It works if enough people are cynical enough & blame their government enough for all manner of ills. “Well, they all lie.” The attitude of low expectations. It’s the same as not giving a sh—. Reminds me of the famous statement by a bank robber:” I rob banks because that’s where the money is.” This leveling out of corruption & truth telling means government is meaningless, truth carries no weight, robbing the treasury (taxpayers) because that’s where the money is is fine because I tell you that’s what I’m doing. Tell me again about the transparency of Trump University & the so-called foundation. And the tax records that are never revealed - very out in the open.
A country that was once a strong democracy can’t fall into the abyss of corruption & dictatorship without the willing cooperation of enough of its citizens. Enough Americans hate their government so much hat its ok to see it destroyed because, hey, it’s ou on the open!
Trump found his way to the ultimate grift by finding the right marks (see above) & the key to his ultimate subsidy. When you don’t expect much, you usually don’t get much - and, thanks to those marks, we got worse than not much. And millions of them think it will never hurt them (newsflash: he hurts ALL of us) but will hurt “those people.” And even if they are directly hurt - well, a small price to pay ‘transparency’ & showing those libs & the world how tough we are.
What this lack of embarrassment also allows is to openly promote white supremacy that for the past 50 years has become socially acceptable. Having lived in the South in 1970's, the thing that pissed off the bigots the most was you couldn't say the "n" word in public anymore.
Re: 19th century fictional detective literary references!
Surely the hard-working staff recalls that the purloined letter setup gets a callback when Irene Adler hides a photograph sought by Sherlock Holmes.
Totally concur on Trump's corruption. Hard to believe that the Biden Crime Family would have gotten a pass on influence peddling if Hunter had just auctioned off paintings in the Oval Office while Joe signed autographs, but apparently they lacked vision.
I agree with you, of course. But I also agree with Politico that the transparency and press availability deserve to be praised, and when politicians we prefer don’t make themselves open and available, they can reasonably be criticized for it. The lack of transparency doesn’t make good behavior bad, any more than the transparency makes bad behavior good. But transparency at least makes it possible for objective observers to judge the politician. Self-interested observers will reach their preordained conclusion regardless of the transparency or press availability.
trump’s “media availability” isn’t transparency. Objective observers are no more clear about anything when all he does is lie, avoid answering questions, and attack members of the press. Being a transparent liar is not worthy of praise.
That’s fair enough about the word “transparency” being the wrong word. I continue to believe that media availability ought to be praised. If you don’t agree because of the various bad actions that can accompany it, it’s okay with me. In a landscape where the politicians we prefer do not always practice media availability, I think it ought to be praised when it does happen, the goal being to incentivize it for the “good” politicians. But you need not agree. I realize that many would not agree.
I’m with you in theory, in the same way the “answer to free speech is more free speech.” It only exists in a vacuum. And I agree that “transparency” is simply the wrong word for trump.
My main problem with this kind of thinking is that it correctly criticizes the right while incorrectly letting the left off the hook. Whether my method works better is debatable; I don’t claim that it does.
But I tend to find that beveling an evaluation so that even grudging and highly qualified praise isn’t possible for one side is often accompanied by its sibling, the conviction that even mild criticism is unacceptable for the side we perceive as morally correct. You may not be one of the people who think that way, and if you are not, that is to your credit. I find that sort of thinking dangerous, and I believe it contributes to a vicious cycle that ends up strengthening the hand of bad actors like Trump. But I also know that many consider my perspective simply wrong.
It is always open season on democrats. The trump administration is immune to criticism because it has no shame.
My comment had no mention of partisanship, only of brazen liars. Just because the vast preponderance of lairs happen to be in the trump administration doesn’t make criticism of their lying partisan. So I find your comment to be bothsiderism.
I appreciate the civil discussion. Have a great rest of your day.
The emoluments law needs to be greatly expanded and improved for the digital age. The founders sure did not have crypto! And the laws regarding campaign finance also need major overhaul. Musk bought the election and what did it get him??
In reference to Dan's piece and the previous comment, there exists a voluminous body or legally-binding laws, rules, regulations, even softer norms covering criminal and civil corruption, which are being ignored, mocked or otherwise not complied with or prosecuted. Is there an entire population of accessories out there and a corresponding share of guilt or shame?
There must be some limit to any arguments about presidential immunity...are they elected to exercise their unlimited greed or for the best interests of the public?
At some point, the public at large will realize what Trump is getting away with, but I suspect it will be years from now and well past the time for any accountability.
