• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump on Saudi prince knowing of Khashoggi plot: 'Maybe he did, maybe he didn't'

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
38,793
Reaction score
9,515
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From United Press International

Trump on Saudi prince knowing of Khashoggi plot: 'Maybe he did, maybe he didn't'


Nov. 20 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump said Tuesday Saudi Arabia will continue to be a "great ally" -- despite purported ties between Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the death of reporter Jamal Khashoggi.

Trump issued the statement Tuesday afternoon, the same day he was expected to receive a CIA report on the journalist's death last month.

"Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an 'enemy of the state' and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that -- this is an unacceptable and horrible crime," the president added. "King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder of Mr. Khashoggi. Our intelligence agencies continue to assess all information, but it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event -- maybe he did and maybe he didn't!

COMMENT:-


Please see also

Trump says no penalty for Saudi prince for Khashoggi murder


and


Trump thanks Saudi Arabia for low oil prices amid backlash over Khashoggi response



Mr. Trump's principled stand on this matter deserves acknowledgement, so here goes


"Hey Donald, that's BS!"
 

Amelia

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Messages
9,804
Reaction score
7,610
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
And he still hasn't hit bottom.
 

PIPEWRENCH

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
4,076
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Guilty until proven innocent. Now that is how to make Himmler proud. What is wrong with Trump. Just point your finger at someone and accuse them and they are guilty unless they have absolute proof of innocence. The new American justice.
 

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
37,755
Reaction score
24,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Guilty until proven innocent. Now that is how to make Himmler proud. What is wrong with Trump. Just point your finger at someone and accuse them and they are guilty unless they have absolute proof of innocence. The new American justice.

This is the second time, the first being Helsinki, where Trump has publically taken the 180 degree position of the intelligence community.
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
38,793
Reaction score
9,515
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
This is the second time, the first being Helsinki, where Trump has publically taken the 180 degree position of the intelligence community.

Why would Mr. Trump want to pay any attention to the so-called "intelligence" community when he is so much smarter than they are?
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Guilty until proven innocent. Now that is how to make Himmler proud. What is wrong with Trump. Just point your finger at someone and accuse them and they are guilty unless they have absolute proof of innocence. The new American justice.

Short of overthrowing a government, when it comes to world leaders the closest you are going to get to a court room “guilty” is the determination of the intelligence community.
 

Exactice

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 29, 2016
Messages
5,023
Reaction score
1,288
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
From United Press International

Trump on Saudi prince knowing of Khashoggi plot: 'Maybe he did, maybe he didn't'


Nov. 20 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump said Tuesday Saudi Arabia will continue to be a "great ally" -- despite purported ties between Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the death of reporter Jamal Khashoggi.

Trump issued the statement Tuesday afternoon, the same day he was expected to receive a CIA report on the journalist's death last month.

"Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an 'enemy of the state' and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that -- this is an unacceptable and horrible crime," the president added. "King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder of Mr. Khashoggi. Our intelligence agencies continue to assess all information, but it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event -- maybe he did and maybe he didn't!

COMMENT:-


Please see also

Trump says no penalty for Saudi prince for Khashoggi murder


and


Trump thanks Saudi Arabia for low oil prices amid backlash over Khashoggi response



Mr. Trump's principled stand on this matter deserves acknowledgement, so here goes


"Hey Donald, that's BS!"



OK I had to do more research and since you posted this.

1) WHAT is TRUMPS legal jurisdiction ON this in the first place?

1) Khashoggi WAS NOT a US Citizen, BUT a Temporary "O" Visa recipient.
2) I have tried to read up on Domestic Lawful Protections. These do NOT apply to "O" Visa recipients and LPR (Lawful Permanent Residents) NOT on US SOIL.
3) Khashoggi was a Saudi Citizen, Entering a Saudi consulate, Murder by Saudis. What US jurisdiction do we have now?


SO Lets say the PRINCE is guilty.... WE have World Wide Jurisdiction to find the Prince Guilty of authorizing the Murder and we have the jurisdiction to apply sanction on that country for actions they took on their on Countryman?

The acts Were ATROCIOUS. Unforgivable. BUT Trump has World Police Jurisdiction to claim fault and hold the Prince accountable? WOW that is SOME power!
 

Rogue Valley

Exordium and Terminus
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
66,011
Reaction score
50,370
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is the second time, the first being Helsinki, where Trump has publically taken the 180 degree position of the intelligence community.

