the Clintons did was to avoid transparency (email server and deletion, FOIA avoidance, foundation, hiding payoffs from foreign businesses and countries). Clintons went from “dead broke” to the 10th ranked member of congress in less than 4 years:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jun/10/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-says-she-and-bill-were-dead-broke/
And how much has Clinton Inc raised through their foundation:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/02/27/what-is-hillary-clintons-net-worth.aspx
Those are “Trump Level” cash flows…
BfC (5517e8) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:08 amI’d much rather it be a Cruz presidency too, but Cruz was not able to make the connection with voters that he needed to. He fell short. The
goodGREAT news is the country won’t be suffering through a Hillary Clinton presidency.I’m willing to give the fella we elected a decent chance to show us what he’s made of. I remain hopeful.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:18 amWe’ve heard the Binary Choice argument for months. Trump won and Hillary lost so that argument is over. Now it’s time to hold Trump accountable for all his promises and for avoiding conflicts of interest, let alone the appearance of them.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:36 am==Hostility comes from fear. Why are you afraid of a blog post just because you disagree with it?==
Do you ever look back on your own blog posts to double check for any evidence of the hostility and fear you easily find in others’ posts here if they happen to view things differently than you do? If I counted correctly, you have posted 13 comments here this morning since 5:33 a.m.–mostly challenging what appear to be thoroughly reasonable points of view –just ones that happen to be different from your own view or level of concern. It saddens me that things have become so personal, and discussions of opinion so zealous and divisive as to be unpleasant to read through.
elissa (749046) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:38 amPre-presidency sapper strategies carried out behind the lines. Not so friendly fire. This pre-cog stuff is something to behold. Getting all riled up based on the characterizations of Democrats with bylines? Pull the other one.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:47 amI get why everyone is so protective of Trump. He seems clueless about legal issues and he’s a showman more than a businessman, so there is reason to worry whether he can bluff his way through these issues. I think he can for now, especially with his supporters saying it doesn’t matter. But if there is proof of an actual conflict with a foreign government, public opinion may change.
I would prefer that Trump either change his businesses now to protect himself from future claims, or realize the risk and establish protocols to avoid conflicts. But Trump will only do that if he feels pressure from his supporters, and that isn’t happening. If Trump has problems because of this, it’s on him and on those who made excuses for him.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:49 amProtective? Just showing some decency and a little patience…
https://i.chzbgr.com/full/3057568512/hA77C46A6/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:52 amI consider that an actual threat directed at me. Congratulations, Haiku. You win.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:55 amLol. They need safe spaces in Texas!?!? Good lord, they will go Blue!
Show some patience and a little less of the “spun-up”.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:03 amAnd as one saw with Cheney, that served him not, w chose industrialist including the feckless O’neill for his first two treasury secretaries, unorthodox choices which did serve him in good stead, better than paulson.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:03 amhttps://pjmedia.com/instapundit/250156/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:04 amelissa, counting another person’s comments and reporting the number to scold them feels personal to me. Do you ever look through your own comments to double-check for any evidence of hostility? Does that question itself sound hostile?
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:08 amDevos is a little concerning as robin has pointed out, guiliani I think would be a better choice than Rooney for foggy bottom. Any disruptive element will be challenged, consider what they turned the office of special plans into.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:10 amI hope Mr Donald selects John Bolton to become Secretary of State. That would be a great early Christmas present to America.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:19 amPatterico, my single comment above referred to the discussion on THIS thread last night and today–and not the entire body of work of any particular commenter including myself. I am sorry if that did not come through in what I hoped might be a useful comment to help lessen some of the tension around here.
elissa (749046) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:21 amI am not interested in defending Trump,
But I also don’t want myself or anyone else getting lost in whatever uproar of the moment will be in the headlines.
They will not treat him fair and they will make stuff up,
it is what they do,
and McConnell and Ryan and co. like making deals too,
Something I need to remember better than I do,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:23 am“Fret not, it tends only to evil”
Psalm 37:8
Bolton, is another one who is a killing word, they keep safe spaces over here elissa, if trump wanted to curry favor with erdogan, Dolan is not the middlemen one would use.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:25 amLet’s consult the post for a hint.
So, I would start by not doing that.
I’ll make a couple of related points in this comment and not a new comment, lest elissa start counting my comments in this thread (it’s not personal or annoying as long as limited to one thread, apparently!).
I’m glad we cleared that up. Clearly, I was signaling the end of the Republic.
I think we could have a more constructive discussion if we grappled with what the other person is actually saying, and not a caricature. You have shown a nuanced view of this, Kevin M, indicating that it is not ideal behavior and noting that it will become more of a concern if it develops into a pattern. I agree with that. But rather than asking “what would you have him do?” as if I didn’t make a pretty reasonable argument about that — avoid the behavior discussed in the post — I would prefer if you look at what I actually suggested he do, and if you agree with it (and I think you do), say so. And you don’t need to act like I am signaling the end of the Republic. It makes it easier to dismiss my views — pfft! look at this guy! he thinks this is the END OF THE WORLD! — but it’s not an accurate representation of my tone.
It depends on whether we are talking about avoiding blatant illegality, or avoiding slimy attempts at undue influence that raise a whiff of corruption even if they are technically legal. You’re correct that we do not have the former here. But a “drain the swamp” campaign should be avoiding the latter, and Trump is not even trying. HIs attitude is “the laws are on my side” and “this is all being overblown.”
And he will absolutely have people defending him regardless of how ridiculous and unethical (or even blatantly illegal) his behavior ends up being. The question is how large that group of defenders will be.
Me, I will defend him when it’s merited, and criticize him when it’s merited.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:37 amSince when has “being President” become a moral hazard? Don’t answer that, we already know.
felipe (023cc9) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:39 am@Patterico:<I.“this is all being overblown.”
Well, he’s right about that, because a rule that is impossible to execute is being invented out of whole cloth and imposed solely on him.
More than one commenter has explained by blind trusts or divestment would be a) unfair to Trump and b) fail to remove conflicts of interest.
He is going to be President and there is no legal way to confiscate his assets. There is no reasonable and just way to remove any conflicts of interest.
Consequently, if he does not disclose them, and does not handle them equitably, make that an issue in 2020 when he’s up for reelection. If it’s really bad before then, make the case for impeachment.
But do those things fairly and reasonably you’d need actual evidence of wrongdoing, not the mere possibility that he could do wrong if he wished.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:44 amI’m pretty sure it’s Haiku’s sense of humor, and not intended a a threat.
But now I’ll address Haiku.
First of all, I don’t appreciate humor at the expense of other commenters who are have a years-long history of polite discourse. If you want to make crude jokes about national figures, that’s one thing. But when your attitude towards people is disdainful and then you couple that with the kind of joke you made, it’s too aggressive for me. My temptation is to go find cartoons of idiots who will support a Republican no matter how over-the-top his actions, and then post those cartoons to represent you. Please note, I would not be calling you an idiot. It would just be a cartoon. Humor, get it? Ha, ha, don’t like it, go to your safe space.
But, you see, I am not going to do that, because that is how comments sections devolve. So what I will do is ask you, not to abandon sharp humor, but to abandon it against other commenters, at least if those commenters are my friends as opposed to drive-by leftist punks who might deserve that treatment.
As for substance:
The person who convinced me this was an issue was Jeremy Lott, the author of the Washington Examiner piece linked in the post. I’m pretty sure he’s not a Democrat. If you want to be taken seriously, discounting every source under the sun as the product of Democrats with bylines ain’t the way to do it. If you just want to be the court jester whom everyone knows is in the tank for Trump no matter how filthy his behavior, fine, just be careful where you direct your jokes, and remember that court jesters serve at the pleasure of the king and are expendable.
I’m sorry if this little lecture is too tough for you. If you need a fainting couch or a crying pillow I can obtain one easily. It’s Black Friday and the discounts are no doubt awesome to behold.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:50 amThis all neatly evades the actual points I have made: 1) Trump doesn’t seem to care about the issue, and 2) there are specific behaviors he engaged in here that were easily avoidable if someone did care about draining the swamp.
Trump doesn’t, and the fact that none of his defenders will address the actual points I made in the post is telling. I’ll repeat them here if they got lost in the shuffle:
All of this was utterly unnecessary.
And, just as I often criticize the media for giving a pass to Dems, I find laughable the idea that people here would give a pass to a Democrat who did precisely the same stuff mentioned in the block quote above.
