The Rock
And now.....without further ado....Briarcliff Manor High School's own Baron of Bullshit, the one, the ONLY..........PAULABE ZEIDEN From Boone will entertain us with his lies and falsehoods!
"But everything’s fine in the WH. No chaos at all."
And there's no fraud and lies coming from your words......riiiiight..........
Why the hell is this not even a tad bit surprising?
How many more of trumps people have to be exposed as crooks!?
Matt
I mean the man gets to choose ANYONE he wants and after a year how many people have quit? Great leaders just don't have this happen.
I had a old coworker get called to lead Hillary's campaign. This woman was the best at we she does - great leader. After 2 months she quit. She saw the writing on the wall and knew Hillary was a mess.
As the old saying goes, "This to shall pass..." Eventually he won't be POTUS and all this unnecessary chaos and lack of leadership will be behind us. This country has survived centuries of good and bad leaders.
That's the beauty of our country.
Politicians for the most part have NO concept at all of what it is, most of them not even having the experience of running a lemonade stand. Obama was a CLASSIC example of this. Talk, talk, talk, talk.......and nothing gets done.
So...you're saying the turnover is because Trump's team hasn't been delivering results? That's why we've had change in key economic, foreign policy, intelligence, and advisory positions? His administration isn't delivering results?
It has nothing to do with results...it has to do with loyalty to the President's position du jour.
And, as I said earlier, every time I've had to fire someone that I hired, I felt I had done a poor job of selecting that person. I think most successful leaders/business owners recognize and hire good employees from the start, not cycle thru them, like a McDonalds, until they land a good one.
Matt
And I never said that the turnover is because of lack of results. He's getting results and he wants MORE and BETTER results and he's also looking into the future. I don't pretend to know how Trump thinks or what his strategy is. I'm beginning to get an idea though. One thing's for sure, the DC crowd has NO concept whatsoever and Trump's just getting started. I guess my take is that this is like a war and these are "battlefield promotions/demotions". He's doing what has to be done in a constantly shifting situation where the only things that matter are results.
Maybe it's just an aberration and a "first year thing" so to speak. But if he keeps up a similar turnover rate, I can't imagine how anyone can view that as being a sign of a well run ship.
I am a stock holder, so it is partly my company -- just like it is every stockholders. And my keister is always on the line...as is anyone who works in my company. Seeing 40% of your colleagues laid off over the last few years is a stark reminder of that. I am given responsibilities within my company and have authority over certain decisions -- just like Trump has. Sure, it's not "my company" any more than America is "Trump's country" or the government is "Trump's government." We all, ultimately have to answer to somebody, including the President of the United States.
Our leadership welcomes individuals with alternative perspectives and ensures their voice is heard and considered, even if their suggestions and opinions aren't acted upon. I've learned that people can tolerate decisions that go against them as long as they are included in the decision making process. Being marginalized because you share a difference of opinion is a different matter. It's my belief that Trump largely looks for "yes men" -- people that confirm his world view with little to no pushback. Seems many of those that pushback at all are shown the door.
Well, I guess if you think a high turnover is the mark of a successful administration, then Trump is definitely leading the pack.
From this linked article:
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/07/591372397/white-house-staff-turnover-was-already-record-setting-then-more-advisers-left
President Trump insists his isn't a White House in chaos, but it's hard to deny the near constant churn of key aides, including Tuesday's announced departure of economic adviser Gary Cohn. A full 43 percent of top-level positions in the Trump White House have seen turnover. That is not normal.
In fact, the Trump White House has had more turnover among senior aides in the first 13 1/2 months of Trump's term than his four most recent predecessors had after two years."
Matt
We will never know all of the details....but this a big mistake.
I'm worried Trump will pull an Obama and surround himself with "Yes" men....look what road that took Obama down- disastrous policy decisions one right after the other.
Yes, and all his predecessors were career politicians who have about as much of an idea on how to run a business as I do performing a brain surgery. Obama was a textbook example of this. Trump is running this as he runs his businesses, and so far he's outdoing those 4 predecessors. If that means some casualties along the way, then that's the price of war, and make no mistake about it.....it's WAR. So basically to your quote.....who cares?
