[QUOTE=ewmayer;548531]And encouraging trade because it would help one's economy, and a good economy would help one in a re-election campaign, so what? This is allegedly illegal or unethical now? [/QUOTE]
Doesn't it count as conflict of interest?

[QUOTE=axn;548562]Doesn't it count as conflict of interest?[/QUOTE]

Huh???? So FDR should try to lose WWII because if the Allies are winning it will help him get re-elected which is a conflict of interest.

[QUOTE=Prime95;548567]Huh???? So FDR should try to lose WWII because if the Allies are winning it will help him get re-elected which is a conflict of interest.[/QUOTE]

Doing the thing because there is a legitimate reason, vs doing the thing because "I want to win re-election"? If FDR entered WW2 _only_ because of reelection prospects, then yes, it would be a giant conflict of interest.

Biden And His Ventriloquists Keep Out-Hawking Trump
 

[URL]https://consortiumnews.com/2020/06/23/biden-and-his-ventriloquists-keep-out-hawking-trump/[/URL]
[QUOTE]“Trump talks tough on Venezuela, but admires thugs and dictators like Nicolas Maduro,” tweeted Biden Incorporated. “As President, I will stand with the Venezuelan people and for democracy.”

“Translation: if Trump retreats from his current policy of trying to sanction and suffocate Venezuelan into submission, Biden will make sure to revive it,” journalist Aaron Maté said in response.

“To be clear, Joe Biden is now attacking Donald Trump from the right on Venezuela,” said journalist Walker Bragman.[/QUOTE]

As found [u][color=blue]here[/color][/u]:

To: Donald Trump, President of the United States

Cc: Mark Meadows (Chief of Staff), Kayleigh McEnany (Communications Director), Kellyanne Conway (Counselor to the President), [i]et al[/i]

From: Jill Granat, General Counsel, Burger King (division of Restaurant Brands International)

Subject: Trademark Infringement

To whom it may concern:

It has come to our attention that numerous blatantly false statements being issued by the Administration have caused confusion regarding a valuable Burger King trademark.

We therefore respectfully request that the White House, and all executive agencies, immediately [b][size=4]cease and desist[/size][/b] from issuing such statements.

Failure to comply may result in our having to take further steps to protect the interests of Burger King and Restaurant Brands International.

It is Burger King, not the White House, that holds the trademark, "Home of the Whopper."

Thank you for your attention.

Respectfully,

Jill Granat,
General Counsel, Burger King and Restaurant Brands International

P.S. If you require an enumeration of said blatantly false statements, please make contact with our office. Regrettably, the digital version of the list was too large to be sent electronically, and we were unable to deliver a printed copy because White House security protocols did not allow for a semi to come onto the White House grounds.

Uh, except that whopper-telling is just about the the most popular sport in DC and its propaganda-transmitting MSM these days. To take a recent example, "[url=https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/07/the-latest-russiagate-bombshell-took-just-one-week-to-be-exposed-as-dud-who-had-planted-it-.html]Russia offered bounties to Taliban fighters to kill US soldiers in Afghanistan[/url]." Total, unmitigated, deliberate-falsehood bullshit, which alas got shredded so quickly by multiple independent bullshit-detectors that its promulgators are now busily slow-walking it back: Original story was splashed on front page, A-1 of the NYT, non-apology-apology walkback was buried on page A-19. Check out the raft of excuse-making euphemisms the NYT propagandists deploy, textual pretzel-contortions to avoid admitting they got caught promulgating bullshit, which was pushed out with precisely 0 fact checking:
[quote]A memo produced in recent days by the office of the nation’s top intelligence official acknowledged that the C.I.A. and top counterterrorism officials [b]have assessed[/b] that Russia [b]appears[/b] to have offered bounties to kill American and coalition troops in Afghanistan, but emphasized [b]uncertainties[/b] and [b]gaps in evidence[/b], according to three officials.
...
The memo said that the C.I.A. and the National Counterterrorism Center had [b]assessed[/b] with [b]medium confidence[/b] — meaning credibly sourced and plausible, [b]but falling short of near certainty[/b] — that a unit of the Russian military intelligence service, known as the G.R.U., offered the bounties, according to two of the officials briefed on its contents.

But other parts of the intelligence community — including the National Security Agency, which favors electronic surveillance intelligence — said they [b]did not have information to support that conclusion[/b] at the same level, therefore expressing [b]lower confidence[/b] in the conclusion, according to the two officials.[/quote]
Ah, yes "intelligence assessments" from "unnamed top officials" - we've seen that ruse before, and the problem for NYT and its ilk is they've now been caught too many times pulling this sort of nonsense, and their credibility is trending rapidly toward nil. And liying-liar lead Russiagate hoaxer Adam Schiff, as it turns out, was himself briefed on the aforementioned 'assessments' months ago but did not see them as worth doing anything about ... until end of June, just after Trump said he wants to pull remaining US troops out of that sh*thole country, to use his own descriptors:
[quote]Top committee staff for Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, were briefed in February on intelligence about Russia offering the Taliban bounties in Afghanistan, but he took no action in response to the briefing, multiple intelligence sources familiar with the briefing told The Federalist.[/quote]
Convenient timing for Schiff to suddenly wax outraged, yes?

Now can we please get back to the less-political funny? There's a reason for the existence of the "politics belongs in the Soap Box" thread in Soap Box, and I will likely shortly move the above 2 posts there, or into another more-suitable Soap Box thread. I know DrS does love himself his daily Trump-bashing, but it doesn't need to leak all over areas of the forum where politics is better avoided.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;550167]
It is Burger King, not the White House, that holds the trademark, "Home of the Whopper."

Thank you for your attention.

Respectfully,

Jill Granat,
General Counsel, Burger King and Restaurant Brands International

[/QUOTE]
:missingteeth: :goodposting:

[QUOTE=ewmayer;550219]I know DrS does love himself his daily Trump-bashing,[/QUOTE]
Talk about not checking your facts! If you'd bothered to check my postings over the last six weeks or so, you would have noticed a number of multi-day intervals between consecutive postings, with larger intervals between postings about the current occupant of the White House. In fact, I haven't been posting much about him over a longer stretch. I reckoned, there's not much point.

Lately, though, it seems even some R's are coming out of their torpor and thinking that maybe this Cult of Personality thing isn't so great after all. Adhere today, gone tomorrow...

Meanwhile, said occupant is acting so classically Bad Guy, it's pitiful. You [i]MUST[/i] re-open the schools! If you [i]don't[/i] reopen the schools, I'll cut off your Federal funding!

Never mind trying to say why it might be a Good Idea to re-open the schools. Do it because I say so, or else...

That's absolutely classic Bad Guy / Oppressor. Good Guys appeal to the listeners' sense of what is right, their sense of justice, etc. Bad Guys go straight to the threats.

What is right (as most folks think of it) and justice aren't even on our CIC's radar. Imploring that reopening the schools might be good for the kids, is left to toadies.

It seems that a major risk with schools re-opening is to teachers and other staff. That leaves aside kids passing the virus around and taking it home to the family.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;550264] Adhere today, gone tomorrow...[/QUOTE]
A nice turn of phrase. I must remember to use it myself in appropriate contexts.

[QUOTE=kladner;550460]It seems that a major risk with schools re-opening is to teachers and other staff.[/QUOTE].