world

Trump White House setting turnover records, bracing for more

42 Comments
By JONATHAN LEMIRE and ZEKE MILLER

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

42 Comments
Login to comment

Right on.

Keep everyone on their toes and bring in fresh blood every now and then to spice things up.

The most important thing is that Jared and Ivanka stay.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

More evidence of the obvious: Trump is a crap leader.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

No one in their right mind could ever have thought Trump would be anything but the monumental screwup he has proven to be.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Being a CEO of a branding company is VERY different from being a POTUS.

After the election, a friend who was a die-hard Trump supporter asked me for a CV and asked how much it would take to get me on-board. I said there wasn't any number that would get me into that administration.

I feel bad for people who accept those jobs believing someone acting like a 12 yr old will change.

I bet none of those people mind being held accountable for results that are actually possible. President Trump clearly lives in a fantasy golf game. http://trumpgolfcount.com/ 88 days so far.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Truth be told, Trump appointed some real idiots who were then fired, and most of the other relatively sane people in the White House quit after realizing the realities of working for a moron like Trump. As the man himself would say, SAD!!

7 ( +7 / -0 )

No one in their right mind could ever have thought Trump would be anything but the monumental screwup he has proven to be.

He is? How so?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Examples:

Reince Priebus - savagely and cruelly axed as a sacrifice for Trump's failings;

Sean Spicer - quit in disgust moments after Trump hired as communications director Anthony Scaramucci, who in turn resigned 10 days later after demonstrating how unfit he was for the job (though his lovely quotes remain);

Michael Flynn - Let go reluctantly as he knows too much - and he eventually spilled it all to Mueller.

There are more who were axed or resigned in disgust, and still more crucial positions that have never been filled due to incompetence. This will create problems.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Reince Priebus - savagely and cruelly axed as a sacrifice for Trump's failings; 

If you are useless to any President and you are a source of leaking critical information to the media, I’d run you out ASAP as well.

Sean Spicer - quit in disgust moments after Trump hired as communications director Anthony Scaramucci, who in turn resigned 10 days later after demonstrating how unfit he was for the job (though his lovely quotes remain);

I liked Spicer, but he was a bit combative, not really good as a communications director. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a whole lot better, especially the way she shuts down the antagonistic Trump hating press.

Michael Flynn - Let go reluctantly as he knows too much - and he eventually spilled it all to Mueller.

That was not the reason why he was fired. He directly lied to the face of his VP, Pence. You can’t do that, that was the main reason, not including his lies and ties to Russia business dealings.

There are more who were axed or resigned in disgust, and still more crucial positions that have never been filled due to incompetence. This will create problems.

Yeah, so I hear, but you didn’t give me any REAL reasons, you’re not saying anything that hasn’t happened through any administration.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Something "that hasn't happened through any administration"? One word: Javanka.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Trump is an intelligent man. If I remember well, he is the third US IQ. Those men and women work very fast. The team around them is run to the ground if their are not top notch level. Their work 300% percent the normal time without breaking a sweat. That is their normal walk in the park. The turn over is there to find the fastest ones. If they stay they will have good tuition and big bucks standard promotion.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Hm... sounding more and more like the Scottish play.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The American voters elected a businessman and not a career political wonk. Those who have never spent a day working in corporate America and instead relied on generational government handouts will never understand that this is how things are done in the business world. . . .

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

If I remember well, he is the third US IQ

I don't think even Trump in his most outrageous grandstanding moments has made this claim.

Can't understand why anyone close to him would call him a moron.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Why is the turnover so high?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The American voters elected a businessman and not a career political wonk. 

Tex, that argument might be persuasive save for the fact that each fired individual was replaced by a political wonk. Wonkery works.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

When people not performing their function as the boss expects, you get rid of them. Nothing new there.

Thought liberals hated all those fired people anyway?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Tex, that argument might be persuasive save for the fact that each fired individual was replaced by a political wonk. Wonkery works.

But they are not the President, so it’s all good.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

History's verdict sneak preview: "Dotard Trump, thrown in at the deep end, drowned. Did not even last 4 years."

4 ( +4 / -0 )

When people not performing their function as the boss expects, you get rid of them. Nothing new there.

Thought liberals hated all those fired people anyway?

Two points:

Trump is not the "boss" in the term that he thinks, as he'll soon learn;

"Liberals" (aka those who choose country over party) may dislike the person but respect the function.
6 ( +6 / -0 )

He decides who his staff and cabinet are so he is the “boss” of that.

The function is still being performed just by someone else more to Trump’s liking.

So who did Trump remove that liberals thought should have stayed?