Agree with him or not, Trump calls is own shots and he does not operate like a politician does so you can take all the past "history" of how elected career politicians did business and toss it because it doesn't apply for the most part with Trump. Time will tell if it's a successful strategy. So far the results are positive, regardless of the "hamburger" that's being ground.
And your comparison of him to Obama is COMPLETELY off base. Obama couldn't run a stocking, no less a country, and had ZERO experience running anything at all except his mouth. Putting Obama in the White House was like throwing a carp in the air and expecting it to fly.
One of the signs of a great leader is to hire folks smarter than yourself....and then either let them do their thing or at least listen their advice. Trump is letting his ego get in the way.
Trump admittedly replaced Tillerson with a sycophant.
Think of the decades of international experience and insights that Tillerson has, Exxon was like a small country for gads sake. To do what he has done indicates he is an amazing person....one we are lucky to have. Then....to treat him like a contestant on a reality show......... a big mistake.
Don't get me wrong....I like where the Trump admin has been taking out country....but Trump can't do this solo.
Just fanning the flames a little.
;-)
Matt
Now it’s a big mistake firing him, kind of reminds me of Comey. LMAO
Any Beavis and Butthead, or Dumb and Dumber videos are perfect for this forum at times.
I admire Tillerson, and I liked his selection for SoS. He probably has more positive international experience than 99% of the politicos in Washington. I'm also not surprised he ultimately sided differently than Trump on certain issues, and therefore got fired.
Matt
Whose mistake was that, ultimately?
Matt
Tillerson was more interested in the oil in the ground for his business contacts then what was best for Keeping America Great.
Matt
A healthy organization has some turnover, planned or not. Nobody likes a kiss-ass yes man (except for a weakling boss), and there is no room for a rogue either. The Trump Whitehouse is not a "good 'ol boy" system, the very plague of most corporations and companies...
Nine Issues that Divided Trump and Tillerson
President Donald Trump, flanked by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, told members of the UN Security Council at a White House luncheon on Monday that they should act to counter Iranian 'destabilization.'AFP MANDEL NGAN by JOHN HAYWARD13 Mar 2018575
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s seemingly sudden dismissal by President Donald Trump comes after a year of constant stories about his impending departure. He had a number of significant policy and messaging disputes with the president, and every one of them was followed by a chorus of unnamed administration sources telling reporters that Tillerson’s ouster was imminent.
Here are some of the most significant and highly publicized disagreements between President Trump and his first secretary of state:
Russia. Trump critics immediately assumed Tillerson was fired for speaking out of turn by blaming Russia for the poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter. However, senior administration officials claim Tillerson was asked to step down on Friday, three days before he made his comments about Russia. A source close to Pompeo told CNN he has known he would transition from CIA director to secretary of state since December, and his successor Gina Haspel has been effectively running the CIA for months while he prepared himself for the move.
Ironically, Tillerson’s history of business dealings with Russia fueled early criticism that his appointment as Secretary of State was a sign that Trump would be very soft on Moscow. By the time of his departure, Tillerson was seen as tougher than Trump on Russia, and the president was criticized for failing to follow his lead. For his part, Vladimir Putin said he regretted awarding Tillerson the “Order of Friendship” in 2013.
Tillerson took a more outspokenly negative view of Russia’s actions in Ukraine and Syria than Trump, and pointedly disagreed with him about Russia’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 election. As recently as November, some analysts said Tillerson had grown so confident of his position, so certain that he would not be fired, that he was making his own foreign policy and using his public comments to prod Trump into seeing things his way.
Tillerson reportedly told an associate in July that he was “stunned” by President Trump’s apparent willingness to accept Putin’s denial of Russian meddling in the 2016 election.
The “moron” incident. It would also be remiss not to mention the July 2017 Pentagon meeting at which Tillerson allegedly referred to President Trump as a “moron.”
