Essentially Trump is replacing lawyer politicians with highly successful businessmen

Padding post with Gas/Oil or Wall St buddies is one thing, especially big donors , padding post with science deniers is another, but hey I didn't vote for the guy.

I saw on SNL Trump appointed Walter White to lead the DEA.

Sounds about right.

originally posted by: Xeven

Even Hillary is a disbarred lawyer.

Um no she isnt. She has not been disbarred. Where did you come up with that one?

well you know what shakespear said about the lawyers dont you?

The problem i see is that none of these people where voted in by anyone.


Trump has in effect turned the USA into a overt corperocracy.

a reply to: Aazadan

I certainly don't think lawyers and former lawyers should be exclusively selected for these positions. In fact, I think the majority of people in my ideal Cabinet wouldn't be lawyers. I'm just pointing out why so many other politicians and administrators select people with law backgrounds.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Xeven

Even Hillary is a disbarred lawyer.

Um no she isnt. She has not been disbarred. Where did you come up with that one?

She actually was by the Arkansas bar association. But not for illegal activities like BIll Clinton his suspension of his license was for activities. Her license was suspended for failure to meet requirements. Basically not continuing required education So she is banned from practicing law as well. For her she would have to resubmit and pass the bar. Bill has the same option since his original suspension was for 5 years but he is also barred from the supreme court meaning that its very unlikely they would approve him to retake the bar but in theory it could happen.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Aazadan

I certainly don't think lawyers and former lawyers should be exclusively selected for these positions. In fact, I think the majority of people in my ideal Cabinet wouldn't be lawyers. I'm just pointing out why so many other politicians and administrators select people with law backgrounds.

I think Lawyers have a tendency to always look for loop holes and options as a lawyer its great but as a politician they end up working against the people as they find ways around things like the constitution. So in politics they can do a lot of damage but along those same lines if they have something they want to get done they can find ways to make it happen. So its a double edged sword id say.

"It really is a coup. He really is in large part draining the swamp of lawyers"

I can´t remember the "enraged, concerned and left-behind" people voting for him because of draining the swamp of lawyers. I thought i heard and read that it was about kicking the establishment in the back, to learn TPTB a lesson.
Well, good that "successful businessmen" are "not establishment", are "not the rich elite" that doesn´t care for anybody else than itself and it´s money bin...

"I am very hopeful these highly successful and intelligent men will do much better for the US than the lawyers have"

Yes, because "successful businessmen" are worldwide known to care for "enraged, concerned" and most of all "left-behind" people. Because "successful businessmen" are know to be the most trustworthy people on earth.
"Successful businessmen" are successful when they make a lot of money, by dodging taxes, by exploiting workers. But if they need money, taxpayers money is good to save their businesses, ask Trump!

Why can´t you Trump voters admit that you were fooled? When Trump is obvisiously not planning to drain the swamp, like promised for votes, but only changing the gators in the swamp, his voters say: But this gators are good gators. Everything Trump does is of advantage for the "concerned, enraged and left-behind" people.

Some said it has something to do with education. The lower the education, the more the concerned, enraged and left-behind people are willing to vote for those rightwinger "saviours", are willing to believe their lies and promises.
First i thought that this is a too cheap reason, they can´t be all just uneducated.

But since the alleged billionair Trump is gathering his billionair friends around him, since he took all the promises back he made for votes, hours after he was elected, since you can see who is nominated by Trump and his voters still are defending him, i really think it must have to do something with education and intelligence.

People have eyes but are not willing to see, sad!

originally posted by: Xeven
Essentially Trump is replacing lawyer politicians with highly successful businessmen

Selfish greedy corrupt thieves and scoundrels replacing selfish greedy thieves and scoundrels....
Oh nooooo.....
Not again!

So, here we have a thread full of people who are happily ushering in the corporatocracy. That's just great. I mean, the corporations have always cared about the little people in the past so let's just wave their flags for them and give them all the power. Gross.

a reply to: okrian

They didn't have a problem with it when Dubya Bush did it. So we shouldn't be surprised that they're ok with it when another Republican does it. Dubya even had the Goldman Sachs CEO at the time (Henry "Hank" Paulson) join his Cabinet! (Yes, that's the same guy who was the architect for the Wall street bailouts that people here claimed to be against.)

Ok...so apparently a LOT of people on ATS are unaware of Goldman Sachs' and other big financial institutions role in the collapse of 2008 as well as being blind to the fact that most billion dollar companies like oil, gas, etc literally # on you and I.

I'm..I'm speechless at the ignorance/offset from reality in this post.

