This should be interesting

[baldo]

As positive as Trump's nominee for Sec of Defense is, on the surface, his picks for Treasury and Commerce should make everyone stand up and take notice. Before everyone gets all up-tight, read up on the history of Mnuchin, his pick for Treasury. His actions after the crash are the type that make 99% of the people in this country want to stock up on pitchforks.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-treasury-foreclosed-homes-mnuchin-232038

http://www.wsj.com/articles/steven-mnuchins-defining-moment-seizing-opportunity-from-the-financial-crisis-1480547063

"Mr. Mnuchin assembled an all-star cast drawn from his years on Wall Street, including Mr. Soros, hedge-fund manager John Paulson, billionaire Michael Dell’s investment firm and several former Goldman executives, including J. Christopher Flowers. They signed up on the basis that Mr. Mnuchin would personally run the bank, according to people familiar with the matter."

[f6john]

        It's on Trump. He has to make everything work. It's his team. We're working outside the box.  I know you're looking for cracks and will continue chipping away at everything that looks questionable to you. Most of us could care less. You will have plenty of time for told you so's
once he takes the oath of office.

[baldo]

       It's on Trump. He has to make everything work. It's his team. We're working outside the box.  I know you're looking for cracks and will continue chipping away at everything that looks questionable to you. Most of us could care less. You will have plenty of time for told you so's
once he takes the oath of office.

John, you're right, not a Trump fan. But like I said, I'm willing to give him a chance. I'm cautiously optimistic with this Carrier deal, but the devil's in the details. He's a wild card, and maybe that's what we all need right now.

I posted this because this nominee is someone we ALL need to be aware of. He was the worst of the worst during the housing crisis. How many members here know someone that either lost or came close to losing their home?

He's really bad news to be the man placed at the head of our Treasury Dept.

For most if not all of his nominees so far, I don't see much drainage. This should be a concern for everyone.

[The emperor has no clothes]

       It's on Trump. He has to make everything work. It's his team. We're working outside the box.  I know you're looking for cracks and will continue chipping away at everything that looks questionable to you. Most of us could care less. You will have plenty of time for told you so's
once he takes the oath of office.

John, you're right, not a Trump fan. But like I said, I'm willing to give him a chance. I'm cautiously optimistic with this Carrier deal, but the devil's in the details. He's a wild card, and maybe that's what we all need right now.

I posted this because this nominee is someone we ALL need to be aware of. He was the worst of the worst during the housing crisis. How many members here know someone that either lost or came close to losing their home?

He's really bad news to be the man placed at the head of our Treasury Dept.

For most if not all of his nominees so far, I don't see much drainage. This should be a concern for everyone.

Bob, you've got to take them at their word. "Most of us could care less" None of the nominees that make us step back and go "whoa" bother them at all. Right now they are happy he won and are perfectly fine with any of his picks. That may change down the road, but for now they just don't care.

[f6john]

   Actually the statement should have read most of us "couldn't" care less.  

[The emperor has no clothes]

   Actually the statement should have read most of us "couldn't" care less.  

I've never understood why people say it the other way.

[Romeo]

   Actually the statement should have read most of us "couldn't" care less.  

I've never understood why people say it the other way.

ditto

[Moonshot_1]

I didn't see anywhere that Mnuchin and his group were making the bad loans. Just that they purchased assets from the entities the FDIC closed down.

Yes, they did foreclose on tens of thousands of properties. That was the essence of the assets. The loans on them were deficient. One story was an anomaly of woman being .70 deficient and that attempt at foreclosure was attributed to confusion in insurance coverage.

Bottom line to this story is that there was going to be somebody having to manage some of this disaster.
A disaster brought on, in no small part, by a Congress passing legislation to have banks and other institutions make gazillion sub-prime loans.

From my perspective, I see no issues or criminality by Mnuchin in this. He came away with a large payoff but it likely came with large risks. He was smack in the middle of all this and gained valuable insight to the problems and likely has thoughts as to solutions to the problems.

Had he been instrumental in writing those sub-prime loans to people he knew could not afford them, and doing so with the intention to foreclose on the properties, then I'd have a completely different opinion.

But even from the article, my take is a good one on Mnuchin.

[Willow]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.        

[G-Man]

.......you've got to take them at their word. "Most of us could care less" None of the nominees that make us step back and go "whoa" bother them at all.............

You, Bob, and ALL the talking heads on all those "news" shows have been dead wrong about EVERYTHING regarding Trump for about a year and a half now.  Why should we give a rat's a$$ what takes you aback regarding anything Trump says or does?  All of a sudden you're gonna be right?   

