President Trump

[xer0s]

lol, it's getting nuts...

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

i went through this with rob ford as mayor. it really sucks. the bigots will be so empowered. the only good thing is he's likely to mitigate the damage he'd do by being largely incompetent

[dubz]

clinton camp already crying on camera with lots of states still to go

[youtube]bSS0tsCTCJg[/youtube]

[youtube]r1_p6A56ZVI[/youtube]

[seremtan]

i went through this with rob ford as mayor. it really sucks.

that's nothing. try Brexit

[AndyW]

THE GREATEST PRESIDENT THAT GOD EVER CREATED !!!

[lvlshot]http://i.imgur.com/GiMeYFO.jpg[/lvlshot]

[PhoeniX]

lol.. What have you done America?

[Κracus]

Any bets on how long he stays before impeachment?

[Κracus]

I'm guessing 2.

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

prescient thread is prescient

[plained]

his speech is very nice,

his grandson there is so tired ey that is how my son gets!

[youtube]NGBcttFu5MQ[/youtube]

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

As Donald Trump finishes his campaign with a promise to break the control of Washington by political insiders, his transition team is preparing to hand his administration over to a cozy clique of corporate lobbyists and Republican power brokers.

“Our movement is about replacing a failed and corrupt political establishment with a new government controlled by you the American people,” Trump says in his closing campaign advertisement, followed by flashing images of K Street, Wall Street, and Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein.

But the Trump transition team is a who’s who of influence peddlers, including: energy adviser Michael Catanzaro, a lobbyist for Koch Industries and the Walt Disney Company; adviser Eric Ueland, a Senate Republican staffer who previously lobbied for Goldman Sachs; and Transition General Counsel William Palatucci, an attorney in New Jersey whose lobbying firm represents Aetna and Verizon. Rick Holt, Christine Ciccone, Rich Bagger, and Mike Ferguson are among the other corporate lobbyists helping to manage the transition effort.

Presidential transition teams develop policy plans and come up with a list of more than 4,000 people an incoming president appoints, including White House jobs, cabinet secretaries, and lower level positions that oversee the military, agriculture, trade, and beyond.

Trump for America Inc., a nonprofit group chaired by Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., to oversee the Trump transition, has quietly moved ahead, meeting with interest groups and reaching out to lobbyists to plan a future Trump administration.

The group has held regular meetings at the Washington, D.C., offices of Baker Hostetler, a law and lobbying firm.

On Thursday, the group hosted a breakfast at Baker Hostetler attended by Microsoft’s Ed Ingle and Steve Hart, two lobbyists who, according to filings, have worked to promote the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Other transition meetings have included briefings with the Financial Services Roundtable and the Investment Company Institute, two lobby groups that represent Wall Street interests, as well as with the BGR Group, a lobby firm that represents Saudi Arabia and the South Korean government.

Trump, of course, isn’t alone is relying on entrenched political insiders to shape his future administration. The Hillary Clinton transition team is led by Ken Salazar and Tom Donilon, two former Obama administration officials who now serve on the lobbying teams of major law firms. Though the Clinton campaign gained headlines for banning registered lobbyists from managing her transition, the distinction between registered and unregistered lobbying is largely a question of semantics.

Trump’s decision to embrace lobbyists while denouncing them on the campaign trail should come as no surprise to any seasoned observer.

The reality television mogul seized on distaste for big money politics as a potent campaign issue, denouncing the role of Super PACs during the Republican primaries. “I have disavowed all Super PACs,” Trump said, adding that he would oppose any support from lobbyists and other special interest groups. After shoring up the nomination, the candidate quickly reversed himself, not only raising cash from lobbyists but switching gears to aggressively embrace the the same Super PAC strategies used by more traditional candidates. Several Trump staffers moved from his campaign to Super PACs supporting the Trump-Pence ticket.