So the definition of liberal is now “country before party”? Bwaaaahaha would that also include country before illegal immigrants? Doubtful.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Oh my god that Trump is horrible! He replaced some of this staff and every.single.one.of.them who was removed we liberals had advocated for their removal.

How dare Trump do what we asked for and said was the correct thing to do. Let’s make fun of him now for doing it!

How’s Bannon firing now? Let me guess, it was now unjustified, he is a paragon of virtue and he lost his job cause he dared to “speak to power”?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

BlacklabelToday  02:27 pm JST

Oh my god that Trump is horrible! He replaced some of this staff and every.single.one.of.them who was removed we liberals had advocated for their removal.

You're really on a mission to misunderstand what people are saying about this, aren't you. No one is angry that Trump is hemorrhaging staff. We're laughing at him for having the highest turnover in modern history. The big thing Trumpets were saying from before the election was how Trump may be an idiot, but his experience in business would mean he can hire the smartest staff ever. Turns out he can't even get his sub-par staff to stick around. What a clown!

5 ( +5 / -0 )

So who did Trump remove that liberals thought should have stayed?

That's not for the Liberals to choose. The actual people don't really matter so much, rather we're more interested in the ineptitude of the administration in being able to choose quality people and keep them.

Remember the whole 'drain the swamp' thing? Well he has had to drain some of the swamp alright, unfortunately it was pollution he had put in the swamp himself.

It's up to the Republicans to figure out how to do it right. The Democrats are the opposition now.

You seem to be bitter than the Democrats are successfully opposing, while the Republicans are failing to figure out how to do it right.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

So the definition of liberal is now “country before party”?

An increasing number of people are finding it so. Cross the Trump juggernaut and see what happens to you, no matter where you lie on the political spectrum.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Santa only gives out sucky Mr. Pocheetohead toys to those too naughty to qualify for a load of coal.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

How’s Bannon firing now?

He’s now ‘sloppy Steve’ if you don’t mind. Trump threw his potty at him earlier.

Not a great judge of character this Trump fella. The composition of the swamp may change from week to week but it still smells rank.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Well I guess the new book is pure fiction or fake very fake news right?

Or maybe wolfy was working for killary or Obama ?

well the orange one is probably going to throw the biggest temper tantrum to date!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Successfully opposing? More like whining as policy after policy gets implemented without your side input because you prefer to oppose instead of working together. But however you see it.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

More like whining as policy after policy gets implemented without your side input because you prefer to oppose instead of working together. 

Aside from executive actions (the same Repubs excoriated Obama for), all Trump has to show for his first year in office (with zero up at bat) is a massively unpopular tax law.

It's not whining; it's representation of the public will (Trump lost by 3,000,000 votes, after all, and has not gained in popularity since). Good luck to government dysfunction as a due to mismanagement as a GOP strategy.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

So again, what has all this resistance and but Russia nonsense actually prevented from happening? other than healthcare which took 3 republicans help to block?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

81 achievements and 11 Obama “legacies” gone in 1 year with 3 or 7 more years to go.

so what did you successfully resist against again? Plus a lot of these achievements are actually good but your “resistance” prevented you from being a part of them. Good luck winning elections voting against tax breaks.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year-one-list-81-major-trump-achievements-11-obama-legacy-items-repealed/article/2644159

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Bass4Funk, I left you a comment on the other Trump thing today..I appreciated your comment about keeping guns out of idiots hands. When credit is due... I don't see the press as Trump hating, however. Don has brought this on himself. And his Roy Cohn wish? Of all people. I'm not interested in the small talk in the book. I am interested in whether of not there is obstruction of justice, or an attempt at it by trying to keep Sessions around for Trump to be protected. That is not the attorney general's job. We are learning that Don Mcgahn was pressuring Sessions to not recuse himself. As an attorney, the president is not McGahn's client, the office of the presidency is his client. That's a huge difference. Mcgahn drove the Federal Election Commission into a ditch to undermine our election laws, he did a direct assault on the ethics program, and now we're learning he attacked the department of justice. If you think Walter Schaub, who was the last Senior Director of Ethics has an understanding of proper prcedures and behavior, see what he has to say about Don McGahn. If anything, I think the big issue the left and the press has with Trump is his ethics. That's not "hating". Maybe it's just bigshotits billionaire hotshot style, but if it breaks the law, and or weakens our government, it has consequences. It ain't any means to get the end you want. The Means Is The End.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

He’s now ‘sloppy Steve’ if you don’t mind. Trump threw his potty at him earlier.