This is actually the third time. He rejected the US intelligence community consensus (no opposition) pertaining to Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

At that time, Trump likened the IC to nazis.
 

PIPEWRENCH

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
4,076
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
This is the second time, the first being Helsinki, where Trump has publically taken the 180 degree position of the intelligence community.

Do we have proof and have we presented it to the world to justify any actions we take? Or are we just going to run around burning witches on speculation. Without proof this is nothing but media hype and media justice.
 

PIPEWRENCH

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
4,076
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Short of overthrowing a government, when it comes to world leaders the closest you are going to get to a court room “guilty” is the determination of the intelligence community.

Has the evidence we have been presented to the world to justify our taking action. If not then Trump is doing the right thing. Innocent until proven guilty. What is so hard about this. Or maybe Trump should start assassinating world leaders on speculation or if we don't like them. Maybe we need Putin for our leader who will take action without proof of guilt just the speculation or the possibility of guilt. No world court just a wannabe god doing what ever he wants because he is the leader of a superpower country.
 
Last edited:

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
37,755
Reaction score
24,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Do we have proof and have we presented it to the world to justify any actions we take? Or are we just going to run around burning witches on speculation. Without proof this is nothing but media hype and media justice.

Two things that are incompatible: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia & Rouge Operation..........
 

OlNate

Shameless Canuck
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
20,496
Reaction score
11,760
Location
Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Has the evidence we have been presented to the world to justify our taking action. If not then Trump is doing the right thing. Innocent until proven guilty. What is so hard about this. Or maybe Trump should start assassinating world leaders on speculation or we don't like. Maybe we need Putin for our leader who will take action without proof just the possibility of guilt.

lol...re: the bolded...isn't that what you guys do anyway, regardless of who is president?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ory-kill-leaders-around-the-world-north-korea
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
38,793
Reaction score
9,515
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
OK I had to do more research and since you posted this.

1) WHAT is TRUMPS legal jurisdiction ON this in the first place?

I agree that Mr. Trump may not have any "legal" justification for any action (although that has not stopped the US government from intermeddling in the internal affairs of other countries [sometimes going so far as to either invade them on spurious pretexts or to finance, organize, and/or support the illegal overthrow of the existing governments]) but that does not, in the least, amount to the total abdication of any condemnation of the "immorality" of an action by another country.

You might want to note that the Dredd Scott decision was BOTH "legally justified" (based on the laws in effect at the time) AND "morally repugnant" (also based on the standards of morality preached by most groups at the time [as well as those of today]).

SO Lets say the PRINCE is guilty.... WE have World Wide Jurisdiction to find the Prince Guilty of authorizing the Murder and we have the jurisdiction to apply sanction on that country for actions they took on their on Countryman?

The only court that has that sort of jurisdiction is the International Criminal Court and the government of the United States of America does not accept that the International Criminal Court has any legitimacy. If the US government were to admit that the ICC has any legitimacy then the US government would also have to admit that the jurisdiction of the ICC also extended to the United States of America. The US government will not do that - EVER.

The acts Were ATROCIOUS. Unforgivable.

Got that one right.

BUT Trump has World Police Jurisdiction to claim fault and hold the Prince accountable? WOW that is SOME power!

Not quite.

However Mr. Trump DOES have the ability to say "Because of that atrocious and unforgivable act, my country is NOT going to sell your country any weapons (not even if you pay cash) and is also going to work with the other nations of the world to fine a replacement for your (essentially) sole source of income.". Mr. Trump will not do that - especially if doing that would mean a $2.00 drop in his income.
 

PIPEWRENCH

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
4,076
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
lol...re: the bolded...isn't that what you guys do anyway, regardless of who is president?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ory-kill-leaders-around-the-world-north-korea

We used to back when JFK was president. He reaped what he sowed. Now the rich and powerful that own our government use our CIA and military to remove uncooperative leaders. What is comical is a lot of the leaders we removed were leaders we helped put in power. When they do the bidding of the rich and powerful they are portrayed as good leaders by our media. When they don't they are the bad evil leaders. Owning all the media has major advantages for the rich and powerful. Most peoples knowledge of what is happening comes from their portrayal of events. The glass can be half full or it could be half empty.