Reports at the time claimed Tillerson spent the entire summer on the verge of quitting and was prevented from leaving only by appeals from Vice President Mike Pence.
Speculation about the exact reason for Tillerson’s outburst ran wild throughout Washington. Early rumors held that Tillerson, a former president of the Boy Scouts, was angered by Trump’s “politicized speech” to the organization. Some said Tillerson disliked Trump’s policy on Afghanistan. Later a theory developed that Tillerson thought Trump was a “moron” because he wanted to increase America’s inventory of nuclear weapons.
The State Department denied Tillerson used “that type of language” to refer to President Trump. Tillerson said at the time, and repeated as recently as a February interview with CBS News’ 60 Minutes, that he would not dignify questions about the “moron” incident with a response. Administration critics took this as a tacit admission that he did insult the president. Tillerson responded that focusing on rumors about what language he used in the Pentagon meeting was one of the “destructive games” of Washington.
North Korea. The stated reason for Tillerson’s replacement as Secretary of State is North Korea policy. Trump famously told Tillerson in October that he was “wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man.” This was taken at the time as the clearest signal to date that Trump was not happy with his Secretary of State, and that Tillerson was conducting his own rogue foreign policy, although Trump and Tillerson downplayed it as a bit of good-natured ribbing.
Tillerson was therefore either surprised or gratified, depending on which source talks to a particular reporter, when Trump announced he was willing to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. Just hours before the announcement was made, Tillerson told reporters, “We’re a long way from negotiations. We just need to be very clear-eyed and realistic about it.”
Some media soothsayers took it as a grim omen for Tillerson’s career that he was so clearly out of the loop when the most potentially important U.S. diplomatic mission in a generation was launched. Trump confirmed on Tuesday that he made his decision to meet with Kim Jong-un without consulting Tillerson.
Afghanistan. Tillerson was seen as undercutting Trump’s strategy in Afghanistan in August. Shortly after Trump declared “our troops will fight to win” and “from now on, victory will have a clear definition,” Tillerson told the Taliban: “You will not win a battlefield victory. We may not win one, but neither will you.”
“We believe that we can turn the tide of what has been a losing battle over the last year and a half or so and at least stabilize the situation and, hopefully, start seeing some battlefield victories on the part of the Afghan forces,” Tillerson said, in what was taken as a significant break from Trump’s promise of fighting to win and settling for nothing less than the defeat of the Taliban.
Supporters of the Trump administration’s diplomatic strategy pointed to the Afghanistan dispute as an example of the “good cop, bad cop” routine. Detractors sensed a power struggle between Trump loyalists and a dissident faction headed by Tillerson and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, who happens to have been in Afghanistan when Trump announced Tillerson’s departure on Tuesday.
Qatar. One of the most carefully scrutinized differences of opinion between President Trump and Secretary of State Tillerson involved Qatar. Trump was outspokenly supportive of the decision by Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain to take action against Qatar for supporting terrorism. Tillerson’s criticism of Qatar was moderated by encouraging all parties to refrain from escalating the situation, and praise for Qatari progress in “halting financial support and expelling terrorist elements.”
“Everybody was taken by surprise by the president’s comments. It undermined what the secretary had to say. The policy that is being worked is the Tillerson policy, Trump’s comments notwithstanding,” a State Department official told the Washington Post in June.
In July, Trump praised Tillerson for “doing a terrific job” and said they disagreed “only in terms of tone” on Qatar. However, Tillerson continued to be much more critical of the “quartet” blockading Qatar than President Trump.
“There seems to be a real unwillingness on the part of some of the parties to want to engage. It’s up to the leadership of the quartet when they want to engage with Qatar because Qatar has been very clear—they’re ready to engage,” Tillerson said in October as he was preparing for another trip to the region.
In January, after the administration resolved a dispute with Qatar over airline subsidies, Tillerson praised Qatar as a “strong partner and a longtime friend of the United States.” He also talked up enhanced trade and energy cooperation between the U.S. and Qatar, and once again praised the Qataris for the improvements they have made in counterterrorism. Meanwhile, he encouraged Saudi Arabia to be “a bit more measured and a bit more thoughtful” in its actions with respect to Qatar and other Middle Eastern crises.
