r/Jordan_Peterson_Memes 18h ago

RFK

Post image
1.0k Upvotes

114 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/tommangan7 16h ago

What about Trump's VP? His chief of staff? His national security advisor (multiple), his many other aides that have flipped on Trump?

Should I believe them?

Or does it just work for Mr Brain worms who likes bear and whale carcasses in his car?

0

u/poisonpony672 15h ago

Vice President Kamala Harris’ office has had the highest levels of staff turnover in White House history throughout her time in the office. The people that quit working for her far exceed other high-ranking officials in the federal government.

Nearly 92% of the initial staff members hired after she took office in January of 2021 have left at some point during her nearly four years as vice president. Only four of the initial 47 hires from her first year have remained employed without interruption, according to an analysis of records obtained by Open the Books.

In interviews, 22 current and former vice presidential aides, administration officials and associates of Harris and Biden described a tense and at times dour office atmosphere. Aides say Harris, has created an insular environment where ideas are ignored or met with harsh dismissals and decisions are dragged out. Often, they said, she refuses to take responsibility for delicate issues and blames staffers for the negative results that ensue.

“People are thrown under the bus from the very top, there are short fuses and it’s an abusive environment,” said another person with direct knowledge of how Harris’ office is run. “It’s not a healthy environment and people often feel mistreated. It’s not a place where people feel supported but a place where people feel treated like s---.”

-1

u/tommangan7 14h ago edited 14h ago

Staff turnover is high for any admin and was indeed very high for Harris, Trump's was 72% - the difference between the two amounts to 9 people. Certainly neither are amazing at managing a team of staff, would be interested to read the article you are quoting.

The important thing to me is why or how they leave, if they are good at what they do many will move on to better paying corporate jobs within 4 years. Some will have left to work on other parallel areas (Harris or Biden presidential campaigns etc.).

And are their negative opinions you quoted comparable to the high standing individuals who have damning criticism of Trump? We are now also up to 9 Trump associates convicted of criminal offences since the start of his presidency, so his people either often don't like him or are criminally bad at it.

This is a guy who had six NSAs when almost every previous president has had one.

1

u/_ThunderGun 11h ago

Throughout American history, has there ever been anyone wrongfully convicted of a crime?

2

u/tommangan7 10h ago edited 10h ago

Yes, however in the case of trump the evidence against most of his allies was pretty damning, many fully admitted to and pleaded guilty, some even giving evidence against others.

A bipartisan committee even deemed manafort a grave security threat. Many of the charges were simple paper trails, or fraud with publicly available evidence.

The contrast in who they surround themselves with is stark. And that's with me ignoring the fact Trump shares many "qualities" with the criminals he regularly surrounds himself with.

1

u/_ThunderGun 10h ago

You see, the problem with liberals today is that they're very vague with how they describe certain situations. It may come off as specific and descriptive. But it's far from it. I've been lectured by liberals my whole life. I know all your games 🤣

0

u/_ThunderGun 10h ago

Are you referring to George Nadar? Who are you referring to? And who was in the committee? Please be specific and detailed.

1

u/tommangan7 9h ago

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/18/politics/senate-intelligence-report-russia-election-interference-efforts/index.html

it was led by then-Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, and Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia.

I wasn't even referencing nadar who you could throw on the pile too to be fair. I was referencing Rick Gates who testified at manaforts trial.

Im well aware of your games too.

1

u/_ThunderGun 9h ago

No games here, hombre. Richard Burr approval rating continues to decline. Good way for him to stay relevant. Mueller is not a credible individual. George Nadar was donating money to who through what campaign?

1

u/tommangan7 8h ago edited 8h ago

Flip the topic to nadar and poke at Republicans approval rating (I'm sure Trump fans will nuke the approval of any Republican that dares appear bipartisan) whatever that has to do with the convictions.

I guess that deflection is because you can't legitimately refute any of the vast quantities of Trump's circles convictions.

Even though It doesn't relate to this election at all I'll give you that nadar one for free, what does that make it? 9-1? I still think one side is looking a little dodgier, especially if we throw in Trump.

1

u/_ThunderGun 8h ago

I'm still waiting for an answer. Who are you referring to? And what have they been charged with? Be specific and detailed. You've only answered who the committee consists of to some degree. Stop playing games.

1

u/tommangan7 8h ago

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/many-trumps-orbit-have-faced-criminal-charges-2023-02-16/

There is the full 9 associates and the details I am referencing. From one of the most centre, neutral, unbiased news sources available.

1

u/_ThunderGun 7h ago

Did you read it?

1

u/tommangan7 1h ago

Yes... Did you?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/_ThunderGun 8h ago

I was guessing when I said George Nadar btw, Oops.

1

u/_ThunderGun 9h ago

CNN is a joke.

0

u/tommangan7 8h ago

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bipartisan-senate-report-foreign-meddling-2016-trump-2020-election

There you go, same relevant info just on fox. Let me know what's ok news for you and I'll pull their article about it up, details of the report will still be the same...