If Trump seemed to be taking this seriously, and making an effort to avoid these conflicts, I might feel sympathetic. He does not, at all.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:55 am@Patterico:This all neatly evades the actual points I have made:
Because this is what it adds up to:
TThe latest complaint to be decided was filed by Anchorage resident Linda Kellen Biegel, who took issue with Mrs. Palin for wearing to a public function a jacket made by a company that sponsored the governor’s husband, Todd, a snow machine racer. Ms. Biegel asked the personnel board to determine whether Mrs. Palin was abusing her position to serve her personal and financial interests.
That’s the route you’ve chosen to go down.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:58 amFirst, thank you Elissa, I believe your intent was perfectly clear. I might point out that at least a certain percentage of the tension may be caused by constant denigration of those who actually voted for Trump. Nothing like someone screeching “I told you so” before the man has even taken office. It is my choice to read the content here or not, that is a given. But I have so often found this site to be an island of rational discourse in an ocean of dogma.
Which then brings me to DJR. If you will read through my comments, I believe it impossible to come to the conclusion that I believe Trump absolutely accountable during his tenure as President. I could hardly bring myself to vote for the man. As for sweeping assertion that “hostility” is rooted in fear, I am not quite certain of this little factoid. When I take umbrage, it is not so much the treatment of Trump that troubles me, but the condescending remarks concerning the roughly 50% of the voters who had to hold their collective noses and vote for someone. These remarks I do not take personally as they may pertain to me, but instead the collective. I see very clearly that this must necessarily be an indirect defense of Trump. But I assure you: were such circumstances warranted, and the man proven to be corrupt, I will advocate passionately for his removal. But even then, I will not spend a minute of my time, expend any effort whatsoever, castigating the voters. Given the Devil’s bargain, you do what you must to preserve even a fraction of your tattered soul.
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:02 amIf you say so, Gabriel.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:02 am@Patterico: The points you are making simply have no remedy, other than the ballot, which you already didn’t get your way on.
Just like with the endless accusations of “Hitler” directed to people who are not Hitler, endless accusations of “corruption” that are based on no evidence whatever of any wrong doing are simply going to insure that actual wrongdoing gets passed over as more of the same. Kevin M pointed this out to you too.
It seems hard to believe that Trump does it on purpose, but he certainly seems to provoke in his opponents behavior that does nothing but further his interests. The longer it takes his opponents to learn this the farther he will go.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:04 amOr, as I should have written above: “…not to come to the conclusion…”. Being a winbag using a cell phone has its perils.
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:05 amPlease ignore all warning signs and let me know when the accident has actually happened.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:07 amWhen the driver takes the curve 30 mph faster than he should, but no accident occurs, all passengers and onlookers should shut up because no accident has occurred.
So you’re pre-blaming me for actual wrongdoing being ignored by others.
If this is going to be a finger-pointing contest, Gabriel, I can play too.
I’ll pre-blame you for the actual wrongdoing itself. Here’s how:
If people like you engage in endless defenses of things that aren’t really defensible, on the grounds that nothing has happened yet, then you send a signal to Trump: his defenders will have his back on a partisan basis no matter what he does. And that will encourage him to do worse.
You’re an honorable guy, and when Trump really does wrong, you’ll call him out. But, you see, it will be too late — because you defended him when the warning signs were there.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:13 amPeople who support Trump, but who also care about corruption as more than an empty slogan to get him elected, should take Trump aside and say: “Look, this isn’t a big deal right now, but you can’t go on like this, or it will distract from your entire Presidency.”
To me, the solution is divestment. You want to say that’s unfair to him, fine. That becomes his choice, and he gets the grief that comes with that choice.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:21 am@Patterico:But, you see, it will be too late — because you defended him when the warning signs were there.
The defendant is a bad man, so of course he must be guilty of this crime. That is about your argument here.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:21 am@Patterico:To me, the solution is divestment
And we’ve been over it and over it. You assured us that Trump’s business is nothing but licensing his name. Okay, then it is impossible for him to divest in any meaningful way. It would be impossible for Oprah to do so, for that matter. And you already know why.
You are saying that Charles Koch or anyone else who owns a business needs to be stripped of that before they can hold high office. There is no such rule, and never has been. But you’re inventing it for Trump because you hate him.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:26 amAnd the result of this rule you invent on the spot has only benefit to lifelong politicians who do nothing but hold office. It’s more incumbent insurance. If you didn’t hate Trump you might see this more clearly and think about the second and higher order effects, like the economists you refer us to encourage us to do.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:27 amYup. That’s about it. The only added ingredients are these:
1) I have not accused him of a crime.
2) He has engaged in behavior exactly like this before. And when I warned about that, I was told by people, including you, that he hadn’t engaged in any official corruption yet.
3) He has engaged in behavior showing warning signs — unnecessarily bringing up with a foreign leader the love that his business partner and the person who will run his business have for said foreign leader. And:
4) In his interview with the New York Times he mocked the notion that any of this could present a problem and cited the fact that the laws that apply to everyone else in creation in government do not technically apply to him.
Otherwise, you nailed it!
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:28 amPlease stop making things up to win an argument, Gabriel. It does not become you.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:29 amI also cease to be amazed at how the media turns on a dime, from “Trump’s business is totally fake, just licensing his name” to “Trump owns this industrial giant that is going to benefit from his policies”, and then we all follow along.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:29 am@Patterico:he laws that apply to everyone else in creation in government do not technically apply to him.
Cite the law that says what Trump should do with his businesses while he’s President. We’ll wait.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:30 am@Patterico:bringing up with a foreign leader the love that his business partner and the person who will run his business have for said foreign leader.
Boilerplate and meaningless statements–this is Sarah Palin’s jacket all over again.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:32 amOh good Lord, is it possible to impeach a President-elect? I absolutely felt that Fiorina would have been an excellent President, and Trump a dreadful choice. Alas….
Thus, this: once done mooning about, a decision had to be taken. Putting anger or exasperation aside, based on what the nation knew about these deeply flawed candidates, who do you believe was the proper choice. And let’s be realistic: one or the other was going to win.
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:33 am@Patterico:Please stop making things up to win an argument, Gabriel. It does not become you.
Here’s some chap at RedStatesaying Trump’s primary business asset is his name.
The Trump name, which is Donald Trump’s primary business asset, is now so toxic that his company is running away from it as fast as possible….Well, the brand name will catch fire once Donald Trump is elected president.
Stop laughing!
But he didn’t say “nothing but” so you got me there. Consider my remark suitably revised.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:35 amShow me where I claimed such a law exists. I’ll wait. Oh my, this burning of strawmen and using phrases like “we’ll wait” and putting words in people’s mouths is such great Internet fun!
I do not like talking to you when you get in this mode, Gabriel. It’s the second time in the last few days. I am now going to stop talking to you for 24 hours, beginning as of the publication of this comment.
You can use that as open season to engage in more chest-beating and dishonest debating tactics, if that is important to you.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:36 amAh yes, tommie Christopher, off all people, found the rationale behind that complaint, but yes it tail you win, heads you lose.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:37 amMy link didn’t work, fortunately it was cross-posted at Patterico. Sure miss that edit button.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:38 amIt is just like Gabriel to make up things to win an argument. But let’s take him at his word, for the sake of argument, to wit: You assured us that Trump’s business is nothing but licensing his name.
I want to open “nk’s Chicago Style Hot Dogs” in Ankara, and I’m having problems with zoning, health, and business permits. I buy a license from Ivanka for “Trump-nk Chicago Style Hot Dogs”. At the same time, Trump is deciding whether to approve military aid in the form a Patriot missile system to Turkey.
Do you need to have it spelled out further?
nk (dbc370) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:38 amEstacarus,
This is not a discussion about who should have been elected President. I think even supporters of his could recognize the way that his cavalier attitude about the potential for conflicts has a potential for engulfing his presidency.
Me, I don’t care, because if he does enough to get impeached, then it’s President Pence, and I’d prefer that anyway. But I would think people who support might take him aside — except for the fact that people who criticize him are branded as disloyal, so nobody will want to take him aside even if it’s necessary.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:40 am@Patterico:cited the fact that the laws that apply to everyone else in creation in government do not technically apply to him.
Show me where I claimed such a law exists.
