Oops....among all your other misstatements of fact, you forgot Papadopolis, who's illegal collusion with Russia, seeking a hostile foreign power's help in digging up dirt on Democrats, actually started the FBI investigation before anyone knew the Republicans hired Fusion/Steele, who later turned their work over to Clinton, who then informed the FBI who was already investigating Trump's campaign. Papadopoulos plead guilty. His actions spurred the legitimate investigation, not Fusion or Steele.

On October 5, 2017, Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to making false statements to FBI agents about the timing and the possible significance of his contacts in 2016 relating to U.S.-Russia relations and the Donald Trump presidential campaign.

It's clear you haven't read the Mueller report...although if you had it's also clear you would continue to lie about what's in it, as you just did. There are mountains of evidence being considered in multiple courts as we speak, and mountains more waiting for him to leave office. 34 convictions on that evidence you say isn't enough for court. The lions share of those blacked out parts of the report you didn't read are due to ongoing cases....liar.

Most of what was in the Steele dossier turned out to be 100% correct, as was the decision to turn it over. It was independently verified before being mentioned in courts. This has been litigated, and Trump lost, sore loser. Trump, conversely, still publicly states he would accept foreign help in his campaign and wouldn't inform the FBI, two crimes against the US. Rusher, if you're listening, please hack government servers and release dirt on my opponent...remember? And within hours they did exactly that, remember?

In October 2015, Fusion GPS was contracted by conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon (who, like most Republicans were Trump haters) to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates. In April 2016, attorneys for Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC separately hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump, while The Free Beacon stopped its backing in May of 2016. In June 2016, Fusion GPS subcontracted Steele's firm to compile the dossier. Clinton campaign officials were reportedly unaware that Fusion GPS had subcontracted Steele, and he was not told that the Clinton campaign was the recipient of his research. Following Trump's election as president, funding from Clinton and the DNC ceased, but Steele continued his research and was reportedly paid directly by Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn R. Simpson. While compiling the dossier, Steele passed information to both British and American intelligence services.

Trump has said clearly he would not have turned it over, nor would he care if the accusations were true.


Trump is a life long criminal fraud, admitted and convicted, and horrific business man, backstabbing "friend" who constantly tried to sleep with his friend's wives, incestuous pedophile, cheating husband and philanderer, and well known documented golf cheat. You and he admit he's a constant liar, in fact you applaud him for lying, stating clearly that you think that he is smart to lie under oath, because the truth would convict him. His cabinet has proven to be the worst, most criminal administration ever in the history of the US. None has more convictions for crimes against the state, or more pending criminal cases, or more lobbyists filling positions, or more turnover, or more failed appointments.

Funny, don't you still chant "lock her up" over pizzagate and Benghazzi, demanding more politically motivated investigations alongside Trump? Sore loser...still fighting the losses. As usual, you have it all hypocritically backwards.

[Redacted to conform with sift rules, not because I didn't mean every word]

List of people in Trump's administration that have quit or been fired. The Trump Administration has seen the highest rate of turnover among White House staff in decades.

During the president’s first year, the administration saw a 34% turnover rate. This is the highest of any recent White House, according to a Brookings Institution report that tracked departures of senior officials over the last 40 years.

The next-highest turnover rate for an administration’s first year was Ronald Reagan’s, with 17% of senior aides leaving their posts in 1981.

Former presidents Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and Bill Clinton saw much lower turnovers during their first year in office—9%, 6%, and 11%, respectively.

------

John Kelly – December 2018. The retired Marine Corps general was hired in July 2017 to bring order to the White House.

Matthew Whitaker – December 2018. Named acting attorney general in November this year, replacing Jeff Sessions. Immediately came under scrutiny over past remarks about the investigation into possible Russian collusion with Mr Trump's presidential election campaign.

Nikki Haley – December 2018. Stepped down as US ambassador to the UN at the end of the year.

Jeff Sessions – November 2018. After months of being attacked and ridiculed by the president, the former senator was forced out as attorney general.

Don McGahn – October 2018. Mr Trump revealed in August that the White House counsel would leave following strains between the two over Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Scott Pruitt – July 2018. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) chief quit after he came under fire over a series of ethics controversies.

David Shulkin – March 2018. He left his position the Veteran Affairs secretary, telling the media he had been fired rather than resigning.

HR McMaster – March 2018. Mr Trump’s national security adviser was replaced by John Bolton.

Rex Tillerson – March 2018. The secretary of state was fired by the president on after a series rifts.

Gary Cohn – March 2018. The National Economic Council director and former Goldman Sachs president said he resigned his advisory role.

Hope Hicks – February 2018. The White House communications director, a long-serving and trusted Trump aide, decided to resign.

Rob Porter – February 2018. The White House staff secretary stepped aside following accusations of domestic abuse from former wives.

Omarosa Manigault Newman – December 2017. The former star of The Apprentice was fired as assistant to the president.

Richard Cordray – November 2017. The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s first director quit his administration role.

