Hiku said:
Ljink96 said:
Holy fucking shit.  I'm just trying to be optimisic though. It does sound like a comic book story though. What was this from though was it Batman? I'm not good with films these days XD.
|
Yeah, it's from the third Batman. Dark Knight Rises.
And yeah, no point in being pessimistic now, but gotta be realistic. He has appointed some bad people like the CEO of Exxon Mobil (Oil company), Goldman Sachs ("Worst bank in America who robbed the middle class" according to Trump himself), etc, who gave him lots of money.
Perhaps his corruption ends there and he starts opposing legislation that's bad for the country.
But some of his decisions make it seem like earning money is still his biggest priority. For example, he appointed Ben Carson, who supported his campaign (seen in one of the clips above) as head of US housing. This after Carson previously declined a position in Trump's admministration because "Dr. Carson feels he has no government experience, he's never run a federal agency. The last thing he would want to do was take a position that could cripple the presidency."
Now he accepted the position of head of housing. As Elizabeth Warren pointed out in the clip, Trump has large interests in that sector, as he sells buildings for a living. She asked if Ben Carson could guarantee that he wouldn't have the money from his department benefit Trump's company, as that is a conflict of interest that a President should not have, and he could not confirm that he wont pour money into Trump's pocket.
So if money is still Trump's main motivation, unlike Bernie Sanders who has never accepted a coorporate check in his entire carreer, always refused, then it's hard to be optimistic. But we'll of course have to see and hope for the best. Trump does occasionally say some good things, like that pharmaceutical companies are "getting away with murder".
|
He's got a pretty balanced group of experienced Washington leeches and successful people without much time in government. That always seemed to be the MO, trying to get a combination of experienced people who agreed with him + business people who haven't been employed by Washington forever.
I'm not trying to justify every pick, but I think the bait & switch idea that gets floated around is false. Especially when you consider who was giving to Trump and who was giving to Hillary. She got far more from corporations and lobbyists than Trump, and that isn't debatable.