This murder is just a convenient tragedy the rich and powerful who own our media can use to attack Trump. Every day people are murdered in every major city in this country and the world. But they are never heard about and most likely no one will even look into who killed them. That is unless they can use it to make money or use it to hurt someone they can't own and control such as Trump.


If Trump does nothing because there s no concrete proof who is responsible he is a loser. If he reacts and later evidence does emerge he will be the irrational idiot who umped the gun. You have to love our media.
 

PIPEWRENCH

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
4,076
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I agree that Mr. Trump may not have any "legal" justification for any action (although that has not stopped the US government from intermeddling in the internal affairs of other countries [sometimes going so far as to either invade them on spurious pretexts or to finance, organize, and/or support the illegal overthrow of the existing governments]) but that does not, in the least, amount to the total abdication of any condemnation of the "immorality" of an action by another country.

You might want to note that the Dredd Scott decision was BOTH "legally justified" (based on the laws in effect at the time) AND "morally repugnant" (also based on the standards of morality preached by most groups at the time [as well as those of today]).



The only court that has that sort of jurisdiction is the International Criminal Court and the government of the United States of America does not accept that the International Criminal Court has any legitimacy. If the US government were to admit that the ICC has any legitimacy then the US government would also have to admit that the jurisdiction of the ICC also extended to the United States of America. The US government will not do that - EVER.



Got that one right.



Not quite.

However Mr. Trump DOES have the ability to say "Because of that atrocious and unforgivable act, my country is NOT going to sell your country any weapons (not even if you pay cash) and is also going to work with the other nations of the world to fine a replacement for your (essentially) sole source of income.". Mr. Trump will not do that - especially if doing that would mean a $2.00 drop in his income.

That single person murdered is a tragedy. But shouldn't we be just as concerned about the other 1.5 million people murdered all over the world. Why is this murder so important that it is worth more than 1.5 million other murders combined? I will tell you. It is our rich and powerful using their media to attack Trump who they do not own and cannot control like the rest of their bought and paid for party puppets. That is why this single murder is worth more than the other 1.5 million murders combined. Our president and our congress needs to stop everything they should be doing to run our country and should concentrate their efforts against this Saudi ruler who may not even be guilty.
 

OlNate

Shameless Canuck
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
20,496
Reaction score
11,760
Location
Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
We used to back when JFK was president. He reaped what he sowed. Now the rich and powerful that own our government use our CIA and military to remove uncooperative leaders. What is comical is a lot of the leaders we removed were leaders we helped put in power. When they do the bidding of the rich and powerful they are portrayed as good leaders by our media. When they don't they are the bad evil leaders. Owning all the media has major advantages for the rich and powerful. Most peoples knowledge of what is happening comes from their portrayal of events. The glass can be half full or it could be half empty.

This murder is just a convenient tragedy the rich and powerful who own our media can use to attack Trump. Every day people are murdered in every major city in this country and the world. But they are never heard about and most likely no one will even look into who killed them. That is unless they can use it to make money or use it to hurt someone they can't own and control such as Trump.


If Trump does nothing because there s no concrete proof who is responsible he is a loser. If he reacts and later evidence does emerge he will be the irrational idiot who umped the gun. You have to love our media.


Re: the bolded... I think one of the most interesting commentaries on American foreign policy is the end of Rambo 3. Check it out, if you don't know what I'm talking about. ;)

I agree with you, people die every day. But the deaths of high profile individuals can serve to drive change, if there is anyone ballsy enough to do it. How many people died in the Vietnam war, yet there are two images that drove massive change to public opinion: the burning monk and the naked girl.

When presented with symbols of greater problems, you can act, if you have the power to do so (which one would think the POTUS has), or you can choose not to act. But either way you send a message, the magnitude of which generally correlates to the scale of the symbol. With respect, do you approve of the message your president has sent regarding SA?
 

PIPEWRENCH

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
4,076
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: the bolded... I think one of the most interesting commentaries on American foreign policy is the end of Rambo 3. Check it out, if you don't know what I'm talking about. ;)

I agree with you, people die every day. But the deaths of high profile individuals can serve to drive change, if there is anyone ballsy enough to do it. How many people died in the Vietnam war, yet there are two images that drove massive change to public opinion: the burning monk and the naked girl.

When presented with symbols of greater problems, you can act, if you have the power to do so (which one would think the POTUS has), or you can choose not to act. But either way you send a message, the magnitude of which generally correlates to the scale of the symbol. With respect, do you approve of the message your president has sent regarding SA?