It works if enough people are cynical enough & blame their government enough for all manner of ills. “Well, they all lie.” The attitude of low expectations. It’s the same as not giving a sh—. Reminds me of the famous statement by a bank robber:” I rob banks because that’s where the money is.” This leveling out of corruption & truth telling means government is meaningless, truth carries no weight, robbing the treasury (taxpayers) because that’s where the money is is fine because I tell you that’s what I’m doing. Tell me again about the transparency of Trump University & the so-called foundation. And the tax records that are never revealed - very out in the open.
A country that was once a strong democracy can’t fall into the abyss of corruption & dictatorship without the willing cooperation of enough of its citizens. Enough Americans hate their government so much hat its ok to see it destroyed because, hey, it’s ou on the open!
Trump found his way to the ultimate grift by finding the right marks (see above) & the key to his ultimate subsidy. When you don’t expect much, you usually don’t get much - and, thanks to those marks, we got worse than not much. And millions of them think it will never hurt them (newsflash: he hurts ALL of us) but will hurt “those people.” And even if they are directly hurt - well, a small price to pay ‘transparency’ & showing those libs & the world how tough we are.
What this lack of embarrassment also allows is to openly promote white supremacy that for the past 50 years has become socially acceptable. Having lived in the South in 1970's, the thing that pissed off the bigots the most was you couldn't say the "n" word in public anymore.
Re: 19th century fictional detective literary references!
Surely the hard-working staff recalls that the purloined letter setup gets a callback when Irene Adler hides a photograph sought by Sherlock Holmes.
Totally concur on Trump's corruption. Hard to believe that the Biden Crime Family would have gotten a pass on influence peddling if Hunter had just auctioned off paintings in the Oval Office while Joe signed autographs, but apparently they lacked vision.
I agree with you, of course. But I also agree with Politico that the transparency and press availability deserve to be praised, and when politicians we prefer don’t make themselves open and available, they can reasonably be criticized for it. The lack of transparency doesn’t make good behavior bad, any more than the transparency makes bad behavior good. But transparency at least makes it possible for objective observers to judge the politician. Self-interested observers will reach their preordained conclusion regardless of the transparency or press availability.
trump’s “media availability” isn’t transparency. Objective observers are no more clear about anything when all he does is lie, avoid answering questions, and attack members of the press. Being a transparent liar is not worthy of praise.
That’s fair enough about the word “transparency” being the wrong word. I continue to believe that media availability ought to be praised. If you don’t agree because of the various bad actions that can accompany it, it’s okay with me. In a landscape where the politicians we prefer do not always practice media availability, I think it ought to be praised when it does happen, the goal being to incentivize it for the “good” politicians. But you need not agree. I realize that many would not agree.
I’m with you in theory, in the same way the “answer to free speech is more free speech.” It only exists in a vacuum. And I agree that “transparency” is simply the wrong word for trump.
My main problem with this kind of thinking is that it correctly criticizes the right while incorrectly letting the left off the hook. Whether my method works better is debatable; I don’t claim that it does.
But I tend to find that beveling an evaluation so that even grudging and highly qualified praise isn’t possible for one side is often accompanied by its sibling, the conviction that even mild criticism is unacceptable for the side we perceive as morally correct. You may not be one of the people who think that way, and if you are not, that is to your credit. I find that sort of thinking dangerous, and I believe it contributes to a vicious cycle that ends up strengthening the hand of bad actors like Trump. But I also know that many consider my perspective simply wrong.
It is always open season on democrats. The trump administration is immune to criticism because it has no shame.
My comment had no mention of partisanship, only of brazen liars. Just because the vast preponderance of lairs happen to be in the trump administration doesn’t make criticism of their lying partisan. So I find your comment to be bothsiderism.
I appreciate the civil discussion. Have a great rest of your day.
The emoluments law needs to be greatly expanded and improved for the digital age. The founders sure did not have crypto! And the laws regarding campaign finance also need major overhaul. Musk bought the election and what did it get him??
"hey at least he talks to the media more" hmm, I don't know if this means as much to some people as others.
In reference to Dan's piece and the previous comment, there exists a voluminous body or legally-binding laws, rules, regulations, even softer norms covering criminal and civil corruption, which are being ignored, mocked or otherwise not complied with or prosecuted. Is there an entire population of accessories out there and a corresponding share of guilt or shame?
There must be some limit to any arguments about presidential immunity...are they elected to exercise their unlimited greed or for the best interests of the public?
At some point, the public at large will realize what Trump is getting away with, but I suspect it will be years from now and well past the time for any accountability.
Just so I'm clear on this, you're saying a public auction for presidential pardons is not corrupt?
You’re conflating bribery with legislative deal making (you vote for my bill, and I’ll vote for your bill). The latter is perfectly legal.