Hmm, let me parse this. You say Trump says that laws that apply to everyone else in creation don’t apply to him, and then you say that you never said any law that applies to Trump in this situation even exists. I may need the whole 24 hours to reconcile the two. But I may be a bit slow.
Well, your readers will judge it for themselves, whether I unfairly characterized you or not.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:42 amPatterico… do you find fault with the cabinet selections made to this point? Yes or no? Or the folks reported to be under consideration? Yes or no?
As of today, in my opinion, that is really all that can be usefully measured. The rest is so much pre-cog hot air that is not based on fact or any substantive evidence, or anywhere near enlightening.
My take – for what it’s worth – is that the election is not even three weeks old and some are a little too busy doing the cut n’ shuffle and performing duties best suited for a mortician. I remain hopeful – indeed, I’ m praying – that Trump can be guided to do what’s right and help improve conditions for all Americans, improve our standing in the world as it is and reach out to our friends and allies who were given shortshrift, if not shown and subjected to outright hostility, by the soon-to-be-shown-the-door Obama administration.
Now, does that sound agreeable?
Colonel Haiku (aacf41) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:44 am@nk:Do you need to have it spelled out further?
No. But what is the remedy? Force him to sell the business–to whom, and how will we keep that honest–and take his name off-rendering the business valueless? Pretty hard on the guy who bought don’t you think?
I understand the conflict of interest, nk, and have repeatedly acknowledged it. But there is no way to get rid of it without creating an a) injustice and b) a pernicious precedent.
At least no one has proposed any.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:45 amI should say further there is no way to get rid of the conflict period. If Trump divests he has to exchange his business for money, conflict of interest. He will then have to put that money somewhere, conflict of interest. Confiscating that money is illegal and unjust The person who bought his business will own a business that says “Trump” on it, conflict of interest. If “Trump” is removed that business loses almost all its value, unjust.
Nobody is proposing solutions that make any sense. I’m afraid it all relies on Trump a) disclosing conflicts and b) navigating them ethically.
I will say at the outset that it will not surprise me if he fails to do it, but he has not failed to do it yet. When he does, yeah, get the Senators to impeach. Until then, wait until he’s done something wrong before you demand he be punished.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:48 amMeanwhile trump names kt Mcfarlane as flynns deputy.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:49 amExactly. As I noted, it is a fact that certain laws that apply to just about everyone in creation in government do not apply to the President, and Trump has cited that fact in his defense when talking to the New York Times. But so many of the bad things that happen in the “swamp” that he claims to want to “drain” are similarly technically legal — as would licensing “Trump-nk Chicago Style Hot Dogs” from Ivanka. Nothing technically illegal about that at all. But it’s a step towards how things work in a banana republic.
If you actually believed the “drain the swamp” rhetoric, you would be surprised to hear Trump doing his Al “No Controlling Legal Authority” Gore imitation.
That’s if you actually believed it.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:49 amIf Trump sets up a blind trust, that trust has to sell off the Trump business. Nothing is resolved, all the other issues still apply. To whom will they sell it? How will it make money without Trump’s name, its primary asset? If they keep the name how is that not a conflict of interest for Trump?
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:50 amMore agreeable than what we were seeing from you before, yes.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:51 am@Patterico:That’s if you actually believed it.
No, because there’s the issue that the behavior demanded of him by some of us here is completely impossible, and you have given no acknowledgment of that.
Please explain how Trump can meaningfully divest of his NAME. Who will buy it? If they buy it, how can they make money from it without giving Trump a conflict of interest? If they are not allowed to use it, why would they buy it?
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:52 amNK – please do spell it out further, because if I can get a Patriot battery in exchange for a hotdog stand, I want in on that action. Who in their right mind is going to rob a house equipped thusly?
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:55 amAny business that buys Trump Organization, whose primary asset is Trump’s name, would have to keep the Trump name on things. And anyone wanting to curry favor with Trump can buy stuff with Trump’s name on it and patronize Trump-branded businesses.
How does the conflict of interest go away?
And if they successfully convince everyone that Trump benefits in no way personally from use of his name–then how is the name worth anything and why would they want to own it?
What else do you guys have to propose? Should the government just nationalize Trump Organization? Would that solve the problem for you? What?
I mean propose something, fine, but it has to be something that actually would work and be fair, not just for Trump but for whoever ends up owning Trump’s name.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:59 amAnd not only that, I’d prefer it not be a precedent that effectively only allows professional politicians to hold office.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:00 amThe point, Estarcarus, is that when you’re doing business abroad it’s good to have the President of the United States call your friendly neighborhood dictator and tell him, “You know, Caudillo, Estarcarus is my kids’ partner. A tremendous guy. A yuuge friend of ours. He says great things about you too.”
nk (dbc370) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:01 amThat is an interesting link, DRJ. I will quote from it:
The most persuasive part of the proposed solution appears to be this:
Trump appears to be a guy who tries to get away with anything he can, legally. If you want to rein him in, you’ll have to pass more laws.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:03 am156… nice pick, narciso!
Colonel Haiku (aacf41) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:04 amYup. These laws apply to everybody except the President and Vice President. So they apply to the Secretary of State. I guess that would make it impossible for a businessman to become Secretary of State.
I guess that’s why Trump will have to reluctantly pass over Mitt. The country’s loss, huh, nk?
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:05 amHey, Haiku, is the reason your nose is so far up Trump’s ass because his shit actually doesn’t stink?
(That’s about as agreeable as you were to DRJ. Is this how you want me to behave towards you from now on?)
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:12 am#168 is an example of the kind of wonderful comments section we could all have if we devolve into “funny” insults of other commenters.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:13 amThe linked article says that they had been staying away from it for fear of a Clinton backlash. Now they’re no longer afraid they’re doing the opposite, and plan to stay there as a matter of simple politeness. Whatever you call this, it’s not bribery. They’re not planning to stay there so as to slip him a few dollars under the table; they’re planning to stay there so as to flatter him, and because they see it as “rude to come to his city and say, ‘I am staying at your competitor’”. So what exactly does anyone expect him to do about this? Take his name off the property?! How is that reasonable? I’m really not seeing the problem here; no matter who is president diplomats will be trying to flatter him or her in some way, and trying not slap him or her in the face. And it’s not as if they don’t need to stay at some hotel, so why not this one?
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:15 amMoreover, Trump admitted that that is how he has been doing business all his life. In the debates. When questioned about his donations to Democrat politicians. That it was necessary to donate to the politicians in power in order to grease the skids for his casinos, hotels, and other construction projects. To him, it was “how business is done”.
nk (dbc370) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:19 amSwamp drained!
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:20 amPatterico, suppose you were in Trump’s position, minus the history of being a crook and a bully, of course. Suppose you were a successful developer with a large portfolio of real estate, who had managed to monetize your name itself, all done honestly and on the level, and now you saw a place for yourself in the White House. Would you disqualify yourself from office for being so successful?! Assuming that you wouldn’t, you now find yourself president; how would you go about protecting yourself from conflicts of interest? Bearing in mind that no law requires you do to anything, and it’s entirely up to your conscience, how would you solve the problem, and how much would you be prepared to sacrifice on the altar of being seen to be honest?
Or suppose David Koch were president; what would you expect him to do?
You know I hold no brief for Trump, but what I’m seeing here is you holding him to an impossible standard.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:23 amThis wasn’t what the swamp was about. So it’s orthogonal to draining it.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:24 amPainter is an idiot, after they way comedy twisted the conflict if interdt regulation to allow the Libby eitchunt,* have they leArned no lesson.
*rove had worked for ashcroft once, is he couldn’t possibly be impartial.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:25 amIt is how business is done, when you have politicians who can kill your business if you don’t bribe them. That’s why the Bible bans receiving bribes, but says not a word against paying them; accepting bribes is always a choice, but paying them is usually not. The best an honest politician can do is let people know that they don’t need to bribe him, that he will treat them fairly without it.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:27 amI guess that’s why Trump will have to reluctantly pass over Mitt. The country’s loss, huh, nk?
Dana has a post up about it and I agree with the sentiment that a stand-up guy like Romney should not step into a Trump administration. The country lost when Trump got the nomination.
nk (dbc370) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:27 amOn the Turkey thing, I’m not really seeing the problem. He’s talking to Erdogan for the first time, naturally he wants to make a connection. Isn’t it the most natural thing in the world to say “hey, I’ve heard a lot about you from my partner, excellent person, and a yuuuuge fan of yours”? Is he supposed to harm the USA’s interests by not using this personal connection to get on the guy’s good side?! I mean yeah, the guy’s a creep, and if Ivanka really is an admirer that’s a problem, but it’s the same problem whether he tells the guy about it or not.
