• 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!

When Even Rick Santorum Turns You Down (1 Viewer)

Wow! Trump could not even get Rick to take the gig.

Santorum not interested in White House chief of staff role

I'd say the news that this ship is sinking has been officially written on the wall.

I think it's going to go to Newt Gingrich. Which is hilarious. Two serial adulterers leading the GOP with the full throttled support and backing of that idiotic pack of the politically motivated hypocrites known as evangelical christians. :lol:
 
Last edited:
There are plenty of talent in the pipeline. Piers Morgan for example is begging Trump for the job.

Piers Morgan eh? Geez if that's the level of talent we're talking about then maybe Bill O'Reilly should be asked too. I'd rather Kanye West because at least then we'd have interesting tirades.
 
Piers Morgan eh? Geez if that's the level of talent we're talking about then maybe Bill O'Reilly should be asked too. I'd rather Kanye West because at least then we'd have interesting tirades.

Sean.....let it be Sean....
 
Wow! Trump could not even get Rick to take the gig.

Santorum not interested in White House chief of staff role

I'd say the news that this ship is sinking has been officially written on the wall.

According to a report published by The Washington Post on Tuesday, Santorum’s name was mentioned among a number of others that sources claim Trump has been considering for the role.

Mentioned by the MSM probably looking for another stupid story to push a false narrative. Nothing new..................
Never mind he has not be asked. But what the heck the lying media runs with anything today!!
 
Let's get something straight:
  • Donald Trump was born into "polite society" and he was so unruly he had to be sent not to one of the established boarding schools that well-behaved kids of his social set attended -- Andover, Choate, Exeter, Groton, Kent, Deerfield, St. Paul's, etc. -- or a good local school as did his sister, but to what amounted then to "reform school for rich kids," a military academy. Even in my youth (1960s and '70s), parents still threatened to send one to military school "If you don't straighten up, and fast. You think you have it rough here. Wait 'til they get hold of you....Mark my words. You are skating on thin ice, young man...."

    My folks remonstrated us for the most minor things, such as "terrorizing" our younger siblings or throwing a "dodgeball" too hard at one of the smaller kids and making him cry. My childhood friends' parents were equally stern.

    Being sent to NYMA marked the start of Trump's lifelong rejection by his peers. Now, his difficulty finding someone to serve as his Chief of Staff is yet another manifestation of folks' having realized that closely associating themselves with Trump is just not worth it in the long run. Kept on one's periphery, Trump is okay enough -- he's an affable and entertaining guy, and there's no great harm in having as part of the gloss in one's life -- however, any closer than that is a bad idea.
 
According to a report published by The Washington Post on Tuesday, Santorum’s name was mentioned among a number of others that sources claim Trump has been considering for the role.

Mentioned by the MSM probably looking for another stupid story to push a false narrative. Nothing new..................
Never mind he has not be asked. But what the heck the lying media runs with anything today!!

??? What? The only person who gets asked is someone whom one knows will say yes.
 
Would you willfully involve yourself with folks who comport themselves as do the folks noted below?
April 2018
  • Did you know about the $130K payment to Stormy Daniels?
    Trump: No.
    Reporter: Why did Michael Cohen make the payment to her?
    Trump: You'll have to ask Michael Cohen. Michael's my attorney, and you'll have to ask Michael.
May 2018
So there we learned that the story was the POTUS not only knew about the payment, but also reimbursed Cohen for it.

However, prior to that, the WH line was that Trump didn't know anything about the payment. And then after Rudy's revelation, the WH still wouldn't own up to the matter and neither would it state that staffers there had been misled.
  • WH Press Briefing, Sara Sanders, March 7, 2018:
    Sanders: There was no knowledge of any payments from the president, and he's denied all of these allegations.
    Reporter: Did the president approve of the payment that was made in October 2016
    Sanders: None of these allegations are true.
  • WH Press Briefing, Sara Sanders, May 3, 2018
    Reporter: You said, on March 7th, "There was no knowledge of any payments from the President, and he’s denied all of these allegations." Were you lying to us at the time, or were you in the dark?
    Sanders: The President has denied and continues to deny the underlying claim. And again, I had given the best information I had at the time.

    Reporter: Why can’t you just answer “yes” or “no” whether you were in the dark — I think, is a fairly simply question — whether you just didn’t have the information at the time?
    Sanders: I think it’s a fairly simple answer that I’ve given you, actually, several times now. I gave you the best information that I had and I’m going to continue to do my best to do that every single day.
All that equivocating rather than simply stating "I wasn't aware of the truth of the matter" (unless, of course, she was aware of the matter as it was, in May revealed, and was in fact lying in March) Sanders delivered, yet yesterday she had the temerity to say she wanted to be remembered as "transparent and honest."


Mind you, the payment was important enough to Trump that he flat-out untruthfully denied knowing about it in April 2018. Now, some months later, however, he'd have us believe it's no big deal.
  • December 10, 2018: "So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution,..."
Let's this straight:
  • The Democrats have nothing to do with calling the transaction a "campaign contribution." It is Michael Cohen, Trump's own SDNY DoJ attorneys and a judge who all have called it that.
    • The Democrats aren't who charged and sentenced Michael Cohen for an illegal campaign contribution.
  • "Simple private transaction" --> Um, there's nothing simple about it.
    • It's hush money paid to keep two women quiet that, per the SDNY, was paid with "the intent to influence the election." That's not simple.
    • Simple transactions don't entail an attorney, the creation of a "shell company," and go-betweens purchasing stories to "catch and kill" them.
      • A simple transaction is what transpires when one buys a ham or hires someone to rake the leaves.
      • And why lie about what's but a simple private transaction?
Trump has asserted that the transaction wasn't a violation. Trump doesn't get to decide what is and isn't a violation of the law, judges and juries do.