[Alpha Dog]

There was taking for anyone that wanted to take a risk.  Houses could be bought in Cleveland and Detroit for a 100 dollars or less.  Terrible neighborhoods but some took the chance and helped to fix run down areas.

[The emperor has no clothes]

.......you've got to take them at their word. "Most of us could care less" None of the nominees that make us step back and go "whoa" bother them at all.............

You, Bob, and ALL the talking heads on all those "news" shows have been dead wrong about EVERYTHING regarding Trump for about a year and a half now.  Why should we give a rat's a$$ what takes you aback regarding anything Trump says or does?  All of a sudden you're gonna be right?   

Gary, I didn't say you should give a rat's a$$ what I think. I was giving Bob my opinion of how the other side looks at it. I understand full well most here don't care what I think. I'm ok with that. If I'm mistaken about how you guys feel about his appointments, then by all means show me where I'm wrong.

[..]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.        

A dogs urge to return to his vomit can be all encompassing.

[dinosnake]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.        

Isn't that a double-standard of cutting him slack because of his party association?  

"I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything"  He has already done a number of things, at least according to the media: remember the campaign promises of sweeping away the old rancid Washington establishment and influence peddlers?  Instead, he's hiring them himself.  Remember the campaign complaints of some of Obama's policies, including a full-scale reversal of ACA?  Instead, he's backed away from those claims and now is only looking to overhaul ACA while keeping some of the systems in place.  

And how is a democratic capitalist government supposed to "punish" companies that use preexisting rules to outsource, and still remain democratic and free enterprise?

So he's done an volte-face on a number of basic tenets in his campaign...and he isn't being called to task.  "Let's give him a chance!" "He'll probably be great, just wait and see!"  

And if he were ANYONE else, especially not conservative, would everyone be as patient?

Ask yourself that question honestly.  He still has a long way to go, but things are certainly being knotted-up early.

[Wizzard]

you have to pass it to see.  


SSDD

[Fathertime]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.        

Isn't that a double-standard of cutting him slack because of his party association?  

"I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything"  He has already done a number of things, at least according to the media: remember the campaign promises of sweeping away the old rancid Washington establishment and influence peddlers?  Instead, he's hiring them himself.  Remember the campaign complaints of some of Obama's policies, including a full-scale reversal of ACA?  Instead, he's backed away from those claims and now is only looking to overhaul ACA while keeping some of the systems in place.  

And how is a democratic capitalist government supposed to "punish" companies that use preexisting rules to outsource, and still remain democratic and free enterprise?

So he's done an volte-face on a number of basic tenets in his campaign...and he isn't being called to task.  "Let's give him a chance!" "He'll probably be great, just wait and see!"  

And if he were ANYONE else, especially not conservative, would everyone be as patient?

Ask yourself that question honestly.  He still has a long way to go, but things are certainly being knotted-up early.

A lot of people were conned this past November.

[Wizzard]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.      

Isn't that a double-standard of cutting him slack because of his party association?  

"I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything"  He has already done a number of things, at least according to the media: remember the campaign promises of sweeping away the old rancid Washington establishment and influence peddlers?  Instead, he's hiring them himself.  Remember the campaign complaints of some of Obama's policies, including a full-scale reversal of ACA?  Instead, he's backed away from those claims and now is only looking to overhaul ACA while keeping some of the systems in place.  

And how is a democratic capitalist government supposed to "punish" companies that use preexisting rules to outsource, and still remain democratic and free enterprise?

So he's done an volte-face on a number of basic tenets in his campaign...and he isn't being called to task.  "Let's give him a chance!" "He'll probably be great, just wait and see!"  

And if he were ANYONE else, especially not conservative, would everyone be as patient?

Ask yourself that question honestly.  He still has a long way to go, but things are certainly being knotted-up early.

A lot of people were conned this past November.

And I am very sure that is a fact in YOUR mind. There might be many that disagree! Far as I am concerned, in my opinion we have been conned for the last 8 years!

[Willow]

... my opinion of how the other side looks at it. I understand full well most here don't care what I think. I'm ok with that. ... then by all means show me where I'm wrong.

There are two statements there and a request that are mutually exclusive.

Perhaps one of the ways we could work toward the healing of America is to stop referring to each other as "the other side".  We're all Americans.  We're voters who voted one way or the other.  I don't have everything in common with everyone who voted for the candidate I voted for neither do you.  My opinion is that when you try to put everyone in the same boat and explain "how the other side looks at it" you have shown yourself to be repeatedly incorrect.  Some do.  Some don't.  