What if this Turk had not been a business partner but just a personal friend? Would your analysis be any different? Because friends often become partners, and vice versa.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:31 amMilhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:27 am
That’s why foreign interests staying at Trump’s hotels might be a smaller deal than Trump’s phone call to Erdogan. The first can be seen as an attempt at ingratiation which might or might not get them something; the second seems more like subtle extortion/intimidation by the President-elect.
nk (dbc370) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:32 amOn the other hand, back during the primaries Trump made an enormous deal of being self-funding and therefore unbribable. And certain people bought it. Now we’re seeing what nonsense that was. Even if he really had self-funded his entire campaign, it’s impossible for him to be unbribable. Unbribed is possible; unbriable not. So that campaign point was a yuuuge lie. But we always knew that.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:36 amIt’s good to see people here with integrity, putting country before Trump. (I can’t say “country before party” since who knows what party Trump belongs to, today.)
I’m still trying to pick my jaw up off the ground after this election. I think that I would have preferred any of the other candidates before Trump.
Tillman (a95660) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:36 amAnd done what? I hope you’re not saying that businessmen have no business running for office.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:38 amEven if he could sell the hotel, wouldn’t the new management want to keep the name? And even if the whole world knew that he no longer owned it, wouldn’t they still want to stay there just so they could flatter his ego by telling him how nice “his” hotel was? If he were to insist they remove his name that would considerably lower the sale price; is it really fair to expect that of him (even if he can do it without illegally scr*wing any partners?)
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:42 amSure it might, but they’ve got plenty of ways to do that to any president. Look how they’ve got pretty much the whole State Department on retainer, by dangling the prospect of nice sinecures when they retire, if their interests are advanced now. The hotel doesn’t add much if anything to the influence they can wield.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:45 amTurkey claims some soldiers were killed by Syrian government bombs, but gives no details, and others say they were actually killed by a car bonb set off presumably by ISIS.
Sammy Finkelman (1190c5) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:47 amHaiku, I don’t think you quite realize how someone could take that cartoon you posted.
I believe you meant it as a joke and not a threat, but we live in a crazy world, as some of us are all too aware, and that’s just not something to joke about.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:54 amI don’t think it was unnecessary. The purpose of the call was to make a connection with this foreign leader, with whom I assume Trump has never had any personal contact before. Not using the means he had at hand for this purpose would be stupid and a dereliction of duty. Again, what if his Turkish friend were not also a business partner? Would it not be right and proper to mention his admiration for Erdogan? And his daughter’s admiration must surely be a legitimate thing to bring up; why should the fact that she does business in Turkey change that?
None of this is to ignore the fact that Trump’s a crook and Erdogan’s a tyrant trying to set himself up as the next Caliph of the Sunni. If Ivanka really admires him that’s a bad thing. But telling him about that admiration isn’t.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:15 pmIs it an entirely too subtle to thread the needle here? The interests and integrity of the Republic must necessarily trump (sorry) all else. But isn’t this all a bit over the top? Go to court with the case you’ve constructed against Trump thus far, before the man even steps into office. Let’s see how that would go. Moseby had a better chance of convicting those cops than you might with this thin gruel. I have never actually heard of someone being indicted for public corruption before he actually assumes the office.
And this is no argument for the man, it is an appeal to reason. It would bother me little to see the man impeached. I figured I wasn’t voting for Trump, I was voting for the President once either candidate was dragged before the people and summarily removed from office.
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:28 pmNo. But it is possible to impeach a president who was sworn in 30 second ago, for offenses he committed decades ago. And they need not have been against the law; an impeachable offense is anything the House thinks ought to disqualify the person from office.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:43 pmGabriel, Patterico explicitly acknowledged that Trump is exempt from these laws. So how can he point to such a law?
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:45 pmPatterico — in a Banana Republic, licensing the name “Trump-nk Chicago Style Hot Dogs” would require paying a fee to Ivanka for the name, along with which would come a building permit and a “pass” without inspection from the health department — in New York City. That’s monetizing government service.
The fact that some foreign business thinks its business prospects in a foreign country are enhanced by having the name of the US President appear in the business’ name is simply beyond the ability of the the President to control other than simply deny the license — which is suspect is exactly what would happen.
But a significant portion of the Trump family wealth IS tied up in licensing the Trump family name. That right belongs to a lot of Trumps who didn’t run for President.
So what to do??
Banana Republics condition the permission to do business in the Republic on the requirement to first pay tribute to those in power who control your ability to do so.
So, point out to me when you find an example of Trump authorizing $500 million in economic assistance to some third world country, and then $25 million of that goes to a company building a new Trump Hotel, who then pays $10 million to Trump, Inc., to license the name.
Then you’ll be on to something.
A phone call which includes “Hey, I know a guy”, isn’t something.
And, IMO, its a bit presumptuous for folks like us — not having a chance to actually hear the conversation — to come to the conclusion as you have stated that the reference was “unnecessary.” That determination is somewhat dependent on the context in which it came up.
Such as maybe Erdogan said without prompting along the lines of “I just had lunch earlier today with Mehmet Ali Yalcindaq, and we discussed how US policy towards Turkey may change with your election.”
Trump has to say something, right? Or would you suggest he simply ignore the reference and go on to issues of destroying ISIS in Syria?
Without context — or a complete transcript — you cannot come to the conclusion that the reference was unnecessary.
And given that Amberin Zamen’s article — in which she makes the claim that in the call Trump said Ivanka was an admirer of Erdogan — is written in Turkish, and I haven’t found an English translation anywhere yet.
And, she’s been a long-time critic of Erdogan while she was a reporter for The Economist, assigned to Ankara.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:47 pmNote the key words “cited the fact”.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:50 pmNot hard on the buyer, hard on the seller. The buyer, knowing that the purchase price doesn’t include this key asset, will not offer nearly as much.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:52 pmAh, but neither Gabriel nor I did believe it. So I think we are in a good position to defend him now. Such a defense as it is.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/25/2016 @ 12:54 pmWhere did you get the idea that is what’s going on here?
I am pointing out warning signs, and people are constructing a narrative that I am calling for immediate prosecution.
Patterico (80580f) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:01 pmAhem. Yes. So what you are pointing out are mere warning signs? Forgive me if I inferred from your tone and content that you had already empaneled the Grand Jury.
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:11 pmYou are calling for divestiture, but you’ve yet to address the issue of how divesture might take place, or whether its even an effective mechanism to solve the problems you are highlighting.
I think its not — he’s going to get criticized every single day for 4 years, and critics are going to point to conflicts in just about every policy position he advocates, real or imagined.
Under those circumstances there is not “solution” — the problem is intractable. So, if divestiture is not a solution, and the problems will persist regardless of what action is taken, how does your approach solve anything?
There are various reports out that long hours by teams of lawyers are being put into devising a structure and mechanism to create separation between his public responsibilities and private interests. His critics will never be satisfied, regardless of what is devised. But that doesn’t mean they are doing nothing.
With only a BIT of experience in the area, what I expect will happen is some form of testamentary irrevocable trust will be established rather than a “blind” trust. That would move ownership of most of his business empire from himself personally, and into a trust, with the beneficiaries of the trust to be his children and other family members as he designates.
He’s at an age where normal estate planning would call for some kind of arrangement in this fashion anyway. He can’t have active involvement in managing the affairs of the trust estate, so there would be no need to make himself a trustee. Since it would be irrevocable, it would cut him off permanently from personal ownership of whatever holdings are placed into the trust.
Beneficiaries under the trust would have only a future interest on whatever terms for distribution he and his lawyers devise. And his adult children would operate the businesses in the trust in their roles as Trustees.
Will his family still benefit from any increased value of the Trump name and businesses? Sure — but the obligation to divest doesn’t apply to them.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:14 pmEstarcarus,
I have said multiple times already that the laws do not cover this, and that Trump is taking advantage of that technicality. I hope you are reading what I am saying and not the distortions by e.g. Gabriel Hanna, who did not understand the point I was making and consequently misrepresented it as an assertion that Trump was breaking the law.