I say Trump would act if and when presented with facts not might be, or could be. He is absolutely right about not causing the suffering of millions due to higher oil prices without evidence. What part of this is so hard to understand. He needs hard evidence before acting against a world leader. Unlike the way our media is using media justice against Trump.


wheres the beef.jpg
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,720
Reaction score
6,276
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I say Trump would act if and when presented with facts not might be, or could be. He is absolutely right about not causing the suffering of millions due to higher oil prices without evidence. What part of this is so hard to understand. He needs hard evidence before acting against a world leader. Unlike the way our media is using media justice against Trump.


View attachment 67244778

Perhaps The Saudi’s would behave themselves if they knew we were going to negotiate a detante with Iran.
 

OlNate

Shameless Canuck
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
20,496
Reaction score
11,760
Location
Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I say Trump would act if and when presented with facts not might be, or could be. He is absolutely right about not causing the suffering of millions due to higher oil prices without evidence. What part of this is so hard to understand. He needs hard evidence before acting against a world leader. Unlike the way our media is using media justice against Trump.


View attachment 67244778

Ok, you're pissing me off, PW, you're making me actually be disciplined in my approach with Donald Trump, and really watch with an open mind what he's about here. This is the statement I landed on.

[video]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/20/donald-trump-says-he-finds-saudi-explanation-of-khashoggi-death-credible[/video]

So, yes, he says good first step, he calls what happened unacceptable, and says that it's going to be looked at. Ok, all Trump hate put aside, that's fair. I mean, it sure AF LOOKS like SA was being shady here...but when you're dealing with a close ally, no matter what kind of psychos they may be, you need to be careful when talking ****. Too bad he didn't exercise that kind of restraint when dealing with his other allies, but any restraint from Donald Trump should be congratulated, even if it is only brought out for your shadiest, scariest, most human rights violations perpetuating, most linked to 9/11, oil rich ally you have........ (Sorry, bud, that's literally the best I can do...hehe...but believe me, it's me trying)

I guess the right thing to do here is wait for an investigation to happen, hope we're being told the truth, and see what Trump does next. Given the clip, my concern would be that if you let SA get away with it this time, they'll very quickly learn there's little you'll do to them that will endanger "$100 billion worth of work and 600 000 jobs". There's another thread on here about that lady calling Trump SA's bitch...perhaps less flippantly than I've been on the subject earlier in the day, I can't help but suggest that might not be so far from the truth. What will SA do next, seemingly having America, the biggest military power in the world, by the balls?

I'm not necessarily saying this is Trump's fault. American dependance on SA money didn't just happen overnight in 2016. In a sense, America is vulnerable in a couple of directions, due to foreign investment and commerce in America. I mean, all the posturing with China is interesting and all, but if you think $100 billion is scary, how does $635 billion sound? If Trump shows his ass here, you're over. If anything, this is the important one to not **** around with, because it's only $100 billion. It's a much cheaper place to send a message. I would be remiss if I didn't throw a jab here, and point out that this is one of the costs of Trump's "America First" isolationism... the few people you have left become very powerful in your country. What better time to pull these shenanigans than when you've pissed the rest of the world off...hehe.... Back to yes, simply being an asshole can hurt you, and how you behave matters.

But yes, it's important to get it right, I understand that. The world is a crazy place right now. Everything's a mess. Who knows what version of the truth will ever come to light. Regardless of the outcome, if I were Trump, I'd go to his other, long term allies, that he's alienated through one tantrum or another, and say "Look, I know I've been a bit...all over the place, and maybe the last two years has been kinda weird. But there are some pretty bad people holding a lot of the strings right now, and maybe I was wrong about that whole isolationism thing, how about good people vs bad people, like it used to be, and let's make it work for all of us."

Just my opinion, of course... Who really knows, right?
 

PIPEWRENCH

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
4,076
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Ok, you're pissing me off, PW, you're making me actually be disciplined in my approach with Donald Trump, and really watch with an open mind what he's about here. This is the statement I landed on.

