In Exacting Retribution, Trump Aims at the Future as Well as the Past

[Hume]

By removing security protections from former officials facing credible death threats, he signaled that he was willing to impose potentially profound consequences on anyone he sees as having been insufficiently loyal. That included his former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, who helped lead the pandemic response

Trump’s Acts of Retribution Aim at the Future as Well as the Past

The president made good on promises to seek revenge against enemies during his first week back in power, signaling in the process that anyone who crosses him in the future could also suffer.

www.nytimes.com

Meanwhile, cops stopping drivers then know beat up cops will get executed.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Why? If they think they're threatened, they can hire personal security given they're drawing well into the six-figures on retirement.

 

[Hume]

Why? If they think they're threatened, they can hire personal security given they're drawing well into the six-figures on retirement.

Good point. Public officials deserve to be murdered for opposing Trump.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Good point. Public officials deserve to be murdered for opposing Trump.

Not at all. Public officials upon retirement are no longer public officials. Taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for a personal security detachment for them. Supreme court judges, House of Representatives, even Senators, don't get personal security detachments while serving, let alone after retiring. Why should these pompous asshole bureaucrats get one?

 

[Hume]

Not at all. Public officials upon retirement are no longer public officials. Taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for a personal security detachment for them. Supreme court judges, House of Representatives, even Senators, don't get personal security detachments while serving, let alone after retiring. Why should these pompous asshole bureaucrats get one?

Agree. Libs need to be murdered.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Agree. Libs need to be murdered.

 

[AProudLefty]

Why? If they think they're threatened, they can hire personal security given they're drawing well into the six-figures on retirement.

Trump KNOWS they're being threatened.

He's an asshole who doesn't care.

 

[Diogenes]

By removing security protections from former officials facing credible death threats, he signaled that he was willing to impose potentially profound consequences on anyone he sees as having been insufficiently loyal. That included his former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, who helped lead the pandemic response. Meanwhile, cops stopping drivers then know beat up cops will get executed.

Is that so?

 

[Hume]

Is that so?

go kill yourself

 

[Diogenes]

go kill yourself

No.

 

[Hume]

No.

go kill yourself

 

[Diogenes]

go kill yourself

No.

 

[AProudLefty]

Toying with someone gives meaning to one's meaningless life.

 

[Tbird19482]

Not at all. Public officials upon retirement are no longer public officials. Taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for a personal security detachment for them. Supreme court judges, House of Representatives, even Senators, don't get personal security detachments while serving, let alone after retiring. Why should these pompous asshole bureaucrats get one?

So dose that mean we shouldn't be providing protection for Trumps wife and kid?

 

[Hawkeye10]

The SS is a profoundly troubled agency, I am all in favor of lightening the workload by dropping people who never should have been given SS protection.

In fact lets have list of everyone they are currently watching. I would also like a comparison to past practices, I would not be shocked to learn that over the years the lists keep growing.

 

[Earl]

Let them eat cake.

They no longer work for the government. Let them face the same dangers that every other citizen faces.

 

[AProudLefty]

Let them eat cake.

They no longer work for the government. Let them face the same dangers that every other citizen faces.

So no protection for Trump's family?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Trump KNOWS they're being threatened.

He's an asshole who doesn't care.

It isn't his job or problem to protect them. Let them hire their own security if they feel they need it.

 

[AProudLefty]

It isn't his job or problem to protect them. Let them hire their own security if they feel they need it.

You don't deny it.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

So dose that mean we shouldn't be providing protection for Trumps wife and kid?

We should while he is President. Once he finishes serving, that's open to debate.