Did Trump "Drain" the swamp?

[huckelberry]

For some draining the swamp means only reducing the influence of liberals. Nothing to do with money influence and lobbying.(or policy built on ignorance and imagined realities)

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Is being in contempt of court part of Draining The SwampTM?

- Doc

[K Graham]

Is being in contempt of court part of Draining The SwampTM?

- Doc

No, and neither is being twice impeached.

[K Graham]

For some draining the swamp means only reducing the influence of liberals. Nothing to do with money influence and lobbying.(or policy built on ignorance and imagined realities)

Pretty much.

[Res Ipsa]

For some draining the swamp means only reducing the influence of liberals. Nothing to do with money influence and lobbying.(or policy built on ignorance and imagined realities)

Drain the swamp is one of those phrases that sound great but can mean almost anything. Like Markk, I think of the swamp in terms of corruption. The structural problem we have with draining the swamp in our system is the equating of spending money on elections with constitutionally protected free speech. With no effective limits on election spending, politicians are too dependent on those that control the money. When young Congress critters have to spend more time raising money than they do actually governing, corruption is unavoidable.

But I think it’s pretty clear that the people chanting “drain the swamp” weren’t talking about political corruption — for them the swamp was “government officials who didn’t support Trump: liberals, democrats and RINOs. They completely rejected the concept of the civil service — non political government employees — taking the view that every government employee should be subject to an ideological litmus test. Either one was on the Trump Train or was part of the swamp (or the deep state, which was used interchangeably with the swamp). As a result, for example, competent scientists in the government were replaced with ideologues. The idea is that the the entire apparatus of the state from top to bottom should be engaged in promoting a specific ideology, including keeping the leader in power.

How such a sizable portion of the American electorate became convinced that, for example, the primary job of a scientist in a nonpartisan civil service position should see her primary job of doing whatever Trump wanted rather than making sure that slaughterhouses weren’t churning out infected meat, is kind of frightening. But it’s how authoritarianism works.

[Markk]

Really…

because he is the President?

Yes

Yes…we have no choice

WW1 was Wilsons war

WW2 was Rosevelts

Korea Truman

Vietnam Johnson

Bush sr Iraq

Bush the younger Iraq/Afghanistan

Biden Ukraine…

My point if you go back and read what I wrote is Trump was weening us away from war…he did a good job…he certainly did not suck in that regards. Trump was one of the few that said we should not go into Afghanistan…Obama and Biden said we should, and stay out of Iraq, if I remember correctly.

All of those conflicts/wars aside from Ukraine involved US troops. Ukraine doesn’t.

If we’re including wars that we supply materials to, but (arguably) not personnel, then you’ll have to add Somalia to your list for Trump:

Since his inauguration, President Donald J. Trump has presided over an unprecedented escalation of the U.S. counterterrorism war in Somalia. By mid-2019, the United States surpassed the number of strikes by drones and Special Operations raids of any previous year, and had also conducted double the number of strikes that it had through August 2018. With this escalation, Trump intensified a covert American war that had persisted since 2003, and which had killed more than 350 people before Trump took office. In 2017, the Trump administration more than doubled the number of strikes than that of any year that Obama was in office.

https://www.newamerica.org/internationa ... n-somalia/

I wouldn’t characterize Somalia as ‘Trump’s war’ any more than I’d characterize the Ukraine conflict as ‘Biden’s war’ anyway, but YMMV. If you’re going to go that way, consistency lends to credibility of the claim.

Then call it Trump's war, I don’t care, the point is he was weening us away from foreign conflict…give the guy some credit on this, are you that biased? I even stated on another thread that Biden was doing okay in regards that we aren’t heavy into it. Trump did good on this.

[canpakes]

I wouldn’t characterize Somalia as ‘Trump’s war’ any more than I’d characterize the Ukraine conflict as ‘Biden’s war’ anyway, but YMMV. If you’re going to go that way, consistency lends to credibility of the claim.

Then call it Trump's war, I don’t care, the point is he was weening us away from foreign conflict…give the guy some credit on this, are you that biased? I even stated on another thread that Biden was doing okay in regards that we aren’t heavy into it. Trump did good on this.

Gotcha. He was weaning us away from that war by increasing our involvement in it.

[Schreech]

Yea Pakes! - you should know by now that escalation can ALSO mean "weaning" in the same sense that a tapir is a horse :

https://www.military.com/daily-news/202 ... -last.html

"We sadly saw a huge uptick in air strikes and civilian casualties under the Trump administration, and the US government can't just turn a blind eye to what happened," Eviatar said. "Part of moving forward will require looking back, learning from the past, and making amends."

That said, here is a fascinating look at the corruption and profiteering Trump enabled by "draining the swamp":

https://www.citizensforethics.org/repor ... -interest/

"Trump administration officials often mingled with special interests and foreign officials at Trump properties, rewarding them with access for their patronage. Special interest groups likely spent more than $13 million at Trump properties, and 47 Trump officials attended at least one of these events at a Trump property, giving businesses access to power while enriching the president."

............
"Often, visits to Trump properties coincided with White House access. Most recently, seven Michigan state legislators visited the Trump hotel, where some toasted Dom Perignon after meeting with the president at the White House. During the Trump administration, 80 state officials visited Trump properties, including nineteen governors.

Special interests and foreign officials have also gotten White House access while patronizing Trump properties. Five special interest groups, including the American Petroleum Institute, have had White House meetings concurrent with a Trump hotel event. Romanian President Klaus Iohannis had breakfast at Trump’s hotel the day before meeting with the president for a news conference at the White House."

........
"Trump swore he would not make foreign deals as president. But that didn’t stop his brand from acquiring foreign trademarks over the last few years, setting the stage for foreign deals once he leaves office. In the course of his presidency, one of Trump’s companies has received almost 70 trademarks from 11 foreign governments including China, Argentina, and the European Union. Granting foreign trademarks to Trump is a tool that foreign governments may use to curry favor with the Trump administration. "


What was it that Markkk was saying about "lobbyists" and access to the president again? Trump LITERALLY let lobbyists buy their way into getting his attention by speding money at his properties or granting his businesses favor...Trump in the epitomy of the "the swamp".

[canpakes]

Yea Pakes! - you should know by now that escalation can ALSO mean "weaning" in the same sense that a tapir is a horse ...

I see, now. : )

This must be similar to how we weaned ourselves off of lobbyists during the Trump years by dramatically increasing the number of them visiting the White House, which proves how much Trump drained the swamp by increasing it in size and depth.
.

[Markk]

Then call it Trump's war, I don’t care, the point is he was weening us away from foreign conflict…give the guy some credit on this, are you that biased? I even stated on another thread that Biden was doing okay in regards that we aren’t heavy into it. Trump did good on this.

Gotcha. He was weaning us away from that war by increasing our involvement in it.

This latest exchange is a perfect example to Honor…he should understand my point of what we were discussing, as a social experiment. (You won’t get it)

But anyways, is there anything Trump did that was a positive? Kevins responses were predictable, I called it, they will never change, but honestly what is a positive you can say about Trump?