So: I forgive you.
Patterico (80580f) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:16 pmAnd his supporters will never be bothered by any conflict.
He should divest. There is no point in debating how because it is not an option given his cavalier attitude, which does not bother you and never will, but which bothers me.
Patterico (80580f) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:19 pmI believe you meant it as a joke and not a threat, but we live in a crazy world, as some of us are all too aware, and that’s just not something to joke about.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 11:54am
Oh, fer chrissakes… now you got me reaching for the old cartoon that showed two bulls overlooking a small herd of grazing cows. One bull says to the other one, “I think I’d like to slip into a nice, warm prosecutor tonight.”
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:26 pmAdmission, your reply brought a smile to my face. How graceful. I will only say this: based on your posts and comments alone, my feeling is that your intent and your words (to me) are not quite in alignment. But I will take you at your word, even if I take much of what is said about Trump from 4:30 PM EST to Inauguration Day with just a grain of salt. Once his right foot steps onto the carpet in the Oval Office, though, all bets are off. Though I might not be taking my moral and intellectual cues from the Huffington Post.
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:38 pmAnd oh yes, I hope you and Yours had an excellent Thanksgiving. Despite the absurdities of the present days, as Americans, we all surely have many things for which to be thankful.
Estarcarus (5252be) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:41 pm#199 — “He should divest. There is not point in debating how…”
Dodge.
Blaming me for your unwillingness to debate is “projection.”
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 1:55 pmI suspect some of our #NeverTrump friends are angry that Trump defeated that nasty Hillary woman.
As the incumbent, they foresee Trump as the inherent GOP nominee in 2020, whereas if illary had won, the 2020 GOP nomination would be up for grabs.
I just think we really should give President-elect Trump an opportunity to become President Trump before we freak out and bring impeachment proceedings against him.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/25/2016 @ 2:11 pmYou can’t extend conflicts of interest laws to the President for the simple reason that you cannot pass on a decision to someone higher in the chain of responsibility.
SPQR (edd69f) — 11/25/2016 @ 2:19 pmCruz Supporter, angry? Piss off.
SPQR (edd69f) — 11/25/2016 @ 2:21 pm#206 SPQR, take a number, bro. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/25/2016 @ 2:38 pmI think the better argument for not extending the conflicts statute to the President is that it would be tantamount to another qualification for office, one that is extra-constitutional.
There is no constitutional description of requirements to serve for lower office holders, so Congress is free to impose them by statute without fear of offending the Constitution.
But if it were to try to impose a similar limitation on who might serve as President, in the form of a “conflicts” prohibition, then it would run afoul of the text of the Constitution.
It would not be an enhancement of its powers of impeachment because Congress gets to define for itself what it deems to be “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Memorializing a definition in the form of a statute is superfluous because its not needed by Congress to act.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 11/25/2016 @ 2:41 pmShiprwreckedcrew is exactly right, those calling for divestment, including our host, have not been able to explain how it is supposed to work in the face of the objections to it that have been brought up.
He can’t divest himself of his name. His name is what he has that is worth something. Forcing the entity he “divests” to not to us his name would impoverish whatever that entity that is.
Not to mention all the people who are licensing Trump’s name and making money from it. That would be a taking from them too.
Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 11/25/2016 @ 2:59 pm“Trump appears to be a guy who tries to get away with anything he can, legally”
Umm, that’s what all law abiding people do. Maximize their own interests under the law.
“Haiku, I don’t think you quite realize how someone could take that cartoon you posted.”
The same way someone could “take” what Romney said four years ago to mean he’s a Nazi?.
The context of the cartoon was, DRJ was the buzzard saying screw patience, I wanna kill [Trump].
I suppose you could take it as a threat against DRJ, but that would make you an idiot.
That kinda PC demand for self censorship to avoid triggering idiot snowflakes is one of the reasons we gave you Trump.
LBascom (1915c2) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:27 pmAnd speaking of Romney, were were the calls four years ago that he divest himself from his $300 million dollars? I mean I’m sure he has it tied up in investments and such, if he was elected he could have done things to guarantee his investments would do very well.
Somehow I don’t think that would have ever been an issue.
LBascom (1915c2) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:37 pmNo it wasn’t. Are you calling DRJ an idiot? Please say you are. I’ll ban you before you have a chance to blink.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:38 pmI explicitly said I did not take it as a threat, but I think Haiku was rude, and that is his default mode lately. The triumphalism of the Trumpers.
Patterico (d8dcea) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:41 pmThis is exactly what I was mentioning to you, Patrick.
I don’t envy you getting people to act decently. Broken windows are broken windows.
For you, it’s more like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8
It’s a dirty job.
Simon Jester (c63397) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:44 pmthe Baron had snoopers dead in his sights!
he reached for the trigger to pull it up tight!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:44 pmSeriously,
one reason some of us were for Trump was because we thought it would be far eaiser for him to be impeached than Clinton,
and we would be happier about his replacement.
When/if he abuses things,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:48 pmas HRC already did,
hopefully Congress will do it’s duty.
Thanks Simon,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/25/2016 @ 3:51 pmgreat commercial,
almost as good as the horses playing football,
kicking the extra point instead of “going for two”.
If DRJ was serious about that cartoon being a physical threat from the colonel, then yes, Ill say it. He’s an idiot. If that’s a little too much truth for you, ban my ass.
LBascom (1915c2) — 11/25/2016 @ 4:22 pmI remember when I used to come here to escape the MSM echo chamber.
crazy (d3b449) — 11/25/2016 @ 4:36 pmthis was the first link going backwards.
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/silence-surrender-erdogan%E2%80%99s-war-independent-media
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 4:38 pmthis was another piece that was excerpted.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/548448
but you get the flavor,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 4:40 pmMD – In the main, you are quite right about that.
Estarcarus (cd97e1) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:00 pmLbascom, DRJ is neither a man or someone whose intelligence is in question.
The obnoxious defense of ugliness by denying that ugliness is not something absurd reminds me of something a poorly parented child would say.
Trump fans are awfully eager to make conversation unpleasant. Are you upset he lost the popular vote? Embarrassed that his conduct has made his critics nod their heads? Why so mad if you won?
MD makes an outstanding point. Things aren’t so bad y’all.
Dustin (3169e2) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:10 pm“But I guess it’s what the American people want. Who am I to argue with their infinite wisdom?”
Exactly.
What can you do?
Besides send Jill Stein money..
Patrick, I can tell you are in for a long long long(er) season of vexation (unless Hillary steals it in these last days when her little elves have been busy busy stuffing ballot stockings)
steveg (5508fb) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:19 pm“So, who is the devil du jour? Who’s to blame for the fact that the expected win unexpectedly failed to materialize? Well, the mainstream media has found the culprit, and it is (and here’s where you can visualize the Scooby-Doo gang pulling the mask from the “Creature From the Haunted Amusement Park”)…fake news sites! Yes, the left is claiming that fake news is what tipped the scales on Election Day. As summarized by Nancy Scola at Politico:
Critics on the left say false headlines on Facebook harmed Hillary Clinton and helped swing the election to Donald Trump. One fake news story titled “FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email Leaks Found Dead” from sources like The Denver Guardian, The Free Patriot and Red Flag News circulated on the social network prior to the election. Another, under the headline “Michelle Obama Deletes Hillary Clinton From Twitter,” was picked up by conservative radio host Sean Hannity, who later apologized for spreading the lie.
In response to the existential threat posed by fake news sites, Democrats have pledged to take action!
The Clinton campaign’s chief digital strategist [Teddy Goff] on Monday blamed Facebook for enabling the spread of misinformation about the Democratic nominee—and said Democrats in and out of government have been looking at how to tackle the “big problem” of fake news on the social network…. “This is something we were very aware of, saw zero percent chance Facebook was going to be compliant or work with us during the election, but wanted to take on post-election.” Goff declined to shed light on the strategy he says is in the works, other than to say that it would target “one or two people” at the company, including Zuckerberg.
Go get ’em, Klancy. Hang ’em high—it’s the Democrat way.”
http://takimag.com/article/lyncher_faker_mischief_maker_david_cole/print#ixzz4R4cyMIzc
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:23 pm“The US is STILL the best place on the planet to live.
The opportunity for opportunity’s is far greater than anywhere else in world history.
And it should be treated as such.