Some took President Trump’s greater willingness to criticize Saudi Arabia in the new year as a sign he was coming around to Tillerson’s point of view. Trump also thanked the Qataris for “action to counter terrorism and extremism in all forms” in January, a statement taken as a sign that relations between the White House and Qatar could be thawing out.
Iran nuclear deal. Tillerson frankly admitted in August that he disagrees with President Trump about the Iran nuclear deal. Trump has harshly criticized the deal and expressed a strong preference for scuttling or renegotiating it, while Tillerson argued, “There are a lot of alternative means with which we use the agreement to advance our policies and the relationship with Iran.”
After he fired Tillerson, Trump cited the Iran deal as one of the issues he was never able to resolve with the former secretary of state.
“When you look at the Iran deal: I think it’s terrible, I guess he thinks it was OK. I wanted to break it or do something and he felt a little bit differently. So we were not thinking the same,” he said, adding that new Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has a more “similar thought process” on the matter.
The Paris climate accord. Tillerson was equally frank in disagreeing with President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord in June 2017. In fact, he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee he was one of the most vocal opponents of Trump’s decision within the administration.
Tillerson gave Trump credit for hearing his views and considering input from European allies before withdrawing from the accord, but was notably absent from the White House ceremony to announce the decision and subsequent public events.
By September, Tillerson was telling reporters that Trump was willing to consider re-entering the Paris climate accords if the “right conditions” could be found. Other administration officials contradicted his remarks and said Trump is willing to work productively with other nations on environmental issues, but will not return to the Paris accords.
In January, Trump said the U.S. “could conceivably go back in” if the Paris agreement, which he described as a “bad deal,” could be altered so that it does not damage the American energy industry. Rumors continue to swirl that Trump is talking to foreign leaders and looking for a way to return to the Paris accords with a renegotiated American position, despite his continuing public criticism of the deal.
Trade and border security. Somewhat surprisingly given his background as a corporate CEO and advocate of free trade—arguably the strongest in the administration next to Gary Cohn, who departed less than a week ago—Tillerson has not publicly clashed with Trump much over trade policy.
One reason for this might be Trump and Tillerson’s shared concern for the danger posed by China’s growing influence. Tillerson has warned developing countries against doing business with China on several occasions, most recently in early February.
However, Tillerson made a trip to Latin America in February that was seen as out-of-step with Trump policies in several respects, including Tillerson’s praise for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which Trump has called “the worst trade deal ever.”
Tillerson was also taken as softer on border security and immigration reform than the president. Tillerson also directly contradicted the president on drug trafficking, praising Mexico for its efforts to interdict drug smuggling within hours of Trump criticizing them for “pouring” drugs into the United States. An official traveling with Tillerson said Trump’s comments were “not helpful” to the secretary of state’s diplomacy.
Israel and the Palestinians. Another muted dispute between Trump and Tillerson concerns the Palestinians. Tillerson was notably cooler than Trump on the notion of moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, projecting a considerably longer timetable for the move than other administration officials.
The first State Department report on terrorism under Tillerson was also taken as a sign of distance between State and the White House, with the former much more sympathetic to Palestinian arguments than the latter. In June 2017, Tillerson found it necessary to walk back his confident prediction that the Palestinians would end the horrific practice of paying off the families of terrorists, issuing a revised statement more in line with President Trump’s views.
Tillerson also disagreed with Trump’s position on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). Trump and U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley conditioned UNRWA aid on the Palestinians returning to peace negotiations, while Tillerson argued the UNRWA is a U.N. agency whose funding should not be linked to Palestinian conduct. The administration ultimately decided not to cut funding for Palestinian refugees, a decision seen as Tillerson prevailing over Haley in persuading Trump.
Inappropriate no matter what, whether they are the boss or not. Subordinate/insubordination - all nonsensical rhetoric...