I have some interest in your opinion.  It will likely not have a direct impact on mine.  I haven't had a rat's ass in so long that I don't know what I would give it for.  

I'll make you an offer.  I won't refer to you as the other side even if you can't possibly understand the Marine mind.  I would appreciate it if you don't refer to me as the other side.  We're both Americans.

[Willow]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.        

Isn't that a double-standard of cutting him slack because of his party association?  

"I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything"  He has already done a number of things, at least according to the media: remember the campaign promises of sweeping away the old rancid Washington establishment and influence peddlers?  Instead, he's hiring them himself.  Remember the campaign complaints of some of Obama's policies, including a full-scale reversal of ACA?  Instead, he's backed away from those claims and now is only looking to overhaul ACA while keeping some of the systems in place.  

And how is a democratic capitalist government supposed to "punish" companies that use preexisting rules to outsource, and still remain democratic and free enterprise?

So he's done an volte-face on a number of basic tenets in his campaign...and he isn't being called to task.  "Let's give him a chance!" "He'll probably be great, just wait and see!"  

And if he were ANYONE else, especially not conservative, would everyone be as patient?

Ask yourself that question honestly.  He still has a long way to go, but things are certainly being knotted-up early.

I'm not certain of what your definition for a double standard is.  I don't recall myself being critical of Barrack Obama's selections as a president-elect.  I didn't vote for him and I don't approve of many of his actions but I think I did wait for his actions.

As for the rest of the tripe you've stated I don't understand why it is an issue to you.  You didn't vote for him.  You didn't approve of whatever campaign statements he made.  How is a perceived reversal of those something that upsets you?

Let me assure you that Donald Trump is not a conservative.  What is most important is that he's not Hillary Clinton.

Perhaps before getting all concerned about why those who voted for him are not upset about your understanding of his post election statements versus his his pre-election statements you should dig a little deeper into why those voters voted for him.  Some of his stands were important to me.  Certainly not all of them were.  I suspect that's true of a lot of the voting populace.  I'll be most interested in what happens when the first Supreme Court justice is nominated.

I also voted for a Republican congress.  Donald Trump will not be able to achieve some of the intents that were important to me without the support of a willing Congress.

Incidentally, my comment to which you replied was directed, by name, to baldo.  I was encouraged at one point to see his most American response after the election.  Yours has not particularly impressed me at any time.   

[The emperor has no clothes]

... my opinion of how the other side looks at it. I understand full well most here don't care what I think. I'm ok with that. ... then by all means show me where I'm wrong.

There are two statements there and a request that are mutually exclusive.

Perhaps one of the ways we could work toward the healing of America is to stop referring to each other as "the other side".  We're all Americans.  We're voters who voted one way or the other.  I don't have everything in common with everyone who voted for the candidate I voted for neither do you.  My opinion is that when you try to put everyone in the same boat and explain "how the other side looks at it" you have shown yourself to be repeatedly incorrect.  Some do.  Some don't.  

I have some interest in your opinion.  It will likely not have a direct impact on mine.  I haven't had a rat's ass in so long that I don't know what I would give it for.  

I'll make you an offer.  I won't refer to you as the other side even if you can't possibly understand the Marine mind.  I would appreciate it if you don't refer to me as the other side.  We're both Americans.

You are right.   I will refrain from using that term in the future. Trying to generalize is probably not a good argument. I spent 6 months in a way too close environment with marines. I believe I have a pretty good understanding of them. I've even had fun with some of them.   But I will grant you, my psyche is not like most Marines. In all honesty in regards to Mattis, after spending a little time reading about him and listening to people who served with him. I think he is Trump's best pick yet. My initial reaction to seeing Serk's post of his quote about" killing people was fun "was a kind of shocking. But I think he later said it was a poor choice of words, and I have no reason not to go with that. I've got to say, this is going to be quite a ride. The last big pick is Sec. of State. Personally I hope he goes with Corker. Lastly, we are not just both Americans I would include proud in the statement.

[Fathertime]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.      

Isn't that a double-standard of cutting him slack because of his party association?  

"I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything"  He has already done a number of things, at least according to the media: remember the campaign promises of sweeping away the old rancid Washington establishment and influence peddlers?  Instead, he's hiring them himself.  Remember the campaign complaints of some of Obama's policies, including a full-scale reversal of ACA?  Instead, he's backed away from those claims and now is only looking to overhaul ACA while keeping some of the systems in place.  

And how is a democratic capitalist government supposed to "punish" companies that use preexisting rules to outsource, and still remain democratic and free enterprise?

So he's done an volte-face on a number of basic tenets in his campaign...and he isn't being called to task.  "Let's give him a chance!" "He'll probably be great, just wait and see!"  

