Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

Edited to add more information for posters:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Outgoing Ethics Chief: U.S. Is ‘Close to a Laughingstock’

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Outgoing Ethics Chief: U.S. Is ‘Close to a Laughingstock’

    Is this fake news? Does the Ethics Chief position require a liberal ideology? I'll let you decide.

    WASHINGTON — Actions by President Trump and his administration have created a historic ethics crisis, the departing head of the Office of Government Ethics said. He called for major changes in federal law to expand the power and reach of the oversight office and combat the threat.

    Walter M. Shaub Jr., who is resigning as the federal government’s top ethics watchdog on Tuesday, said the Trump administration had flouted or directly challenged long-accepted norms in a way that threatened to undermine the United States’ ethical standards, which have been admired around the world.

    “It’s hard for the United States to pursue international anticorruption and ethics initiatives when we’re not even keeping our own side of the street clean. It affects our credibility,” Mr. Shaub said in a two-hour interview this past weekend — a weekend Mr. Trump let the world know he was spending at a family-owned golf club that was being paid to host the U.S. Women’s Open tournament. “I think we are pretty close to a laughingstock at this point.”

    Mr. Shaub called for nearly a dozen legal changes to strengthen the federal ethics system: changes that, in many cases, he had not considered necessary before Mr. Trump’s election. Every other president since the 1970s, Republican or Democrat, worked closely with the ethics office, he said.

    A White House official dismissed the criticism, saying on Sunday that Mr. Shaub was simply promoting himself and had failed to do his job properly.
    Anyone who actually believes in the existence of sin will avoid lying about others and misrepresenting them.

  • #2
    Originally posted by America View Post
    Is this fake news? Does the Ethics Chief position require a liberal ideology? I'll let you decide.
    Sour grapes. He was appointed under Obama and was worthless as your brownie me-ssiah.
    Your left winger hate dynasty was absolute evil in it's damage with malice running the VA for example.

    He knew 5 years up and his getting to return were as likely as CNN going honest. Zero.


    Narcissists try to destroy my life with lies because theirs can be destroyed with truth.

    Comment


    • #3
      He's wrong. We're not "close" at all.

      We're waaaaaaaaaaaaaay past the bar.
      To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
      - Theodore Roosevelt

      Comment


      • #4
        Although I don't disagree that Trump is embarrassing, I am not inclined to put much stock into the words of a lifelong bureaucrat, whom I had never heard of until today.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
          He was appointed under Obama ...
          I believe he was appointed in 2006, which would have been George W.

          At any rate, it appears he knew he wouldn't be reinstated when his tenure ended in January, so he took a job as a lobbyist. That should be right up his alley since he has spent the bulk of his career swimming in the swamp.

          Again, I don't know anything about the guy other than what I have read today, but he doesn't impress me as a groundbreaking ethics superhero, as much as someone determined to stay in high-paying jobs in DC

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Ronson View Post
            Although I don't disagree that Trump is embarrassing, I am not inclined to put much stock into the words of a lifelong bureaucrat, whom I had never heard of until today.
            I can't convince you otherwise, of course. Still, you don't find it a little ... "disquieting" that someone like this is waving a red flag?

            You're not a Trumpanzee, but you're often skeptical of criticism of the president; this is a statement of fact, rather than a pretext for insult. How do YOU establish whether such criticism has merit or not?
            Anyone who actually believes in the existence of sin will avoid lying about others and misrepresenting them.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by America View Post
              I can't convince you otherwise, of course. Still, you don't find it a little ... "disquieting" that someone like this is waving a red flag?

              You're not a Trumpanzee, but you're often skeptical of criticism of the president; this is a statement of fact, rather than a pretext for insult. How do YOU establish whether such criticism has merit or not?
              Shaub is speaking his opinion beyond the scope of his office, when he talks about how the world views Trump. I can figure it out for myself how the world views him without the unqualified opinion of a disgruntled bureaucrat.

              Also, his motivations are suspect since his tenure at his post is nearing its end and he is unlikely to be retained (as mentioned in your link). He took a job as a lobbyist instead, which is a rather ethically-dubious position in itself.

              Having said all of this, Trump is most certainly disgracing the office since he refuses to divorce himself from his businesses, and refuses to disclose his tax returns. Although this is the first time I have seen a conflict of interest at the top post, I have seen at least one Secretary Of State who had a major conflict going on but apparently was never criticized by Shaub. Not just a little bit suspicious?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by America View Post
                Is this fake news? Does the Ethics Chief position require a liberal ideology? I'll let you decide.
                I agree with him. The credibility of the US in the world has been greatly diminished. Eight years of Obama did incalculable damage to our credibility.

                I don't believe Trump is much better, only slightly less awful than the alternative would have been.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Master Fwiffo View Post
                  He's wrong. We're not "close" at all.

                  We're waaaaaaaaaaaaaay past the bar.
                  And none of the world media is disagreeing with that, apart from the Russian newspapers.

                  ... always look on the bright side of life - Idle Cleese

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mike McK View Post

                    I agree with him. The credibility of the US in the world has been greatly diminished. Eight years of Obama did incalculable damage to our credibility.

                    I don't believe Trump is much better, only slightly less awful than the alternative would have been.
                    Wrong, the lack of world credibility has only occurred in the last seven months.
                    Last edited by juglans1; 07-17-17, 06:07 PM.
                    ... always look on the bright side of life - Idle Cleese

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by America View Post
                      Is this fake news?
                      OF course. I don't even have to read the article to know that!!!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                        Although I don't disagree that Trump is embarrassing, I am not inclined to put much stock into the words of a lifelong bureaucrat, whom I had never heard of until today.
                        If we don't have any reason to buy the opinions of those charged with ethical oversight, how do you propose we do ethical oversight, or do you imagine politicians themselves should have no ethical oversight? I'm just trying to understand what you think we should do, beyond your cynicism and bias towards "life-long bureaucrats". Can you conceive of an institution that does oversight but doesn't also require a bureaucratic structure?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Nouveau View Post

                          Sour grapes. He was appointed under Obama and was worthless as your brownie me-ssiah.
                          Your left winger hate dynasty was absolute evil in it's damage with malice running the VA for example.

                          He knew 5 years up and his getting to return were as likely as CNN going honest. Zero.


                          Narcissists try to destroy my life with lies because theirs can be destroyed with truth.
                          We understand that the very concepts of ethics are foreign to Trumpsters.
                          A Forum Trump Follower:

                          "Maybe the Jews invented the Nazi's. Some have suggested that. It's not so farfetched."

                          "Didn't the Mossad have something to do with 911?"

                          "If they don't want to get run down, maybe they should stay out of the street."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by juglans1 View Post
                            Wrong, the lack of world credibility has only occurred in the last seven months.
                            Fake News sez so

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Derrick View Post
                              If we don't have any reason to buy the opinions of those charged with ethical oversight, how do you propose we do ethical oversight, or do you imagine politicians themselves should have no ethical oversight? I'm just trying to understand what you think we should do, beyond your cynicism and bias towards "life-long bureaucrats". Can you conceive of an institution that does oversight but doesn't also require a bureaucratic structure?
                              Elsewhere in this thread I have commented on Shaub's possible motivations, and his lack of qualifications to lecture Americans on what foreigners might think of Trump.

                              Yes,an outside non-partisan commission should be convened periodically to address new challenges. Not someone who quits his lofty "ethics" post to become a lobbyist.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X