Current, and recent, politicians and their employed minions, act like entry to the US is the equivalent to cheap plastic shopping bags, given away with no regard to any and all.
It is not their’s to give.
There should be a steep entry fee, held in escrow, and very heavy restrictions on all that move here permanently, for a period of no less than 10 years.
Any and all infractions to the restrictions results in forfeiture of the entry fee and immediate, within 30 days maximum, expulsion to their original country, and a stern warning to never try to enter again.
The existing citizens of the US should not be hindered in any way by the rules set forth pertaining to immigration nor the immigrants themselves.
If the US cannot make a profit from immigration through human currency then immigration should not exist.
We do not need immigrants nor shall we bear their burden. We already have more than enough diversity and multiculturalism to last 100 lifetimes.
It is past time for all adult US citizens to grow up and start behaving as adults, especially the rule makers.
The silly children’s party is over.”
http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/thomas_jefferson_on_immig.php
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:28 pmhow much of the news has been fake, about rosie’s almost human attributes, about the doubleplusgood, economy, our Malabar victory over the Islamic state,(subject to total revision and deletion)
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:32 pmthe samizdat has more often been true,
http://fortune.com/2016/11/25/russian-fake-news/
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:34 pmI’m not upset Trump lost the popular vote.
Not sure still why Hillary (being the worlds most qualified, smartest woman ever) hired some guy aptly named Mook and then forgot it was an electoral college race.
Think about the Electoral College and the margin of popular votes within 3-4 states.
2-3 rallies in Western Pennsylvania, non-metro Michigan and non metro Wisconsin and she might have picked up the 11,000 votes here and there, rather than just getting votes along the extreme western strip of the West Coast, the New England Metro areas, and all the blue spots in red American that signify University towns.
Trumps team outsmarted her on the ground… let that seep in. Genius Clinton with the dream team staff and tons of elite cash… loses to a game show host.
What a study in entitlement and ineptitude.
Oh. And if you wanna have a revolution well you know just overturn Trumps victory based off of some newly unearthed votes
steveg (5508fb) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:34 pmbut this constitutes real news,
https://pjmedia.com/parenting/2016/11/24/child-labor-attack-on-trump-education-pick-is-the-dumbest-thing-youll-read-today/
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:43 pmI don’t know your circles MD in Philly but I don’t know a soul who said they were voting for Trump because he’s easier to impeach. Not one person. Before or after the election. Republican or democrat. Black, white or yellow. Nobody! And if someone had said that to me I’d have told him he’s an idiot.
Every person I know who voted Trump did so to get that corrupt commie b!tch out of our government and to save Congress and the Supreme Court. Every single one. Including me. Not because he was the lesser of two evils because that was too close to call. Not because he was the Republican because in reality he isn’t. Not because he’s the conservative because he is not a conservative. They voted to get that slimy thief out of our government, make Congress Republican, insure the selection of Supreme Court and Federal judges were not made by leftist radical nut jobs. Period. And we did. Now we need to direct America in the Right direction.
B!tching about Trump’s business connections means nothing. He didn’t just become a billionaire real estate and business mogul you know. He can’t put his name in a blind trust or divest himself of it. Can’t do. His name is his brand is his income is his very existence.
Rev. Hoagie® (785e38) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:46 pm^^^^^^^^^ YEP ^^^^^^^^^
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 5:51 pm“HMM: Obama urged Clinton to concede on election night. “Obama’s call left a sour taste in the mouths of some Clinton allies who believe she should have waited longer, and there’s now a fight playing out between the Obama and Clinton camps over whether to support an effort to force the Rust Belt states to recount their votes.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/250197/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:00 pm“ONE MONTH AGO TODAY IN THE WASHINGTON POST: There is no possible way Donald Trump’s team actually believes this is their path to 270. “I mean, look. Clinton has a 6.2-point lead in Pennsylvania. She’s up 6.5 points in Wisconsin. She’s up 10 in Michigan. She leads in Colorado by 8 and Virginia by 10. Those are margins that put those states easily out of reach. Put another way, polls do not show Trump close in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and Colorado — they show Clinton leading by 6, 7 and 8 points, respectively. Using that map, Clinton has 323 electoral votes, and a victory. Move all of her light blue states into the ‘maybe’ column and she is at 273. She has won.”
Remember this when the same people sound equally certain of what’s going to happen now.
Related: How Journalism Becomes Propaganda.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/250159/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:04 pmHillary won’t be Prez and I feel fine…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:06 pmPreach it, Reverend Hoagie (#231)!
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:08 pmit’s different editions of to serve man,
http://invisibleserfscollar.com/antithesis-of-the-briar-patch-school-choice-as-the-snare-instead-of-an-escape/#comments
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:27 pmthe dems organize everything via astroturf,
https://twitter.com/lou_keep/status/802270125500071937
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:39 pmWith pleasure. Goodbye.
Patterico (0305dd) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:45 pmpatterns happen in threes,
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-election-idUSKBN13K226?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&rpc=69
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 6:58 pmthat’s a genuine loss cause of Mr. Lee has a good way of making succinct comments to where they inject a lot of valid point of view into a discussion that makes you go oh I see yes yes that was nicely said
but now his voice has gone silent
i am saddened
for these voices, they are all of them unique and precious
like snowflakes
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:32 pmOne mans broken windows are anothers broken record
steveg (5508fb) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:34 pmThe Crushing of Dissent.
Otherwise known as calling DRJ an idiot.
A commenter who has been here since almost the beginning and has supported me through thick and thin, vs. a guy who has been aggressive and annoying as long as I can remember.
Not a difficult call.
Patterico (0305dd) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:48 pmyou thought their vaccine denialism was bad,
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/11/medical-journal-freakout.php
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:51 pmAs much as I enjoy commenters insulting each other … oh wait. I can’t complete that sentence because I DON’T enjoy that.
LBascom just got that message.
If I seem less patient with that sort of BS lately, it’s because I am.
Patterico (0305dd) — 11/25/2016 @ 7:51 pmtimes when the day is like a play by sartre
when it seems a blah blah blah’s in perfect order
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:00 pmWell, Rev.
I said it here on numerous occasions and had people agree with me,
I said it to a few people face to face and they agreed with me.
It was kind of a back up,
if you get Clinton, we’re stuck with her no matter how bad,
if you get Trump, if he is that bad we can probably get rid of him.
Yes, I thought the lawlessness of the dems in general and HRC in particular was an existential threat to the country
but, not every body felt that way,
so I tried to persuade any way I could
I hope we don’t have to keep dealing with the bad vibs of the last 6 months
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:12 pmit is going to get even older even sooner
are you watching the noir with michelle dockery, as an excon, one of the interesting moments, is she and her crew are running down the back roads of the Carolinas in a prius, just on the verge of engine shut off,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:15 pmYes, the lancet became unreliable when they printed that nonsense about child mortality in Iraq,
NEJM became unreliable even earlier about homosexuality and some other things were not medical info at all
besides, i think Trump said something about ensuring everyone in the world had clean water.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:17 pmThat is a pretty good public health policy.
cunning, cunning plans on their part,
http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/11/tongue-tied-green-party-official-stumbles-to-explain-wisconsin-recount/
the eurocrat is spinning something something of j g ballard, or norman spinrad,
oh and re the previous thread:
http://www.oann.com/buenos-aires-city-says-tower-project-linked-to-trump-lacks-permit/
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:21 pmAny other candidates? Does that include Clinton? Because her deliberate pre-planned and calculated mishandling of classified was a serious crime. If you actually listen to what Comey said, he never cleared her. He said no reasonable prosecutor would take the case. Complete and utter BS. He also tried to claim the gross negligence standard was somehow unconstitutional, even un-American. More BS. The Supreme Court has already ruled that establishing mens rea is not, for most crimes, a constitutionally required standard. But proving gross negligence does establish mens rea.
Actually a reasonable, competent prosecutor could have proven actual intent. But in Loretta Lynch we don’t have a reasonable, competent prosecutor. Note, not only did she meet with a potential target of an FBI investigation into his wife’s use of email, she met with a potential target of an FBI investigation into his own foundation. This is Banana Republic stuff.
That said I’m not too terribly impressed with Trump, who seems to be renege on everything. Which if you’ll do a search is exactly what I expected.