And if he were ANYONE else, especially not conservative, would everyone be as patient?

Ask yourself that question honestly.  He still has a long way to go, but things are certainly being knotted-up early.

A lot of people were conned this past November.

And I am very sure that is a fact in YOUR mind. There might be many that disagree! Far as I am concerned, in my opinion we have been conned for the last 8 years!

Good Ole politicians being not good at their word.  Sell snake oil during the campaign and refuse refunds come January.

[therapist]

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”


― Mark Twain

[Valkorado]

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”


― Mark Twain

For sure.

[f6gal]

And how is a democratic capitalist government supposed to "punish" companies that use preexisting rules to outsource, and still remain democratic and free enterprise?

The U.S. Tax code and federal regulations have long been used to manipulate the private sector.  I wound guess that either or both of those established avenues would be exploited to achieve his goals.  Our government is a far cry from a purely "democratic capitalist government."

[mojo]

I rode my Valkyrie today 

Riding my Harley tomorrow...

How about that Secretary of Defense selection? Belated USMC birthday present 

BTW, rat's a$$ taste good with John Wayne bars and spiced beef sea rations 

Ain't that right Jarhead

[Trynt]

[/quote]



 What is most important is that he's not Hillary Clinton.


[/quote]

+1

[Willow]

...
How about that Secretary of Defense selection? Belated USMC birthday present 

BTW, rat's a$$ taste good with John Wayne bars and spiced beef sea rations 

Ain't that right Jarhead

 

[ridingron]

   Actually the statement should have read most of us "couldn't" care less 

I've never understood why people say it the other way.    

Sometimes I could care less. Just not worth the effort. Other times, I couldn't care less. No matter how hard I try.

[Alberta Patriot]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.      

Why bother responding to a perpetual troll's nonsense....?

[baldo]

.......you've got to take them at their word. "Most of us could care less" None of the nominees that make us step back and go "whoa" bother them at all.............

You, Bob, and ALL the talking heads on all those "news" shows have been dead wrong about EVERYTHING regarding Trump for about a year and a half now.  Why should we give a rat's a$$ what takes you aback regarding anything Trump says or does?  All of a sudden you're gonna be right?  

Time will tell, my friend. Time will tell.

[baldo]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.        

Willow, where have I said anything negative about trump? i told you I was giving him a chance, and I am. Am I not 'allowed' to have an opinion on the people he wants to have as his closest advisers? Especially the crew that he's selected so far. He couldn't have picked a worse bunch if he tried.

I've had dozens of opportunities to comment on Trump, but haven't. It's not easy, let me tell ya.

[baldo]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.      

Why bother responding to a perpetual troll's nonsense....?

Don't you have a moose to violate?

[Robert]

How quickly we forget

http://townhall.com/columnists/luritadoan/2011/04/18/obamas_tax_hypocrisy
First some numbers. Some 41 different Senior Obama Administration Officials have been identified as tax cheats, owing over $840 million in back taxes. Many of Obama’s key officials that are responsible for the economy and have been given wide powers in tax policy are themselves, tax cheats and tax avoiders. The most notable of these is Timmy Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury and nominal head of the IRS, who utilized the “INTUIT TurboTax-is-not intuitive-I didn’t-realize-I was-supposed-to-pay-taxes” defense. Once exposed, Obama dismissed Geithner’s tax cheating, and had no problem with him heading the Treasury/IRS. In fact, Mr. Obama continued to stock his Administration with tax cheats and tax avoiders, seeing no contradiction in a advocating policies that call for ever greater taxes on other Americans, while so many of his own cabinet and key economic advisors have failed to pay.Indeed, recent reports estimate the full amount of taxes owed by all members of the Obama Administration is over $3 billion.

Geithner's Tax Troubles Are Serious
http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/13/treasury-geithner-obama-biz-beltway-cx_bw_0113geithner2.html

In 2001, Geithner left the Treasury to join the Council on Foreign Relations as a Senior Fellow in the International Economics department. At the New York Fed, Geithner helped manage crises involving Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, and the American International Group, and as Treasury Secretary oversaw allocation of $350 billion of funds under the Troubled Asset Relief Program
Geithner, Paulson, and Bernanke later argued that Lehman's financial situation was too dire for the government to have legally rescued it. A team from Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse had estimated prior to Lehman's bankruptcy filing that Lehman's liabilities exceeded its assets by tens of billions of dollars.

Lets not also forget 2 of Obamas most important people in his life David Axelrod and George Soros or the many Czars that Obama surrounded himself with, who were not only the most in history but also the most extreme and contrary to the established ways of the US.