Tom Price – September 2017. The Health and Human Services secretary quit under pressure from Mr Trump over travel practices.

Stephen Bannon – August 2017. Mr Trump’s chief strategist was fired in after clashing with other top White House figures, including the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Anthony Scaramucci – July 2017. The White House communications director was fired by Mr Trump after only 10 days on the job. Mr Scaramucci had openly criticised Mr Bannon.

Reince Priebus – July 2017. Replaced as chief of staff by John Kelly, Priebus lost Mr Trump’s confidence after setbacks in Congress.

Sean Spicer – July 2017. Resigned as White House press secretary, ending a turbulent six-month tenure.

Walter Shaub – July 2017. The head of the US Office of Government Ethics, who repeatedly clashed with Mr Trump.

Michael Dubke – May 2017. Resigned as White House communications director.

Katie Walsh – March 2017. The deputy White House chief of staff was transferred out to a Republican activist group.

Michael Flynn – February 2017. Resigned in as Mr Trump’s national security adviser. Mr Flynn later pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. He is set to be sentenced later in December.

Sally Yates – January 2017. Mr Trump fired the acting US attorney general after she ordered Justice Department lawyers not to enforce is immigration ban.

@bobknight33
Super-high staff turnover is a sign of good management, right Bob?

I agree there has been a F load of change in personnel. The real question is does this turnover occur in in business life?

If so then one could consider Trump as some kind of dickhead to work for .

If not then what is the reason for the difference?


I think there is much more going on behind the scenes. Why would one have a military General as your chief of staff?

With Obama's top level FBI as example --
Comey -- fired
McCabe- Fired
James Baker, general counsel -- Fired
James Rybicki Chief of staff -- Fired
Perter Strozk -- Fired
Lisa Page -- ???

If Hillary was elected not of their wrong doings would have come to light. All gunning to get Trump. Still that is just the FBI.


No wonder Trump is cleaning house so much. Some bad guys found? Some paranoia?
There isn't a day goes by without something big occurring.

There is still 3 big reports to come out.
Mullers findings.
The 2nd OIG report and Huber's findings

AG Jeff Sessions appointed John Huber will be the ‘top federal prosecutor’ who will be investigating FISA abuses . Huber's staff is over 400.


Also Guantanamo Bay, Cuba-- Expanding like mad...

$14 million to expand the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. This is a "strategically critical time-sensitive expansion project". DOD justification states the "current trial support facilities are incapable of handling the large number of personnel .
https://insidedefense.com/insider/pentagon-expand-gitmo-after-trump-orders-it-remain-open

The place can hold some 2300 prisoners, currently Gitmo is currently holding 41 prisoners.. Also the 137th, 428th, and 514th was deployed this month to Gitmo for a year . Rotating people out - possible, but some 500 troops for 41 prisoners?

What is so time sensitive for to handle trial support facilities are incapable of handling the large number of personnel .-- Where are these people coming from? What is coming down the pike?

Like I said above:
I think there is much more going on behind the scenes. Why would one have a military General as your chief of staff?

That was quite good.

But man, that 4th issue is a doozy. Learning that "hard work pays off" is difficult when it just really doesn't, at least not anymore. Massive income inequality, zero class mobility, and on and on. We feel like relatively easily replaceable cogs in a relatively pointless machine because WE ARE.

We hear lots of stories about people that manage to buy in, feel like they are doing something important and making a real impact, enjoy some period of good job satisfaction...

...and then all too often, they end up looking like saps when the company that they work for gets bought out by some massive faceless corporation that doesn't value their years of loyal service at all, at which point they get replaced by A) a robot, B) an outsourced sweatshop laborer in a 3rd world country that can be payed a fraction of the local rate, C) a younger and more compliant hire that will inevitably have a massive turnover rate, but who cares because there are plenty more where that came from, or D) the cokehead nephew of the new CEO that needs a job to keep him out of trouble, and hey, might as well keep things in the family, right?

Maybe I'm just a bitter, late Gen-X'er.

all of us?
no one?
mighty big on the presumption bubba.

let me guess,YOU run a business?
is your boss nickname captain whiny cunt?

because every owner/boss i run into that complains about having to pay this or this or that are whiny little bitches.i am not suggesting that some of their gripes are not valid,because they are,but when it comes to paying their employees?

yeah..whiny,little bitchy cunts.

they complain endlessly how they can't find good help.how the turnover is brutal and it costs them soooo much to train,gear and clothe etc etc.

and almost every single one of them pays under 10 bucks an hr.

my son owns his own business.pays 100 bucks a job to start and if you work out? raises it to 150 bucks a job,usually does three jobs a day.

he has only had to replace one helper in five years.

compare that to his cousin,who pays a whopping 9 bucks an hour,and he goes through helpers like a semi-automatic.

guess which one is the whiny little bitch?

to be fair,the cousin does own two houses,five cars and all the newest gadgets.while my son is working on his first home.

but he ain't no bitch,and his workers adore him.

which one you billybussey?

ahh../slaps back
no need to answer!
we already know.

