PBS does not lean left. By all accounts, they are a some what middle of the road with conservative leanings. NPR is the same with leanings to the left. Al Jazeera and BBC are foreign but international news organizations that look at the issues inside the United States with a different perspective. That different perspective can be very informative in determining where my thoughts and feelings fall on a topic.
Let me ask you this: Do you find it at all troubling that Dick Cheney's oil company Haliburton was awarded billion dollar contracts in the wake of the Iraq War? Do you find it troubling that Trump's families businesses have, for whatever reason, not been subjected to the tariffs and other implications of the trade wars being waged? Do you find it troubling that Donald Trump has continued to ignore the emoluments clause and continues to use the office of the presidency to generate wealth for himself (btw, Jimmy Carter was forced to sell his family peanut farm that had been passed to him from his father when he ascended to the White House)?
What the Biden's did, according to Federal Government oversight committees, was legal and did not warrant as much as an investigation at that time.
We can agree to disagree on NPR and PBS. I have no problem with BBC or other foreign outlets. I lived in the UK for two years and am very familiar with BBC, but they tend to be Left of center, as well. It is interesting to get foreign perspectives on what goes on in the USA, but Al Jazeera? Really? I have visions of Baghdad Bob popping up on the screen, telling us that Iraq will annihilate us, if we cross their border. (just kidding) I like to see how other countries view what's happening in the US, but I wouldn't let it influence my position on many issues. Foreign countries have their own agendas, which may or may not be in step with ours.
I believe that Cheney was no longer a part of Haliburton, when he was VP. Allegedly, the reason Halliburton got the contract was that it was the only company large enough to provide all the services required in Iraq. No, I'm not shocked that people in public service use their positions to enrich themselves. I'm not surprised that Congressmen without two nickles to rub together, leave Congress as multimillionaires. Nancy Pelosi is worth over $100 Million. HRC said they were broke, when they left the WH. Now she and Bill are worth around $300 Million. Even Bernie, the avowed Socialist, is worth over $13 Million. The only people that can fix the problem are the ones capitalizing on the corruption. Welcome to politics.
There's a world of difference between selling a peanut farm and dissolving a $10 Billion real estate empire. Trying to equate the two is just silly. Trump is giving up $1.6 million in salary over his term. It's ludicrous to think that he's going to make some windfall profits off military aircrews that are staying at Turnberry. The Left is going out of their minds thinking that there is some sort of corruption associated with that. Trump has probably lost hundreds of millions of dollars in missed opportunities, because he's President. I don't think that he took the job to enrich himself. I think it was part ego and part trying to fix the mess that we're in. He's actually fixing things that were just cans that previous Presidents kicked down the road.
Apparently, you don't like the tariffs. What's the alternative? Do we just let China pillage us, until they've stolen all our manufacturing and intellectual properties? I'm glad we finally have someone in the WH that recognizes the danger of letting this continue and is willing to do something about it. There will be some rough sledding, but if he can level the trading field, we will benefit greatly. He's also renegotiating a lot of trade deals successfully, which benefits our economy and creates more jobs in the US. He's already got most of the NATO countries contributing their 2% GDP toward military readiness, rather than have the US pick up the tab. As I said, he's actually getting things done that previous Presidents didn't want to touch.
The Chinese government would be the one placing tariffs on Trump's properties. Do you really expect Trump to put tariffs on his own properties? To what end? Makes no sense.
"What the Biden's did, according to Federal Government oversight committees, was legal and did not warrant as much as an investigation
at that time."
There are actually laws against buying influence and I don't believe that anyone could make a case for why Hunter Biden was appointed to a Ukrainian gas company's BoD or why the Chinese government decided to invest $1.5 Billion with Hunter Biden's firm, if it wasn't to buy influence with VP Joe Biden. Whether they got their money's worth remains to be determined. Unfortunately, the establishment politicians protect their own, regardless of party. Trump threatens the establishment politicians, which is why he's getting so much resistance from both sides of the aisle and why I tend to support him. The swamp needs to get shaken up.