I mean..trump himself went on negatively about Hilary's ties to Goldman. Does this hypocrisy mean nothing to you?

And no, I'm not a libtard Hilary lover. She's awful.

Open your eyes for the love of god people. You all sound like brainwashed zombies.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Xeven

Lawmakers and lawyers go hand in hand. You literally have one profession that decides and writes the rules, while the other profession learns and applies them. So it makes sense to choose lawyers to help craft new laws, since they may know the existing laws better than the lawmakers themselves.

But the job of the Administration is to put those laws into practice. For that, you want businessmen.

Also, "knowing the existing laws" doesn't necessarily mean that any new laws proposed are better. If anything, it means they are being made without any real knowledge or understanding of the actual impact. The expression "law of unintended consequences" isn't just a pithy phrase.

Trump appears to be setting the Administration up to run as a business - and large businesses tend to have in-house counsel available for providing legal advice to the decision makers. In fact, isn't that the entire point of the Attorney General's position in the cabinet?

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
"Successful businessmen" are successful when they make a lot of money, by dodging taxes, by exploiting workers.

Ahhh... now it all becomes clear. The only route to success is through being a bad person? Really?

Explain to me why so many "successful businessmen" aren't being prosecuted for dodging taxes? Is it because they are actually following the tax laws properly and utilising them to their benefit?

Do you go down to your local tax office and offer to pay more tax than the law says you have to pay? No? Fancy that.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

Thank you!

originally posted by: crazyewok
The problem i see is that none of these people where voted in by anyone.


Trump has in effect turned the USA into a overt corperocracy.

Every president picks their own cabinet.
Then Congress has to approve the picks for some of the positions.

All I can say is, we tried it the lawyer politician way so let's try it Trumps way.

I'm all for it. YAY!!!

originally posted by: EvillerBob

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Xeven

Lawmakers and lawyers go hand in hand. You literally have one profession that decides and writes the rules, while the other profession learns and applies them. So it makes sense to choose lawyers to help craft new laws, since they may know the existing laws better than the lawmakers themselves.

But the job of the Administration is to put those laws into practice. For that, you want businessmen.

I disagree with that reasoning. I don't think it's a coincidence that businessman talk to their lawyers in order to know what they can and can't do in the first place. For example, if you want to start a company in a new region, who would you talk to to find out the legal requirements to set up and maintain a company there? If anything, lawyers are on the front lines of knowing how laws are applied in practice because of the court cases they battle and research.

And with how long it takes to write and pass new laws, it'd be much easier to consult good lawyers to know if a policy idea can legally be implemented with existing laws first. As in, why fight a 2yr battle through your State or federal legislature to get your new policy passed when you can simply use Paragraph 3 Clause 14 of a 1987 regulation to rationalize it?

Also, "knowing the existing laws" doesn't necessarily mean that any new laws proposed are necessarily better. If anything, it means they are being made without any real knowledge or understanding of the actual impact. The expression "law of unintended consequences" isn't just a pithy phrase.

And that's the difference between a lawmaker and a lawyer. Lawmakers may have their own ideas of how a law may be implemented in theory, but lawyers are the ones who deal with the actual impacts of those laws. It's like the lawmaker passing a "stop and frisk" law compared to the law firm that has to defend a police department or victim in court. I'd think that successful and unsuccessful court or arbitration judgments would be the best way to determine the actual impact of a law, right?

Trump appears to be setting the Administration up to run as a business - and large businesses tend to have in-house counsel available for providing legal advice to the decision makers. In fact, isn't that the entire point of the Attorney General's position in the cabinet?

Correct to a point. The Attorney General and Justice Dept are like the in-house legal counsel for the President and Executive Branch. But I'm talking more about knowing the laws in each specific field and how they're applied in daily life, specifically so you'd know what to fix.

It would be like picking a tax lawyer that prosecutes offshore account holders to lead the IRS. They'd know exactly what loopholes are being exploited & upheld in a court of law, so they'd know what "holes" to "plug". Or picking a former labor rights activist turned labor law-specializing lawyer to lead the Department of Labor. That person wouldn't simply know what's legal or illegal like the generic Justice Dept lawyers; they'd specialize in specific labor laws and the different interpretations of them that have been upheld in court.

To everyone on this thread complaining that Trump is picking successful business people...

Did you want him to select failures?
Who do you think should do the job?

He is filling most positions with people who have not made politics a career.
He picked people who will work on their assigned departments to clean them up.
They will organize, trim excess spending, and stop coddling the SJW's.
They have been successful at doing these things on a large scale in the real world.

I consider that a start at draining the swamp.