The swamp

[Phil1111 910]

DJL

***The Hill: Omarosa secretly recorded Trump: report
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/400965-report-former-white-house-staffer-secretly-recorded-trump

"I felt a great disturbance in the Swamp..."

Anyone here have an issue with the trend of people secretly recording interactions with the President of the United States. Fair use in an open forum is one thing but recording devices behind closed doors is entirely different.

I've stated before that people record conversations when they don't trust the other party to the conversation.

So trust vs a expectation of privacy. Neither Omarosa, nor trump have good reputations in this area.

Without dis railing your train of thought. But in the line of discussion of swamp. I was thinking that there is but one single person in the entirety of the trump administration. That has not sullied his footwear by the stink of the trump swamp.

General Mattis.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

DJL

***The Hill: Omarosa secretly recorded Trump: report
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/400965-report-former-white-house-staffer-secretly-recorded-trump

"I felt a great disturbance in the Swamp..."

Anyone here have an issue with the trend of people secretly recording interactions with the President of the United States. Fair use in an open forum is one thing but recording devices behind closed doors is entirely different.

Nope. Not in the least.

Trump is a lying con man. He says something, denies he said it, accuses the people who repeat what he really said of lying, all that.

Gaslighting and then some. The Trumpettes fall for it, but not a whole lot of other people.

The President used to have a team of stenographers to document everything that was said. Both for accuracy and for posterity. Trump (somehow not surprisingly) didn't know they existed, and largely refused to use their services. So they quit.

Now, the serial liar has no documentation of what he said, so he can tell his supporters he really didn't say that. It's textbook demagougery.

Also stupid as hell. Someone else can say "Trump said..." and there's no proof one way or the other.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[jakee 1,254]

DJL

Anyone here have an issue with the trend of people secretly recording interactions with the President of the United States. Fair use in an open forum is one thing but recording devices behind closed doors is entirely different.

Well, we've all seen how well it worked for the Russians, now everyone wants a piece of the action

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Phil1111 910]

jakee

***Anyone here have an issue with the trend of people secretly recording interactions with the President of the United States. Fair use in an open forum is one thing but recording devices behind closed doors is entirely different.

Well, we've all seen how well it worked for the Russians, now everyone wants a piece of the action

You don't think that trump and Omarosa... in the oval office... on the ...Resolute desk....NOOOOO!

[DJL 232]

wolfriverjoe

******The Hill: Omarosa secretly recorded Trump: report
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/400965-report-former-white-house-staffer-secretly-recorded-trump

"I felt a great disturbance in the Swamp..."

Anyone here have an issue with the trend of people secretly recording interactions with the President of the United States. Fair use in an open forum is one thing but recording devices behind closed doors is entirely different.

Nope. Not in the least.

Trump is a lying con man. He says something, denies he said it, accuses the people who repeat what he really said of lying, all that.

Gaslighting and then some. The Trumpettes fall for it, but not a whole lot of other people.

The President used to have a team of stenographers to document everything that was said. Both for accuracy and for posterity. Trump (somehow not surprisingly) didn't know they existed, and largely refused to use their services. So they quit.

Now, the serial liar has no documentation of what he said, so he can tell his supporters he really didn't say that. It's textbook demagougery.

Also stupid as hell. Someone else can say "Trump said..." and there's no proof one way or the other.

I get the need for a stenographer and I don't think Trump would be talking about national security issues around Amarosa but this is a real security issue and it doesn't matter who the President is or whether he's an ass.

Now...if that President is secretly trying to do something illegal that's a different issue, it becomes a whistleblower situation.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[ryoder 1,381]

DJL

I get the need for a stenographer and I don't think Trump would be talking about national security issues around Amarosa but this is a real security issue and it doesn't matter who the President is or whether he's an ass.

Now...if that President is secretly trying to do something illegal that's a different issue, it becomes a whistleblower situation.

You are kidding, right?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-turns-mar-a-lago-club-terrace-into-open-air-situation-room/2017/02/13/c5525096-f20d-11e6-a9b0-ecee7ce475fc_story.html

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[kallend 1,623]

Unfortunately there is so much lying, deception and dishonesty on a daily basis from this administration that many are becoming numb to it. And, of course, there are the "base" folks like Marc who revel in it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DJL 232]

ryoder

***

I get the need for a stenographer and I don't think Trump would be talking about national security issues around Amarosa but this is a real security issue and it doesn't matter who the President is or whether he's an ass.

Now...if that President is secretly trying to do something illegal that's a different issue, it becomes a whistleblower situation.