I don't care whether one views serving as Trump's Chief of Staff from the standpoint of legal and ethical probity or from that of working with prudent, adroit, astute, vested with copious quantities of acumen, and highly knowledgeable professionals. From either vantage point, at this point, one has to know one most likely will not be the chief of many staff who have in abundance those qualities. I don't know about you, but the last thing I'd do is become the "first officer on a sinking ship with a rouge captain."
 
Let's get something straight:
  • Donald Trump was born into "polite society" and he was so unruly he had to be sent not to one of the established boarding schools that well-behaved kids of his social set attended -- Andover, Choate, Exeter, Groton, Kent, Deerfield, St. Paul's, etc. -- or a good local school as did his sister, but to what amounted then to "reform school for rich kids," a military academy. Even in my youth (1960s and '70s), parents still threatened to send one to military school "If you don't straighten up, and fast. You think you have it rough here. Wait 'til they get hold of you....Mark my words. You are skating on thin ice, young man...."

    My folks remonstrated us for the most minor things, such as "terrorizing" our younger siblings or throwing a "dodgeball" too hard at one of the smaller kids and making him cry. My childhood friends' parents were equally stern.

    Being sent to NYMA marked the start of Trump's lifelong rejection by his peers. Now, his difficulty finding someone to serve as his Chief of Staff is yet another manifestation of folks' having realized that closely associating themselves with Trump is just not worth it in the long run. Kept on one's periphery, Trump is okay enough -- he's an affable and entertaining guy, and there's no great harm in having as part of the gloss in one's life -- however, any closer than that is a bad idea.

Because we are so deep into a dark age where the largely ignorant mob rather than justice or good sense rules.

This is NOT Trumps fault.
 
Hillary doesn't want the job either.....So why are you babbling about her?

Doesn't want the Job? Queen Kankles and her Rapist Husband are running all over the place speaking to almost empty arenas about her wanting to be President. Try to keep up.

see #15
 
I would think the clue would be if Chris Christie refuses.:lamo

Chris Christie would jump at the chance. However Jared Kushner would put a stop to it. Remember Christie sent Jared's daddy to jail.
 
Hillary doesn't want the job either.....So why are you babbling about her?

trumpsters always resort to Hillary whenever their darling donny is involved in a pile of stinking poo.
 
According to a report published by The Washington Post on Tuesday, Santorum’s name was mentioned among a number of others that sources claim Trump has been considering for the role.

Mentioned by the MSM probably looking for another stupid story to push a false narrative. Nothing new..................
Never mind he has not be asked. But what the heck the lying media runs with anything today!!

Speaking of stupid stories to push false narratives .....I look forward to Faux News to mention Hillary's emails for the millionth time this year.
 
Speaking of stupid stories to push false narratives .....I look forward to Faux News to mention Hillary's emails for the millionth time this year.

I break into a full-on guffaw when I hear the Hillary line. I mean, really...Two years in and not a single indictment of Hillary from Trump's handpicked DoJ and FBI heads, yet in roughly a year and a half, a bunch of Trump Admin and/or campaign personnel have been run out of office for misdeeds and/or convicted of felonies, and Trump himself has been tacitly indicted with two felonies....But Trumpkins are still talking about Hillary. LOL


I know what Hillary does when she hears Trumpkins and other conservatives go on about "what about Hillary this" and "what about Hillary that"....


 
I break into a full-on guffaw when I hear the Hillary line. I mean, really...Two years in and not a single indictment of Hillary from Trump's handpicked DoJ and FBI heads, yet in roughly a year and a half, a bunch of Trump Admin and/or campaign personnel have been run out of office for misdeeds and/or convicted of felonies, and Trump himself has been tacitly indicted with two felonies....But Trumpkins are still talking about Hillary. LOL


I know what Hillary does when she hears Trumpkins and other conservatives go on about "what about Hillary this" and "what about Hillary that"....




Two years one month with the full resources of the American government behind it at all that we have heard against Trump what we did not know when we decided that he was our guy is peanuts.

That is not going to get this job of killing Trump because he is uncontrollable done.
 
Let's get something straight:
  • Donald Trump was born into "polite society" and he was so unruly he had to be sent not to one of the established boarding schools that well-behaved kids of his social set attended -- Andover, Choate, Exeter, Groton, Kent, Deerfield, St. Paul's, etc. -- or a good local school as did his sister, but to what amounted then to "reform school for rich kids," a military academy. Even in my youth (1960s and '70s), parents still threatened to send one to military school "If you don't straighten up, and fast. You think you have it rough here. Wait 'til they get hold of you....Mark my words. You are skating on thin ice, young man...."

    My folks remonstrated us for the most minor things, such as "terrorizing" our younger siblings or throwing a "dodgeball" too hard at one of the smaller kids and making him cry. My childhood friends' parents were equally stern.

    Being sent to NYMA marked the start of Trump's lifelong rejection by his peers. Now, his difficulty finding someone to serve as his Chief of Staff is yet another manifestation of folks' having realized that closely associating themselves with Trump is just not worth it in the long run. Kept on one's periphery, Trump is okay enough -- he's an affable and entertaining guy, and there's no great harm in having as part of the gloss in one's life -- however, any closer than that is a bad idea.


Trump needs military school now.

Today.

Drill him good.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom