You’re deflecting the original discussion. We were talking about him being vindictive.
North Carolina
- Thread starter Robot_Man
- Start date
I’m talking about the guardrails working to keep him in check during his first term, to prevent him from doing vindictive things like trying to prosecute Comey and Hillary.
How about firing McCabe a day before his retirement so he couldn’t get his full pension? Firing Comey while he was on a work trip and being mad he was able to fly home? Firing Vindeman?
Criticizing Pence while rioters were breaking into the Capital? Pure vindictiveness.
Trump is who we all know he is. We need people around him that will keep him from his insane impulses. For the majority of his first term, that was the case. I don't think he will accept anyone who says no to him during a second term.
Comey McCabe deserve to be fired. Even Democrats had no use for Comey.
He’s tough to work for. I certainly wouldn’t want to work for him. But Harris is notorious for staff turnover and being tough to work for as well. That doesn’t mean you’re vindictive.
If they deserved to be fired or not is debatable…
Trump being vindictive towards them in how they were fired is what we’re discussing though.
FBI policy was that top level employees get 30 days notice of any disciplinary action. The exception is for when a crime has been committed which will result in jail time. That was not the case with McCabe. He was fired earlier than 30 days just to try and make him miss his pension. That is 100% an example of Trump being vindictive.
We will have to agree to disagree. I don’t see it as vindictive. I see two guys who politicized their positions. Boo hoo.
You don’t think McCabe being fired a day before he was eligible for his pension, and weeks before FBI policy dictates was vindictive? Trump tweeted about wanting Sessions to fire McCabe and tweeting about when he gets his benefits.
Not a reasonable position that it wasn’t just Trump being vindictive at this point to be honest. You just don’t want to admit it.
no its 100% vindictive and its laughable he pretends to "believe" that trump isn't vindictive.
of course he is, it's all he talks about. he constantly talks about taking down those who are against him. and its one of his only real policies.
I guess agree to disagree doesn’t mean much? If somebody doesn’t do their job and perhaps undermines you they deserve what they get. McCabe got a nice gig on CNN (which tells you something)…
Last edited:
I get what it means. It means you’re unwilling to consider vindictive behavior when you believe a firing was justified.
Again, if McCabe should have been fired is not the debate. Him being fired outside of guidelines just so he would lose his pension eligibility is. And it’s not like I need to wonder if Trump was thinking about the timing because he tweeted about it months earlier!
You put yourself in a corner by saying Trump wasn’t vindictive while in office and are not stuck on defending that position rather than just acknowledging that this one is a pretty clear example where he was.
You asked for an example where Trump acted vindictively. I gave you one. Now you just agree with the vindictiveness so it doesn't count?
ok... I guess you're right that Trump acting vindictively is not something you need to worry about because you will just make excuses for it anyway.
Trump is as vindictive as anyone else with power. It's sad but it's true. Weren't conservative non profits targeted by the IRS during the Obama administration. Isn't the Trump lawsuit over property values just an attack on Trump when everyone does the same thing and banks do their own due diligence anyway. My opinion this is a bunch of Trump is a monster because he's going to do the same things we've been doing behind closed doors, right out in the open for everyone to see and he's not going to twist it to make it sound good.
Well, yes, but so were liberal groups. Progressive, green energy and occupy were also on target lists.
The issue was that the IRS was not supposed to target specifically based on ideology but they were supposed to target political organizations which should not qualify for tax exempt status. That was the issue.
Not vindictive or inherently biased, the tea party movement was just bigger so there were a ton of requests from tea party groups popping up which were flagged. The IRS now has a policy in place to monitor the filters used and nothing can be added without approval.
The problem for Trump was that it became public elsewhere that he had lied. Not sure the state should let it slide when the facts show fraud?
That's fair. It's entirely possible Harris would be just as vindictive.. though my original point before that was that Trump was less likely to keep the guardrails up. The people who push back against Harris potentially doing whatever she wants will be there if she wins. I don't think Trump keeps anyone around that doesn't say yes to him in a 2nd term.
You don’t seem to get it. It’s not being vindictive when someone is unable to do their job and uses it for political purposes, when he’s not supposed to. It’s called taking care of a problem.
No one is arguing he shouldn't have fired McCabe. That would have been taking care of the problem.
Had Trump not tweeted about his pension eligibility months earlier, or fired him after a 30 day notification which is in accordance with FBI policy... then I'd agree. Unfortunately, his termination was expedited JUST because of vindictiveness. Trump didn't want to just fire him, he wanted to go beyond that and make sure he couldn't get his full pension. You just keep ignoring the timing here.
This one’s fun. He’s so obviously wrong here, just can’t admit it.
He’s not vindictive. Well he’s vindictive but he wouldn’t act on it. Well he acted on it but I agree with him. lol
I'd love to know the numbers of applications to being flagged for both sides. We will probably never know, but supposedly the progressive groups were eventually able to get tax exempt status while the conservatives did not.
How is it the states decision? If I lied to Bank of America, shouldn't Bank of America come after me, not the state?
They're all vindictive, some are just more in your face about it while others talk about our hopes and dreams and are vindictive behind the scenes. Sorry I find it hard to believe Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, Obama and Biden didn't abuse their powers to settle old scores and only this Trump guy is vindictive. Not to mention there's books out about some of these people being vindictive and tearing people down who got in their way.
I'm totally lost on Harris 6 weeks before the election. The people who push back against Harris? You can't push back on her because she just does what is told. I'm trying to find what she stands for other than abortion. Abortion is good. For someone put in charge of root causes at the border how come she never looked into root causes of abortion? Everything she says is rehearsed, nothing is authentic. She's done about 3 softball interviews. Never gets pressed on how her core values remain the same yet her positions flip flop. The real questions are who are these people and how do you or I know they won't go rogue? If you vote for Trump you know who you're voting for, I don't think any of us have a clue about the real Kamala or if we will ever see the real Kamala over 4 years. So who are these people that we are really voting for?
Last edited:
Fair question. Many conservative groups got through though.
Impossible to know all of the details but the audit report did note that there were some where additional information was requested. Some applications were withdrawn. Some applications were not followed up on from those requesting non profit status. The report did note that the additional request appeared overburdensome though.
We've discussed before here, but district courts are the ones who have the ability to go after people or entities for disgorgement of ill gotten gains. The purpose of the law is to prevent others from doing the same thing.
If the bank decides not to pursue legal actions, and there are many reasons why they wouldn't, a district court can step in.
Maybe. But that's why you want good people around the president who can be a voice of reason and would block them from doing anything crazy.
I don't believe Kamala will do anything crazy on her own. She doesn't seem to do anything on her own and when she does people cringe like she's going to shoot an intruder who enters her home. Who would've thought 2 months ago, she was a gun owner. We know nothing about her. My issue is she's no different than a HS basketball recruit with handlers telling her what to do. She's not doing anything on her own. So let us know who these people are. The left acts like there's no worse person than Trump, but anyone with common sense knows there are worse people on the left and right than Trump. Trump is not the most horrible person on planet earth, North America, or even the United States of America but we know Trump calls his shots. How do we know the people behind Kamala calling her shots are better or worse than Trump.