You are kidding, right?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-turns-mar-a-lago-club-terrace-into-open-air-situation-room/2017/02/13/c5525096-f20d-11e6-a9b0-ecee7ce475fc_story.html

You're right, I was off in la-la land for a minute giving him the benefit of the doubt that a President has enough common sense.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

DJL

I get the need for a stenographer and I don't think Trump would be talking about national security issues around Amarosa but this is a real security issue and it doesn't matter who the President is or whether he's an ass.

Now...if that President is secretly trying to do something illegal that's a different issue, it becomes a whistleblower situation.

Well, if the person recording the conversation has proper clearances, then they know how to handle recordings of conversations that include classified stuff.

If they don't have the clearances, then Trump shouldn't be talking about that sort of stuff. I know that, as Pres & CinC he can decide unilaterally what can and cannot be discussed. In that case, the person doing the recording should be very careful.
They would be in illegal possession of classified material.

They might get "locked up."

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[billvon 2,396]

Figured this is a good place to put some notes about the Omarosa scandal, kicked off by two of the leaders of the swamp.

So quick history:

In her early career, Omrasoa worked for Vice President Al Gore. She was "was the worst hire we ever made" according to the office manager. She then worked for the Commerce Department as an admin person for a short time. Her manager said she was "unqualified and disruptive . . .I had her removed."

She then went into show business.

Omarosa is featured on Trump's reality TV show, twice. He comes to like her.

He starts to campaign for president. He pledges that he will hire the best people: "I’m going to surround myself only with the best and most serious people. We want top-of-the-line professionals.” She is hired as Director of African-American Outreach.

Trump is elected. He hires Omarosa as Director of Communications. Omarosa spends her time making bombastic statements about how great Trump is, including "Every critic, every detractor, will have to bow down to President Trump."

On December 12th 2017, she is "forcibly removed from the White House grounds" and fired.

In February she gave an interview where she was very critical of Trump and said she would not vote for him again.

Fast forward 8 months. She writes a book - "unhinged" - and releases it along with several recordings made in the White House. The recordings appear to corroborate several claims in the book, including that Trump used the "N-word." In one recording, Katrina Pierson (White House spokesperson) says she doesn't believe the President's denials and wonders how she can spin it if the tape comes out: "I am trying to find out at least what context it was used in to help us maybe try to figure out a way to spin it. He said it. No, he said it. He's embarrassed."

Pierson immediately denied that that conversation ever happened. When asked by an interviewer whether she was the person on the call with Omarasa, she answered “No Ed, that did not happen. It sounds like she’s writing the script for a movie. You know, I’ve already been out there talking about this — that is absolutely not true.”

A day later she reversed herself, and now claims that she was lying on the tape - but the conversation was real. "In her secret tape recording of me, it was one of many times that I would placate Omarosa to move the discussion along because I was weary of her obsession over this alleged tape."

Even funnier, she later released a statement claiming "No one ever denied we had multiple conversations re: the Apprentice tape."

Meanwhile, Trump has attacked Omarosa viciously, calling her a "dog" a "crazed, crying lowlife" "Wacky and Deranged" "Zero credibility."

Ironically, he followed up these insults by claiming he would NEVER use the N-word. "I don’t have that word in my vocabulary, and never have."

Meanwhile, Sanders is hedging her bets. When asked whether or not the president actually said it, she replied "I can't guarantee anything." Smart lady.

This is, of course, a meaningless scandal, one Trump created singlehandedly. He could end this today by ignoring it. But we all know that won't happen - and so it will continue with him calling her ever more vile names while maintaining he would never call her that vile name. I suspect he will also continue complaining about how the fake news is reporting on this, while he continues to tweet over the "official communications channel" of the White House.

[ryoder 1,381]

New York Fines Kushner Cos. $210,000 for False Documents

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-27/urgent-kushner-cos-fined-210k-by-new-york-for-false-documents

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[headoverheels 291]

ryoder

New York Fines Kushner Cos. $210,000 for False Documents

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-27/urgent-kushner-cos-fined-210k-by-new-york-for-false-documents

That fine is a pittance, and just a cost of doing business. Still a lot more profit had, by filing those false statements.

[billvon 2,396]

Trump worked hard to make sure the FBI building will be built across the street from his hotel. Then he instructed the people at the meetings not to tell anyone what he said.

The DC swamp at its finest.

==========================
Inspector general report: Trump involved in FBI headquarters decision

Aug 28 2018
CBS News

President Donald Trump was directly involved in meetings where officials decided to move forward with a controversial plan to build a new FBI headquarters in the nation's capital, according to a government report issued Monday. The report from the General Services Administration inspector general cites two White House meetings in January and June of this year in which Trump participated.