Looks like there's too much turnover here ... next

yeah I had to google her, which that alone is a point again Lantern's argument. Just based on wikipedia, it sounds like her biggest crime is that she's a black woman in Texas. Apparently her staff has a high turnover rate, and that she's apparently *gasp* "mean". but I'm sure that wouldn't be criticized if she was a white male conservative.

Looks like she also had the audacity to ask the Dept of Justice to investigate whether the Tea Party was intimidating black and hispanics from voting.

And apparently she passed a safety ordinance requiring parents keep guns away from kids,

<sarcasm> that bitch </sarcasm>

Hahaha, using psychology as an example of turnover of scientific knowledge... can't stop laughing!

The quality goes up and down because writers leave, new ones join. Same with Directors. So some seasons may be more to your liking, while others you may think suck. But it's never a constant. I'm sure there's been 100's of turnovers in it's lifetime.

Here's what wiki has to say about Ford and his high wages -- that he called profit sharing for qualified workers. Started in 1914. By the Great Depression, no more profits, I guess, and therefore no more high wages:

Ford was a pioneer of "welfare capitalism", designed to improve the lot of his workers and especially to reduce the heavy turnover that had many departments hiring 300 men per year to fill 100 slots. Efficiency meant hiring and keeping the best workers.[20]

Ford astonished the world in 1914 by offering a $5 per day wage ($120 today), which more than doubled the rate of most of his workers.[21] A Cleveland, Ohio newspaper editorialized that the announcement "shot like a blinding rocket through the dark clouds of the present industrial depression."[22] The move proved extremely profitable; instead of constant turnover of employees, the best mechanics in Detroit flocked to Ford, bringing their human capital and expertise, raising productivity, and lowering training costs.[23][24] Ford announced his $5-per-day program on January 5, 1914, raising the minimum daily pay from $2.34 to $5 for qualifying workers. It also set a new, reduced workweek, although the details vary in different accounts. Ford and Crowther in 1922 described it as six 8-hour days, giving a 48-hour week,[25] while in 1926 they described it as five 8-hour days, giving a 40-hour week.[26] (Apparently the program started with Saturdays as workdays and sometime later it was changed to a day off.)

Detroit was already a high-wage city, but competitors were forced to raise wages or lose their best workers.[27] Ford's policy proved, however, that paying people more would enable Ford workers to afford the cars they were producing and be good for the economy. Ford explained the policy as profit-sharing rather than wages.[28] It may have been Couzens who convinced Ford to adopt the $5 day.[29]

The profit-sharing was offered to employees who had worked at the company for six months or more, and, importantly, conducted their lives in a manner of which Ford's "Social Department" approved. They frowned on heavy drinking, gambling, and what might today be called "deadbeat dads". The Social Department used 50 investigators, plus support staff, to maintain employee standards; a large percentage of workers were able to qualify for this "profit-sharing."

Ford's incursion into his employees' private lives was highly controversial, and he soon backed off from the most intrusive aspects. By the time he wrote his 1922 memoir, he spoke of the Social Department and of the private conditions for profit-sharing in the past tense, and admitted that "paternalism has no place in industry. Welfare work that consists in prying into employees' private concerns is out of date. Men need counsel and men need help, oftentimes special help; and all this ought to be rendered for decency's sake. But the broad workable plan of investment and participation will do more to solidify industry and strengthen organization than will any social work on the outside. Without changing the principle we have changed the method of payment."[30]

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

That's unfortunate and unfair.
Sure, it might be unappealing. But Youtube incentivizes reply girl behavior because youtube isn't about quality content, it's about turnover and clickthru rates.
It's a pretty good exposé tho, I'd encourage everyone to watch the second half.
It really humanizes alejandra. Gives her depth and reminds us that we're all just little ape people trying to make it thru life.

>> ^entr0py:
I made it half-way through. Great example of just how horrifying the youtube community is. Glad there's an alternative.



I wasn't very clear, I was horrified by the people threatening her, not by the girl who cleverly found a way to make money on youtube. What she does seems mildly irritating but harmless; it's easy not to click on her videos if you don't want to. Harmless unless merely seeing a little thumbnail of cleavage sends you into a rage spiral. But people that sensitive about boobs should really abandon the internet as a lost cause.

That's unfortunate and unfair.

Sure, it might be unappealing. But Youtube incentivizes reply girl behavior because youtube isn't about quality content, it's about turnover and clickthru rates.

It's a pretty good exposé tho, I'd encourage everyone to watch the second half.

It really humanizes alejandra. Gives her depth and reminds us that we're all just little ape people trying to make it thru life.



>> ^entr0py:

I made it half-way through. Great example of just how horrifying the youtube community is. Glad there's an alternative.

Sounds delectable!


In reply to this comment by eric3579:
I just missed meow in the lounge : I was out getting cherry turnovers and tacos. What a combo.

I just missed meow in the lounge I was out getting cherry turnovers and tacos. What a combo.