Obama Surrounds Himself with the Most Extreme Appointees in American History
http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/obama-surrounds-himself-with-the-most-extreme-appointees-in-american-history/

When Trump started his picks he was critizied for picking all the swamp that he had drained. But it was his defense that made a good point that is all there is in Washington.

I will wait and see how he manages these people, this is his forte. A good mgr can make or break a business and can set policy and goals that are consistent with the policies of whatever they run. Even though the people may have flaws, you lead from the top.

[The emperor has no clothes]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.      

Why bother responding to a perpetual troll's nonsense....?

Don't you have a moose to violate?

They are out of the rut by now. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

It's an interesting approach, baldo.  I clearly remember your saying you were going to give him a chance and yet you continue to regularly post negatively about his selections, his choices.  He's not even inaugurated yet! I guess he's already used up his chance before he's had opportunity to actually do anything?  Oh, wait, before he's actually taken the office he's already been active in keeping some U.S. jobs in this country.

We get it.  You didn't vote for him. We'd be surprised if he made selections that please you.  Maybe we're just envious because we haven't had the chance to express our displeasure at president-elect Clinton's selections.        

Willow, where have I said anything negative about trump? i told you I was giving him a chance, and I am. Am I not 'allowed' to have an opinion on the people he wants to have as his closest advisers? Especially the crew that he's selected so far. He couldn't have picked a worse bunch if he tried.

I've had dozens of opportunities to comment on Trump, but haven't. It's not easy, let me tell ya.

Bob, don't go tempting fate now. He hasn't nominated Bolton or Wolfowitz. At least not yet. 

[3fan4life]

As positive as Trump's nominee for Sec of Defense is, on the surface, his picks for Treasury and Commerce should make everyone stand up and take notice. Before everyone gets all up-tight, read up on the history of Mnuchin, his pick for Treasury. His actions after the crash are the type that make 99% of the people in this country want to stock up on pitchforks.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-treasury-foreclosed-homes-mnuchin-232038

http://www.wsj.com/articles/steven-mnuchins-defining-moment-seizing-opportunity-from-the-financial-crisis-1480547063

"Mr. Mnuchin assembled an all-star cast drawn from his years on Wall Street, including Mr. Soros, hedge-fund manager John Paulson, billionaire Michael Dell’s investment firm and several former Goldman executives, including J. Christopher Flowers. They signed up on the basis that Mr. Mnuchin would personally run the bank, according to people familiar with the matter."

       It's on Trump. He has to make everything work. It's his team. We're working outside the box.  I know you're looking for cracks and will continue chipping away at everything that looks questionable to you. Most of us could care less. You will have plenty of time for told you so's
once he takes the oath of office.

John, you're right, not a Trump fan. But like I said, I'm willing to give him a chance. I'm cautiously optimistic with this Carrier deal, but the devil's in the details. He's a wild card, and maybe that's what we all need right now.

I posted this because this nominee is someone we ALL need to be aware of. He was the worst of the worst during the housing crisis. How many members here know someone that either lost or came close to losing their home?

He's really bad news to be the man placed at the head of our Treasury Dept.

For most if not all of his nominees so far, I don't see much drainage. This should be a concern for everyone.

Bob, you've got to take them at their word. "Most of us could care less" None of the nominees that make us step back and go "whoa" bother them at all. Right now they are happy he won and are perfectly fine with any of his picks. That may change down the road, but for now they just don't care.

[cookiedough]

maybe all those very rich appointments will take their NEW jobs for 1 buck like Trump did?

I wonder though if he will have to pay taxes on that dollar bill?   

Face it, NONE of them need the dough, so why not man up and do the jobs for basically nothing?

That would shut up the naysayers then.... 

[Skinhead]

I spent 6 months in a way too close environment with marines. I believe I have a pretty good understanding of them. I've even had fun with some of them. 

Please spare us the sailor and Marine stories that resulted from that fun.   

[Serk]

I spent 6 months in a way too close environment with marines. I believe I have a pretty good understanding of them.

“There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.”
― Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army

[Moonshot_1]

maybe all those very rich appointments will take their NEW jobs for 1 buck like Trump did?

I wonder though if he will have to pay taxes on that dollar bill?   

Face it, NONE of them need the dough, so why not man up and do the jobs for basically nothing?

That would shut up the naysayers then.... 

That will be the next thing. Trump ran for President so he could only take a dollar in compensation for the sole purpose of AVOIDING TAXES! Congressional hearings will be demanded. He'll give the dollar back and they will scream HE ISN'T PAYING TAXES AT ALL!