In the first of those meetings, participants agreed to move forward on a proposal to demolish the existing J. Edgar Hoover building in downtown Washington and build a new headquarters in the same spot.

. . .

While there is widespread agreement that the Hoover Building — a crumbling, sprawling piece of Brutalist architecture— does not meet the FBI's needs, the plan to keep the FBI in Washington scraps a long held plan to move the FBI to the Maryland or Virginia suburbs.

Rep. Gerry Connolly, a northern Virginia Democrat who supports moving the FBI to the suburbs, called for additional congressional hearings to uncover the extent of Trump's involvement. He said the project is rife with conflicts of interest for Trump, whose Trump International Hotel is essentially across the street from the FBI headquarters.. . .

The extent of Trump's involvement in the decision is unclear. The report indicates that while GSA employees confirmed the White House meetings with Trump, they received instructions not to divulge any statements Trump made at those meetings.. . .

The IG report also concludes that officials are greatly underestimating the cost of keeping the headquarters in Washington. In particular, the report concludes that GSA is not taking into account the money that could be realized by selling the land under the Hoover building to private developers.

The GSA issued a statement in response to the IG report saying its estimates "are accurate, transparent, and more representative of the full costs of the project than the analysis put forth in the IG review."

There is also some question about whether GSA Administrator Emily Murphy was forthcoming about Trump's role when she testified about the relocation decision to Congress.
===============

[ryoder 1,381]

Don McGahn is departing the swamp:
https://www.apnews.com/941ad6ac387047f096fcefb11b68526a/Trump:-White-House-counsel-Don-McGahn-to-depart-in-the-fall

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[dorkitup 1]

Um, not sure I get your point with this one. Please explain.

The FBI building is currently "across the street" from the Trump hotel and has been there for quite a while (since the 1970s when the hotel was a post office). Personally, I don't have a problem with its location and prefer it to be in DC (i.e., close to congress and the white house). Obviously there are reported issues re: age of the building, its capabilities in the modern world, etc. that need to be dealt with, but who cares about location?

Additionally, fyi, many Federal agencies in DC have been looking at moving locations for a number of years (before Trump was even a candidate). Either to the suburbs or other buildings (not owned by the govt) and paying rent. There are, of course, a number of questions that arise when doing that, such as security, evolving capabilities, employee commute times, etc. that must be taken into account when looking for a new location. To my knowledge, a number of agencies have decided against moving from their dated building after full assessments.

Again, personally, I don't think it makes sense for the govt not to own the real estate. Yes, you can pay another building rent, but eventually, you end up paying everything you sold the old building for. Is tearing down the old building and building a whole new one the answer? Maybe, maybe not. I think it depends on costs, both current and future.

I think this might be a non-story...

[billvon 2,396]

>but who cares about location?

Every real estate investor, real estate agent, homeowner, business owner and hotel manager in the country. The mantra of every real estate investor is "location, location, location." If you own a hotel across from the FBI building you will do very, very well - people who visit the FBI (and many people do, from all over the country) tend to stay there. If it becomes a shopping center or a condo complex, fewer people will stay in your hotel.

So what to do? The ethical thing is to recuse yourself from the decision. The less ethical, but still responsible, thing to do is to participate in the meeting and make the minutes of the meeting open so that there is some oversight.

What would a member of the DC swamp do? Influence the decision to their benefit, then tell everyone not to talk about their participation in order to cover up any misuse of power.

[RonD1120 58]

dorkitup

Um, not sure I get your point with this one. Please explain.

The FBI building is currently "across the street" from the Trump hotel and has been there for quite a while (since the 1970s when the hotel was a post office). Personally, I don't have a problem with its location and prefer it to be in DC (i.e., close to congress and the white house). Obviously there are reported issues re: age of the building, its capabilities in the modern world, etc. that need to be dealt with, but who cares about location?

Additionally, fyi, many Federal agencies in DC have been looking at moving locations for a number of years (before Trump was even a candidate). Either to the suburbs or other buildings (not owned by the govt) and paying rent. There are, of course, a number of questions that arise when doing that, such as security, evolving capabilities, employee commute times, etc. that must be taken into account when looking for a new location. To my knowledge, a number of agencies have decided against moving from their dated building after full assessments.

Again, personally, I don't think it makes sense for the govt not to own the real estate. Yes, you can pay another building rent, but eventually, you end up paying everything you sold the old building for. Is tearing down the old building and building a whole new one the answer? Maybe, maybe not. I think it depends on costs, both current and future.

I think this might be a non-story...

