DiscussMormonism.com

First of all, let me say I think Omarosa is a scheming opportunist. Some of her claims may be true, but that's not the only part of the story that is interesting. While campaigning, Trump claimed the opposition was staffed by incompetents. "I have the best people", he said repeatedly. And with respect to Omarosa, I think that shows you a lot about Trump hiring the best people.



Trump hires the best people? A woman who was fired from The Apprentice 3 times is somehow qualified to work in White House?

Trump's approach to life and business is extremely transactional, and the person at the center of those transactions is Donald Trump. People have commented on Trump's characterization of Omarosa as a dog as being racist, until you remember that he used the same expression after Steve Bannon fell out of his good graces. There is more than one dog in Trumpworld.

But when a President calls "the best people" that he hired 'lowlife dogs', I'd say it says a lot about the judgement of Donald Trump.

Recently I read about someone who had turned around an unsuccessful organization. He was asked how he changed the corporate culture. He said he didn't worry about the culture, if you hire the right people the culture takes care of itself. I think one of the important lessons of the Trump administration is that skills in business do not necessarily translate into good government.

So if Trump hires the best people, and the people define the culture, what is the culture of the Executive Branch right now? To me it seems extremely back-biting and paranoid, which reminds me a lot of the man at the top.

MeDotOrg wrote:Trump hires the best people?

Trump has made notoriously bad staffing decisions. His policy of putting wolves in charge of various branches of the Hen House is unpresidented.

On a case by case basis, I try to make the distinction between Drumpf being a liar and being wrong. This is one of those times where I think he's just wrong, and in this case specifically, incompetent.

I mean, there's always a lie going on in the background with this guy. But there's a sort of irony to the fact that in order to lie, you have to have a handle on the truth, and I seriously doubt he does. His lies are easy to spot because he somehow imagines nobody can see what's in plain sight. He thinks if he says something enough, everyone will be fooled. He believes this because his base has been fooled, and to him, his base is everyone.

I have little doubt in his imagination, here surrounds himself with great people, but he's a dimwit, and I'm not sure he'd recognize a quality person even if he were given a class on the subject (taught at a kindergarten level, of course).

Obviously in the intellectual circles you and Schmo hang out in, she must be is a very relevant and influential person or you wouldn’t give her the time of day. Oh wait I forgot, time is the least expensive commodity for the two of you.

Omarosa Manigault-Newman chose a very apt title for her book about Trump. Hope some of you read Unhinged and give us a book report.

This might go hand in hand with Congressman Ryan's revelation that he and others have been able to avert tragedy after tragedy by talking Trump out of his original impulse decisions. Not sure if this involved Ritalin-laced cheeseburgers.

Bach wrote:Obviously in the intellectual circles you and Schmo hang out in, she must be is a very relevant and influential person or you wouldn’t give her the time of day. Oh wait I forgot, time is the least expensive commodity for the two of you.

The lead sentence was my assessment of her as a scheming opportunist. Personally, I never thought she was relevant or influential. I'm just curious as to exactly why Trump found her relevant and influential enough to hire at the maximum salary for White House Staff (she was making the same salary as John Kelly).

Perhaps you have enough time to explain that one to me.

MeDotOrg wrote:

Bach wrote:Obviously in the intellectual circles you and Schmo hang out in, she must be is a very relevant and influential person or you wouldn’t give her the time of day. Oh wait I forgot, time is the least expensive commodity for the two of you.

The lead sentence was my assessment of her as a scheming opportunist. Personally, I never thought she was relevant or influential. I'm just curious as to exactly why Trump found her relevant and influential enough to hire at the maximum salary for White House Staff (she was making the same salary as John Kelly).

Perhaps you have enough time to explain that one to me.

QAnon will soon explain to us how that high-priced hire of a low-life dog was all part of the wonderful Trump plan that is unfolding in front of our eyes.

Bach wrote:Obviously in the intellectual circles you and Schmo hang out in, she must be is a very relevant and influential person or you wouldn’t give her the time of day. Oh wait I forgot, time is the least expensive commodity for the two of you.

Obviously in the intellectual circles you hang out in, you all have trouble identifying what a circle is.

Well. My best guess is she went from ardent Trump supporter who was severely limited in her scope and abilities to function within the Executive branch (In other words there wasn't really a place for someone who was more of a personality rather than an executive manager) to cynical opportunist and is parlaying her time in the White House into her next pay day. No hate, by the way. Being an opportunist is just smart given the current climate. That said, I think she's up to a dozen Daily Mirror-esque headlines with no proof? In fact, the best thing in the world for her right now is for a tape of Trump dropping the N-bomb to surface. She'd make mad bank off that.

- Doc

MeDotOrg wrote:So if Trump hires the best people, and the people define the culture, what is the culture of the Executive Branch right now? To me it seems extremely back-biting and paranoid, which reminds me a lot of the man at the top.

It would appear that part of the culture in the EB right now is such that Trump can attempt to disparage or defame any of his current or former staff and still keep his job, while staff (current and former) cannot speak negatively of Trump without consequence.