Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (17594)	5/9/2017 12:26:55 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 363834

>> You either don't know what corruption is or don't know much about Tammany Hall and Boss Tweed. I know T/H is one of your favorite topics and no, I just know the basics about it. But corruption is corruption. As to "Trump corruption" if there is evidence of it I'll call it as I see it. Just as I did with Hillary. There is simply no evidence, whatsoever, of corruption with Trump and frankly, I see little to suggest he has any interest in it. This is pretty simple: Neither Clinton nor Obama has ever held meaningful work other than outside the taxpayer dole. While they both served brief stints as lawyers, neither was any good at it and neither was successful. I have been deposed and examined on the stand a number of times by women from Rose Law Firm and they are formidable. Hillary Clinton was never a formidable lawyer. So, the question is, why was she being paid? More importantly, they both came out of government service with a HELL of a lot more money than they went in with. That to me suggests corruption, although it doesn't prove it. But large companies and foreign nations generally do not make these payments to people who continue to have government aspirations without expectation of something in return. If you see something that suggests corruption on Trump's part please let me know. Or anyone else here who isn't a nitwit, I would listen.