Way too much common sense for this forum. However, I understand your thinking and I agree with your post.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[pchapman 261]

RonD1120

***Um, not sure I get your point with this one. Please explain.

The FBI building is currently "across the street" from the Trump hotel and has been there for quite a while [...]

Way too much common sense for this forum. However, I understand your thinking and I agree with your post.

The point isn't whether a government agency should or should not be more or less centrally located, or rent or own their building. That's all fine, and government policy for its facilities can be discussed elsewhere.

The point is that there's a big conflict of interest if a government employee who owns a hotel across from a major government building, is in any way involved in the process of deciding where that agency will be located in the future.

[Phil1111 910]

pchapman

...

The point is that there's a big conflict of interest if a government employee who owns a hotel across from a major government building, is in any way involved in the process of deciding where that agency will be located in the future.

trump would not be stinking his orange nose into this matter. Unless it met the narrative of personal profit and profit for trump Enterprises.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

pchapman

******Um, not sure I get your point with this one. Please explain.

The FBI building is currently "across the street" from the Trump hotel and has been there for quite a while ...

Way too much common sense for this forum. However, I understand your thinking and I agree with your post.

The point isn't whether a government agency should or should not be more or less centrally located, or rent or own their building. That's all fine, and government policy for its facilities can be discussed elsewhere.

The point is that there's a big conflict of interest if a government employee who owns a hotel across from a major government building, is in any way involved in the process of deciding where that agency will be located in the future.

#1 - There was already a plan in place to move FBI HQ out to the suburbs.
Trump wants to change that plan. As was noted, he doesn't do this sort of thing without some significant personal interest.

#2 - He wants to keep it a secret.
Why? Why keep it secret unless he has something to hide?

But of course, the Trumpettes see nothing wrong with it.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[SkyDekker 1,121]

So let me get this straight. Trump owning real estate across the building and inserting himself into the negotiations and telling people to keep his interactions on this matter secret is a non-story.

Wives of FBI or DOJ staff being democrats or working for a company that once worked for a democrat is a clear indicator of bias and conflict of interest.

[kallend 1,623]

dorkitup

Um, not sure I get your point with this one. Please explain.

Do the words "CONFLICT OF INTEREST" mean anything to you?

Anyone recall Trump telling us that he would be a big loser under his tax bill. Turns out he makes out like gangbusters.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,623]

I heard this great description of Jared Kushner:

"A man born on third base who has spent his life trying to steal second."

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[dorkitup 1]

SkyDekker

So let me get this straight. Trump owning real estate across the building and inserting himself into the negotiations and telling people to keep his interactions on this matter secret is a non-story.

Wives of FBI or DOJ staff being democrats or working for a company that once worked for a democrat is a clear indicator of bias and conflict of interest.

I don't think I said anything like that. But thanks for the jump to conclusions. Very entertaining! FBI is under DOJ, which is under the executive branch. Chief executive is the president. Anyone occupying that office is allowed (by law) to "insert" himself into these discussions. Just a fact.

On a side note, FBI is directly across the street from DOJ. To me, it makes sense to have them next to each other, operationally, seeing as how FBI needs to report to superiors at DOJ all the time. Yes, they do walk across the street for meetings (according to "some people I know").

Now is there more to the story involving shady real estate deals? I'm willing to admit, maybe. I haven't seen anything about that (yet), but sure, possible.

billvon

If it becomes a shopping center or a condo complex, fewer people will stay in your hotel.

Billvon, with all due respect, it doesn't sound like you're all that familiar with this part of DC. Whether it becomes something else or not will not have that much effect on the Trump hotel or prices there (my opinion, of course).

That's very much, almost exclusively, a tourist area and that's who is predominantly walking around that area most days and who is staying in those hotels. If someone were to build a hotel there, again, I don't think it would have much effect. All the hotel prices in the area didn't change when the Trump hotel opened. Why would they change when an additional one appeared? What makes you think Trump would want to build one there (if thats what you're insinuating)? I'm all for additional information I haven't heard yet. Please educate me.

I don't think anyone with a brain would open a condo complex, but again, I could be wrong. There are some apartments nearby that rich people can afford. But go a few blocks to the north and east and there would be way better deals, with similar access to important areas. I would think a hotel would make way more money (check out prices, seriously). I also think a shopping area might help hotel prices (although gallery place, with lots of shopping, is already just a few blocks away).

So please explain in more detail so I can understand. I don't want to pretend I know what anyone is thinking nor do I think I have all the answers or know everything. Thanks!

[SkyDekker 1,121]

Quote

Anyone occupying that office is allowed (by law) to "insert" himself into these discussions. Just a fact.

The emoluments clause says different. Just a fact.