[video]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/20/donald-trump-says-he-finds-saudi-explanation-of-khashoggi-death-credible[/video]

So, yes, he says good first step, he calls what happened unacceptable, and says that it's going to be looked at. Ok, all Trump hate put aside, that's fair. I mean, it sure AF LOOKS like SA was being shady here...but when you're dealing with a close ally, no matter what kind of psychos they may be, you need to be careful when talking ****. Too bad he didn't exercise that kind of restraint when dealing with his other allies, but any restraint from Donald Trump should be congratulated, even if it is only brought out for your shadiest, scariest, most human rights violations perpetuating, most linked to 9/11, oil rich ally you have........ (Sorry, bud, that's literally the best I can do...hehe...but believe me, it's me trying)

I guess the right thing to do here is wait for an investigation to happen, hope we're being told the truth, and see what Trump does next. Given the clip, my concern would be that if you let SA get away with it this time, they'll very quickly learn there's little you'll do to them that will endanger "$100 billion worth of work and 600 000 jobs". There's another thread on here about that lady calling Trump SA's bitch...perhaps less flippantly than I've been on the subject earlier in the day, I can't help but suggest that might not be so far from the truth. What will SA do next, seemingly having America, the biggest military power in the world, by the balls?

I'm not necessarily saying this is Trump's fault. American dependance on SA money didn't just happen overnight in 2016. In a sense, America is vulnerable in a couple of directions, due to foreign investment and commerce in America. I mean, all the posturing with China is interesting and all, but if you think $100 billion is scary, how does $635 billion sound? If Trump shows his ass here, you're over. If anything, this is the important one to not **** around with, because it's only $100 billion. It's a much cheaper place to send a message. I would be remiss if I didn't throw a jab here, and point out that this is one of the costs of Trump's "America First" isolationism... the few people you have left become very powerful in your country. What better time to pull these shenanigans than when you've pissed the rest of the world off...hehe.... Back to yes, simply being an asshole can hurt you, and how you behave matters.

But yes, it's important to get it right, I understand that. The world is a crazy place right now. Everything's a mess. Who knows what version of the truth will ever come to light. Regardless of the outcome, if I were Trump, I'd go to his other, long term allies, that he's alienated through one tantrum or another, and say "Look, I know I've been a bit...all over the place, and maybe the last two years has been kinda weird. But there are some pretty bad people holding a lot of the strings right now, and maybe I was wrong about that whole isolationism thing, how about good people vs bad people, like it used to be, and let's make it work for all of us."

Just my opinion, of course... Who really knows, right?

Trump has not sent a mixed message. He said he wants to preserve the relations with Saudi Arabia. That is wonderful but he also said he will decide what action to take when the investigation is concluded and the evidence is presented. If there is no clear cut evidence why throw our relationship with this country without evidence.

I know nothing would piss me off more than being punished without evidence. That is Gestapo tactics and has no business in our government. I cannot believe people want to start punishing people without evidence. Our intelligence is clearly not reliable. Look at what they told Bush about weapons of mass destruction. Now you want Trump to go off on Saudi Arabia with out any evidence. People need to pull their heads out of their backside.
 

OlNate

Shameless Canuck
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
20,496
Reaction score
11,760
Location
Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Trump has not sent a mixed message. He said he wants to preserve the relations with Saudi Arabia. That is wonderful but he also said he will decide what action to take when the investigation is concluded and the evidence is presented. If there is no clear cut evidence why throw our relationship with this country without evidence.

I know nothing would piss me off more than being punished without evidence. That is Gestapo tactics and has no business in our government. I cannot believe people want to start punishing people without evidence. Our intelligence is clearly not reliable. Look at what they told Bush about weapons of mass destruction. Now you want Trump to go off on Saudi Arabia with out any evidence. People need to pull their heads out of their backside.

I believe I said a number of times that the investigation needs to be done right, and that it's a sensitive matter. So I hope you're not directing your scare words (Gestapo tactics?) at me. ;)

I don't think it's that strange that people are jumping all over this, though. It's not like this is the first time SA has done something shady. Without their oil, and the allies it buys them, they would be a villain nation, and would have be sorted out a long time ago. But you're right, they've got you guys by the balls, prudence is important.

But by releasing statements like Trump has about the money and the jobs, he's already paving SA's escape route from any accountability in this situation, if they did do it. I think that goes against the rules of prudence as well, no? "Uh, I dunno if they did it, and if they did do it I'm gonna be really mad, but we're not going to do anything to stop the money going back and forth, cuz we NEEEEEEEEED it..."

If I'm the SA prince, I'm laughing at you right now.
 
Top Bottom