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/08/tru ... lobbyists/

[dubz]

we esteblishment now

[seremtan]

We'll hopefully still have Wikileaks to keep track of shit and call it out.

i though that was your job now

[plained]

" In the end I believe my generation will surprise everyone. We already know that both political parties are playing both sides from the middle and we'll elect a true outsider when we fully mature.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's not a business tycoon who can't be bought and who does what's right for the people. Someone like Donald Trump as crazy as that sounds. "

[dubz]

We'll hopefully still have Wikileaks to keep track of shit and call it out.

i though that was your job now

"As Julian Assange announced at our ten year anniversary on the 4th of October we are currently building ways for our community to support us. The first part has already been launched: you can join the WikiLeaks Task Force @wltaskforce on twitter to help fight disinformation about WikiLeaks on social media. You can call out people who post wrong information about our organization on Facebook. And for more information on how to support WikiLeaks in the future please follow WikiLeaks Community @communitywl on twitter."

everybody join the task force

[seremtan]

WikiLeaks Heroes!

[losCHUNK]

We'll sure find out if he can be bought outright. Lobbyists will be crawling over whoever sits in the chair. It's the deals made that'll matter.
I doubt thus far he owes any huge favours for a piddling three grand. Probably just agreed not to shit-post at any dopey princes, getting them lashed.

We'll hopefully still have Wikileaks to keep track of shit and call it out.
If he goes after Assange or Wikileaks after all the help with getting him in though, everyone'll know instantly he's a complete dud. Shit will hit the goddam fan too.

>NSA is bad for hacking / spying on people
>hopes Wikileaks keeps using hacked data / spying on people

[seremtan]

We'll sure find out if he can be bought outright. Lobbyists will be crawling over whoever sits in the chair. It's the deals made that'll matter.
I doubt thus far he owes any huge favours for a piddling three grand. Probably just agreed not to shit-post at any dopey princes, getting them lashed.

We'll hopefully still have Wikileaks to keep track of shit and call it out.
If he goes after Assange or Wikileaks after all the help with getting him in though, everyone'll know instantly he's a complete dud. Shit will hit the goddam fan too.

>NSA is bad for hacking / spying on people
>hopes Wikileaks keeps using hacked data / spying on people

>Wikileaks
>spying on people

[losCHUNK]

Oh come on, theyre using data obtained from hacking whereas the NSA use data obtained from...

Where do we draw the line ?, is it cos the information on wikileaks is freely available ?, or because one is state sponsored ?, what about a right to privacy ?. I mean spying by definition is the observation of someones private life, what do you think happened to Hillary during this election ?.

I'm not particulary arsed either way, I just think it's a relevant point.

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

There's a huge difference imo. Governments and those who wish to represent the people should be transparent.

[losCHUNK]

So transparency is the issue ?, that's fair enough but we all know that investigative processes sometimes require a level of privacy. Wikileaks for example by releasing information about secret agents and stuff has put lives at risk.

I don't agree with the NSA btw and find some of Wikileaks work good so I make no bones about this making me a bit hypocritical. It's pretty much how far is too far for investigative journalism.

None of us liked it when someone went off to Goofs wife about his comments on here like, cos that was an invasion of his privacy, yet it could also be considered as nothing more than providing transparency to his wife...

[YourGrandpa]

There's a huge difference imo. Governments and those who wish to represent the people should be transparent.

^exactly... If I elected you, you should represent our core interests. If I'm paying you I should know what you're doing.

[losCHUNK]

But you're electing and paying them ?, why can't they serve your interest privately ?. If they released information that the US knew where Osama was would that be ok ?, despite giving him a head start ?

This is also without considering you can;t validate the source of the information or its credibility, which is one of the cornerstones of investigative journalism. Which brings me to the point, how far is too far cos imo wikileaks has crossed the line plenty of times, just like the government and press.

[seremtan]

yeah, in the week that von Clownstick was elected president, let's go after Wikileaks

SO FUCKING APROPOS M8

[losCHUNK]

I've attacked wikileaks before, on this board.

But seeing as you mentioned Trumpy and wikileaks, if wikileaks were considered a news agency you'd say they'd have an obvious agenda or bias seeing as they were giving Hillary shit for doing stuff that Trump did yet gave him a free ride ?. It's not like they present the information and let you come to your own conclusions either, not without Assange turning up with his little footnote anyway.