He doesn’t want to “hurt” the Clintons by not pursuing charges against Hillary! That’s not the point. And I’ll withhold judgement until there’s some sort of official word, but the scuttlebutt is that Petraeus is being considered for Secretary of State. He was convicted of illegally retaining classified federal documents and showing them to his mistress. The idea that he’d be considered ever again for a government post is, again, appalling. I hope it’s not true, but unfortunately I just can’t be sure.
I hate 2016.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:26 pmI don’t rightly know what to think, however we know carlos slims excised the most significant parts of his dialogue with friedman on climate change, made mattis’s view definite on interrogation protocols,
https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2016/11/25/fake-news/
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:35 pmHeh… watching a movie on Amazon, “Deterrence”, think it was released in 2000, 5 minutes in, they’ve got a TV newscast in the background with a story about presidential primary in Connecticut with Trump running against incumbent President Emerson, who’s played by that comedian who sounds amazingly like Mark Levin…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:37 pmThe calm Levin, not the maniacal Levin… Kevin Pollack
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:40 pmLots of people said it, Doc. Rush Limbaugh spoke about it.
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/11/05/rush-think-nevertrumpers-plan-impeach-trump-wins/
It was clear that if the historic first woman President got into office there was no way to get her out. The historic first black President who should have been s***canned years ago proved that.
If I have a choice between the pol who is sacred and the pol who is not, I’m going for the pol who is not sacred every time.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:43 pmah yes, and the kicker it involves Iraqi nukes, what craziness, eh,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:49 pmIraqi strongman Uday Hussein is the renegade Iraqi leader with tactical chemical and biological weapons and he’s overrun a US-led UN presence in the Gulf! The president is holed up in a Colorado diner (Aztec, CO, home of the Screamin’ Beavers) waiting out a blizzard and WWIII is breaking out. And he’s got Christopher Boyc er, Timothy Hutton as his Chief of Staff.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:53 pmReally sucks for him.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:54 pmit’s curious what was in the zeitgeist, around the same time, they released ‘three kings’ will savaged bush’s stopping at the Kuwaiti border, and abandoning the shia tribesman in the marsh,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 8:58 pmwe knew the sequel to that, the sepah cultivated those forces into militia like sciri and the badr
Unless Uday Hussein orders his forces to drop their weapons where they are, pull out of Kuwait and the little bit of Saudi Arabia they’ve entered, AND Hussein turn himself in at the US embassy in Kuwait, teh President will drop a multi-megaton nuke on Baghdad.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:08 pmyes, I got part of it wrong, but the gist of it right, the irony is some of the Islamic state leadership are precisely the type of special republican guards and secret police, that were in charge of wmd’s, kyle mills works that angle in his latest vince Flynn adaptation,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/25/2016 @ 9:17 pmAll of a sudden, Clinton Foundation Inc donations are down–Nothing to sell now that she is the ex-next-president. Many direct “donations” (pay to play) from foreign governments. Should everyone involved be under FBI/DOJ investigation and possible prosecution?
http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/australia-ceases-multimilliondollar-donations-to-controversial-clinton-family-charities/news-story/219577919ed8dfbd79cf808321234eba
And Norway cutting funding (and a bunch of countries that got arms deals approved after a bunch of money fell into Clinton Inc):
Bury Trump because he said platitudes to (what is becoming) a dictator. Or Saudi’s staying in a Trump branded hotel?
Line up Nancy Pelosi+Husband, Harry Reid, and any number of “government employees” for investigations that have sold influence.
BfC (5517e8) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:25 pmThe triumphalism of the Trumpers.
Rest easy, Patterico. That will surely subside. It’s been just over two weeks and already seems like three months.
Binge watch ‘The Apprentice’ and we’ll all be demanding impeachment by Christmas– before he takes office. For Miss Liberty, it was literally the evil of two lessers.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:32 pmHere’s your Triumph right here… https://youtu.be/j556MWGVVqI
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:38 pmPatterico #243: some people just post to be unpleasant. Others try to keep the personal out of things. It seems to me that the former can lead to some “over the top” posts while claiming to Speak Truth To Power.
You kind of warned the person.
It was the person’s choice.
So when a person has important and interesting things to post, and then goes out of their way to dare you, the host, to ban them…well, there you go.
DRJ is worth an awful lot of the other person, in terms of history and value of commentary.
Simon Jester (c63397) — 11/25/2016 @ 10:40 pmActually, I would say the best an honest politician can do is to refuse to accept bribes… But that’s just me… 😉
IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (668532) — 11/26/2016 @ 5:44 amThanks, Steve57,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:15 amYes, I wasn’t trying to take credit for the idea, though it may have sounded like that.
It wasn’t that novel of an idea, just looking at secondary consequences that were fairly predictable.
Funny how Patterico links to huffpo, then gets the huffpo article debunked, and still maintains the leftist trick. The story might be wrong, but the implications are just as bad.
I am reminded of why I no longer visit this site as often as I used to. The #NeverTrump crowd is insufferable.
From a guy that didn’t support Trump.
egd (d2452d) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:59 amThe charitable view of Haiku’s comment is that he believes I’m a vulture who is incapable of demonstrating patience and that my only goal is to kill – hopefully ideas, not people, although LBascom thinks I want to kill people. (Note to LBascom: That was Haiku’s link and not mine, so if you think there is a message about Trump, it’s Haiku’s message.)
Another view is that Haiku has no patience for me and my opinions and, as a result, wants someone to suffer. It’s the next day and Haiku has yet to explain his comment, let alone deny my interpretation, so his intent is unknown. (Note to Haiku: No, I was not “spunned-up,” on drugs or otherwise and I’m still not, but thanks for teaching me a new term. By the way, how do you know about that term? Is it something you run across a lot?)
I’m only commenting because I don’t want anyone banned because of discussions with me. I came here of my free will and while I’ve learned through the years that being online has its downsides, it was worth it to read and comment here. I think LBascom should come back because he fits in with most of the current commenters here. (Note to Estarcarus and elissa: Stashiu3 taught me that anger comes from fear. It was a valuable and enlightening lesson. It’s often useless to argue with angry people, but it can be helpful to understand what makes us fearful so I’m interested in the specific fear that is at the root of someone’s anger.)
DRJ (15874d) — 11/26/2016 @ 10:56 amIf there is a moderator around, please check the filter. I think my last comment is in moderation.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:12 amIt’s not necessary to release it if you’d rather not. Just read it and consider my request.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:13 amMr Donald defeated that nasty ugly old Hillary woman. And now Castro has died. It’s a good holiday weekend!
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:24 amCS, if I’ve morphed into junior Narciso, you’ve become sober straight Happyfeet.
urbanleftbehind (520a56) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:36 amBut Clinton is now challenging the count in some of her Blue Wall states. Sore Loserwoman.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:36 amSometimes plain speaking works best.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:39 amLet’s hope Trump’s initial choices for cabinet and other key positions are a positive sign of what’s to come.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:40 amUndiplomatic speech, in moderation,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:43 amCol, she’ll learn the hard way that Sanders to Trump was an actual thing: http://www.salon.com/2016/11/23/reactionary-democrats-trash-bernie-sanders-for-challenging-identity-politics/
urbanleftbehind (520a56) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:52 am“YOU’RE NOT TELLING ME IT’S A SCAM, ARE YOU? The Mysterious Case Of Jill Stein’s Surging Recount Costs. “Apparently, the more money she raises the more expensive the recount effort becomes. . . . So, with nearly $5mm raised so far, the question is no longer whether recounts will occur in WI, MI and PA but just how much Jill Stein will be able to drain from the pockets of disaffected Hillary supporters to fund her long-shot efforts. All that said, here is Jill Stein admitting to CNN that she has absolutely no evidence of election hacking….even though she asks that you please keep sending your money anyway.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/250239/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/26/2016 @ 11:54 amdiseased piggy wants a recount lol
hey piggy why don’t you recount all the money you spended humiliating yourself and your wench huma
*snort*
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/26/2016 @ 12:20 pm#272 urbanleftbheind, yes, yes, Mr happyfeet and Mr narciso are two commenters worth emulating. It takes all kinds to defeat the nasty Hillary and the murderous Fidel.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/26/2016 @ 12:20 pmThe Commies always said that you have to break a few eggs — well, I want to break out the eggnog to celebrate!
yes yes yes it’s a glorious interlude of sulking sore loser piggies
and amazon turdlord jeffy bezos’s credibility lies in the gutter
better stick to selling dildos online jeffy
nobody’s buying what your third rate wapo sluts are selling
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/26/2016 @ 12:24 pm“Imagine you are one of the anti-Trump folks who believe we just elected a racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-semitic, science-denying dictator. Let’s say that’s the movie playing in your mind. That’s some scary stuff.