He doesn't use a potty. He "turns down" the bed himself.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

You seem to be bitter than the Democrats are successfully opposing, while the Republicans are failing to figure out how to do it right.

Ok, so what do the Democrats propose and besides opposing, what are their solutions? I mean besides imposing more income redistribution?

Of all people. I'm not interested in the small talk in the book. I am interested in whether of not there is obstruction of justice, or an attempt at it by trying to keep Sessions around for Trump to be protected.

And why not? All the Presidents had an AG to protect them. Holder deeply protected and shielded Obama. Bush had John Ashcroft, so I don’t see any difference at all here. Sessions should have never accused himself, I get he didn’t want to give the illusion there is some impropriety going on, but he made a huge mistake in doing so. If the roles were reversed and Obama were in office, No way Holder would allow anyone to get close to him.

I don’t mind then wanting to investigate if there was any collusion going on, but look how long it’s been, Mueller isn’t dumb, the guy is smart, even he knows, there’s no collusion going on with Trump, because with the team he has in place, they are trying so, so hard to find anything to remove Trump, if they had something, we would have already known about it, a long time ago. But now the entire thing is falling apart and Mueller knows that if he doesn’t wrap it up soon, he could destroy his own legacy, the way Geraldo did with that Al Capone vault.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

even he knows, there’s no collusion going on with Trump, because with the team he has in place, they are trying so, so hard to find anything to remove Trump, if they had something, we would have already known about it, a long time ago. But now the entire thing is falling apart and Mueller knows that if he doesn’t wrap it up soon, he could destroy his own legacy

What evidence do you have of this?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

What evidence do you have of this?

common sense.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

hat do the Democrats propose and besides opposing, what are their solutions?

The Democrats don’t need to propose anything. They are the opposition. Their job is to oppose, its the team that’s in power to come up with solutions. Why would the Democrats want to give them solutions or work with the republicans? If there’s anything learned during the obama administration it is that being obstructionist is a valid strategy back into power.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

common sense.

Common nonsense.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

 I mean besides imposing more income redistribution?

This has never, ever occurred. If you disagree, please provide the when and how.

 if they had something, we would have already known about it, a long time ago

This is not how investigations work. It is like saying to the police, "You've been investigating why that corpse had a gunshot to the back of the head for 48 hours now, but haven't released any information about the investigation yet. That means there is nothing to see here. Move along." Straight out of South Park. Solid logic.

The Whitewater investigation began in January 1994 and ended in September 1998, at the earliest. That's four years, eight months. Mueller has only been at it for about eight months.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Look at all the records Trump is breaking as president:

Most inane, immature tweets.

Most churn of administration staff.

Lowest approval ratings of any modern president.

Most blatant lies.

Most support for racists.

Most bankruptcies.

Most ex-wives.

Most time spent golfing.

Most taxpayer money funneled into his own pocket through constantly staying at his own properties.

Most narcissistic..

Most in love with Fox "news."

Most McDonald's comsumed.

Most hairspray.

Kuddos to Trump! ROFL. #I don't really read.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I don’t mind then wanting to investigate if there was any collusion going on, but look how long it’s been

Eight months. Mueller was appointed in May. It's a blink of an eye. People have already been charged, people have pleaded guilty, and people are cooperating with an ongoing investigation. Are you suggesting that Mueller has to wrap it up before he's finished with it? That would be odd, especially when hooking Flynn makes it a certainty that he is going to take down/flip other people of equal or higher importance.

You will go on about collusion, but there are other things to consider as well - rather juicier things as far as the FBI is concerned, because as you love to point out, collusion isn't a crime. So you can look at some of the charges that have been laid so far to get an idea of what's to come. Money laundering most certainly is a crime, and if the investigation turns up more of that, they'll either use it to flip people, or throw the book at them.

Perhaps you feel serenely confident that they won't find any such thing as dirty money in Kushner or Trump's past. I'm buggered if I would be though: a President who for some reason and against all recent precedent doesn't want people to see his tax returns; whose son has boasted about how much of their money comes from Russia; whose son in law is suspected of receiving money from dubious sources...There's a lot to work on there, and Mueller has the people to work on it. And that's just one thread of the investigation.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I don’t mind then wanting to investigate if there was any collusion going on, but look how long it’s been

But nothing. If you don't mind an investigation, stop complaining about it. Just as a reminder, the average special investigations take 904 days on average. Monica Lewinsky took 2000+. http://www.businessinsider.com/how-long-special-prosecutor-mueller-trump-2017-6

Why does Donny get a break in your mind?

After all, if there is no collusion, why worry about the investigation? You and I know very well that Donny is a pretty terrible person.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites