318
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2024
318 points (95.7% liked)
politics
19088 readers
1986 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Your rental car doesn't have its VIN painted on the tail in large lettering and publically searchable.
It's called vetting your suppliers. To make sure someone you're using isn't a potential liability.
Give me a fucking break lmao you know this from all the private jets you charter?
Whether I charter planes has nothing to do with vetting suppliers. I do vet my suppliers as a regular citizen. You do the same thing all the time. I check the reviews of various car rental agencies in the area I'm going to see which are better or worse. That is a form of vetting.
A Presidential campaign and former Presdient would 100% have access to more information than basic reviews. Given the public spectacle of Epstein, they should have information about where assets that Trump may come into contact with in the future are located to prevent this exact scenario.
I can only tolerate so much speculative bullshit. Provide one single piece of evidence. None of y’all have, the few of you pushing this nonsense all consistently refuse to.
It was a liquidated asset that was transferred to another company which rents out charter planes. Why the fuck would they choose to fly in Epstein’s plane? It’s not like they bought it off of him. It’s not like they got a special deal. They rented a charter jet just like all these people do and no one would ever think who owned it or used it. You need evidence to prove that this was at least negligent. Or You need evidence that this was intentional. You need fucking anything to grasp to other than the ridiculous straws you’re pulling on.
Trump advance are pieces of shit. But y’all are just making shit up
I can only assume you replied to the wrong comment. I never said it was intentional. I never even implied it was intentional. I said the Trump political team is incompetent for letting the company use that specific aircraft with the history it has. His team being filled with incompetent people isn't exactly a hot take.
Him using the plane isn't really an issue, you're right, it's just a charter plane (that I hope they deep cleaned given its history). But the fact his staff didn't prevent the usage of that specific aircraft, given the context, just shows they aren't capable of seeing potential issues ahead of time that they easily could avoid.
Political staff normally try to vet suppliers and partners to minimize surprises like this. They normally keep track of issues from a politician's past that could cause more issues in the future. Given Trump's personal history with Epstein, and specifically the issue of Epstein's plane being a primary piece of his pedophilic empire known to the general public, one would have thought they would keep tabs on that.
Stop making shit up.
What are you talking about? What do you think I an making up?
I'm not making any claims. Well, other than Trump's staff being filled with idiots, but I'm pretty sure that's just a well-known fact at this point.
That is a completely different argument than "Trump purposefully choose to be on a former Epstein plane because... reasons" that the other guy is making. Yes, we all know the Trump team is inept, hence why they hang around the guy. The fact that they didn't vet their supplier isn't proof of some conspiracy.