Now imagine watching the news as Trump reveals in slow-motion that he’s flexible and pragmatic on just about everything. . .
As Trump continues to demonstrate that he was never the incompetent monster his critics believed him to be, the critics will face an identity crisis. They either have to accept that they understand almost nothing about how the world works – because they got everything wrong about Trump – or they need to double-down on their current hallucination. Most of his critics will double-down. That’s how normal brains work.
And that brings us to our current situation. As Trump continues to defy all predictions from his critics, the critics need to maintain their self-images as the smart ones who saw this new Hitler coming. And that means you will see hallucinations like you have never seen. It will be epic.
The reason this will be so fun to watch is that we rarely get to see a situation in which the facts so vigorously violate a hallucination. Before Trump won the presidency everyone was free to imagine the future they expected. But as Trump continues to do one reasonable thing after another, his critics have a tough choice. They can either…
1. Reinterpret their self-images from wise to clueless.
or…
2. Generate an even stronger hallucination. (Cognitive dissonance.)
If Trump’s critics take the second option – and most of them will – it means you will see a lot of pretzel-logic of the type that is necessary hold onto the illusion that Trump is still a monster despite continuing evidence to the contrary.”
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/153559105081/a-lesson-in-cognitive-dissonance
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/26/2016 @ 12:25 pmAccording to ABC news, “a senior white house official” is throwing cold water on the recount circus. “Elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective”. Sounds like they’ve about had enough of granny Clinton, too.
elissa (749046) — 11/26/2016 @ 12:59 pmDRJ,
Sorry, your comment was in moderation because it mentioned LBascom’s handle. I have fixed things so the mere mention of his name will not trigger the filter.
He violated a basic rule of common courtesy and what’s more he was warned. I bet he’s thrilled. People like him love to wander around the Internet and whine about how they were banned from various places, distorting the nature of their offenses to make the banning sound extra unfair. I would not want to deprive LBascom of that pleasure.
Patterico (7232db) — 11/26/2016 @ 4:19 pmRomney would just have put everything in a blind trust, just as all recent presidents have done, so it would not have been an issue. When the president has no idea what he’s invested in, he can’t do anything to help them. The problem only arises with Trump because he can’t do this; it’s not possible, and therefore it’s not reasonable to expect it of him.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:00 pmIt occurred to me over Saturday that “impoverish” is not the right word here. What this amounts to is sheer vandalism, destroying value for no reason but a wish that its owner not have it. We exist in this world to improve it, to create value, to leave it worth more than it was when we started; in this way we become God’s partners in the project of Creation. That’s why destroying value is so fundamentally wrong. Even stealing or confiscating value is not as bad as destroying it; at least someone has it. But if you destroy it nobody has it.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:06 pmIt’s been clear since 1998 that there’s no way to get any D president out, because D senators will never vote to remove a D president no matter how strong the evidence against him. And that impeaching a president without removing him only makes him stronger.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:46 pmYes, of course. But there were also some genuine donors who simply didn’t know these problems existed, and that’s why they’ve stopped donating. I imagine Australia falls into that category.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:49 pmNo, that’s the minimum, but it’s not enough. So long as people think they have to bribe him to be treated fairly, they’ll be tiptoeing on eggshells. And it’s rarely a matter of an outright bribe; the sort of thing this thread is about is not that, but subtle favors that can or can not be seen as bribes depending on your perspective. An honest politician has to make it known to all, before they approach him, that he will treat all fairly and there’s no need to pay for it.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:53 pmIf anyone’s worrying about Trump’s possible conflict of interest, they’re worrying about the wrong things to worry about Trump. The amount of money involved has got to be trivial to him, unless he goes out of his way to get money.
Even the ego boost that he might get from this or that action by a foreign government is not too much, and foreign governments could try to boost the ego of almost any president, so, if that is a problem, we have a general problem. And maybe we do.
None of this stuff is going to make or break him, and that’s the only thing that could count. He’s not keeping score any more, or at least not trying to. If you talk about relatively small amounts of money, there’s no end to it. Hotel rooms might otherwise remain vacant for a while, and the price might also have a bit of an auction quality for instance. Windmills might deter a few people from using a golf course, and other things might help.
The laws actually do cover this, but it’s the laws against bribery and kickbacks. The conflict of intrrest rules, are designed not so much for themselvesm as to prevent that possibility from arising.
Or to prevent calculation of self interest. He should be helped to ignore possible effects on his wealth, not have his attention called to it. He’s trying not to pay attention to it.
One conflict of interest he won’t have, we can hope, is raising money for his presidential library.
I don’t think all the money being raised for the inauguration matters, because all that probably only matters to other people and not to him beyond the bare essentials of the ceremony, which is paid for by the federal government.
Sammy Finkelman (1190c5) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:54 pmI don’t think it does, but if it does, an inestigation weakens him.
You could argue, I suppose, that impeaching a president without removing him maybe could make him stronger because then there’s an end to the investigation.
Sammy Finkelman (1190c5) — 11/26/2016 @ 6:58 pmNot really. The scientist who asked her to challenge made his agenda plain: he wants all the machine counts to be checked manually, as a matter of routine, every time. But nobody does that. The paper audit trail exists, but nobody ever looks at it, so what good is it? It’s like never auditing a business’s books; if someone’s stealing money you’ll never know, and if crooks know the books are never audited they’ll be emboldened to steal.
But since right now the only mechanism for getting ballots counted is for the loser in a close contest to call for a recount, that’s what he called on Clinton to do in these three states. Not because he suspects something is wrong, but because if you never check then you’ll never find out if something is wrong.
Clinton’s agenda is of course different.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 7:00 pmSo he looks stronger than before the removal vote that failed to carry, but actually he’s weaker than before the investigation and impeachment vote.
Sammy Finkelman (1190c5) — 11/26/2016 @ 7:00 pmYes. Really.
From the Bloomberg News article: “Hillary Clinton’s campaign will participate in vote recounts of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan if they take place, drawing a rebuke from Donald Trump’s team that the Democrat is being a “sore loser” and part of a “ridiculous” effort.”
As has been written, he’s sometimes correct, more frequently wrong, but never in doubt .
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/26/2016 @ 7:09 pmNo, it makes him stronger because his acquittal is seen as a vindication. Clinton came out from his trial stronger than he was before the impeachment, and swept the ’98 elections. The whole Starr investigation became seen as a witch hunt. That is the lesson of ’98 and it’s why there was no move to impeach 0bama. If you strike at the king you must make sure to kill him.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 7:11 pmThat Trump calls her a sore loser doesn’t make her one. I just explained why the recount is not an instance of sore loserdom; did you not bother reading it?
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 7:12 pmYes. I read it. She’s going after a recount in the three states.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/26/2016 @ 8:40 pmShe’s participating in the recount that Stein is calling. Which is happening not because of any claim of fraud, but because if there is no recount then the paper ballots will never be audited and we will never know whether the machine count was correct. How is that being a sore loser?
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/26/2016 @ 9:07 pmMilhouse, I think the initial complaint is that the voting machines were “hacked.”
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/26/2016 @ 9:15 pmNo, the complaint is not that they have been cracked but that they can easily be, and therefore it’s important to check that they haven’t been. Halderman and his students demonstrated how easily they could have done it if they had wanted to; thankfully they didn’t want to, but there are people in the world who do, so it’s important to check and make sure they haven’t.
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/27/2016 @ 1:01 pmMilhouse (40ca7b) — 11/27/2016 @ 1:01 pm
I think that’s misleading because you couldn’t scale up, and it probably really couldn’t go undetected. As dar as I know, they did nothing to show it could remain undetected or be scaled up.
Sammy Finkelman (dcc9ca) — 11/28/2016 @ 3:09 pmYou don’t need a personal conflict of interest to be accused of – or even be guilty of – distorting government policy to help someone ekse make money.
South Korean president Park Geun-Hye is being accused of helping an old friend.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/world/asia/south-korea-choi-soon-sil.
Sammy Finkelman (dcc9ca) — 11/28/2016 @ 3:19 pm