Why is this not surprising?

[jon-nyc]

It’s so transparent.

[Catseye3]

The Guardian: "Donald Trump is planning an early morning sendoff event for himself at a military airfield in Maryland on Wednesday several hours before his successor, Joe Biden, is inaugurated as the 46th US president at the Capitol in Washington DC.

For his last presidential ceremony, Trump reportedly wants an ostentatious military parade and an official armed forces farewell as the commander-in-chief, as well as a large crowd of supporters, selected backers and current and former officials in his administration and their guests at a huge red-carpet affair.

But latest reports indicate that Trump, who is facing an impeachment trial in the Senate and a number of criminal and civil investigations, will not be afforded a big military sendoff just two weeks after a deadly insurrection at the US Capitol that followed his exhorting supporters to fight to overturn the election."
More: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/18/trump-sendoff-ceremony-biden-inauguration-day

So while Trump was planning this big sendoff for himself (including, according to some reports, a 21-gun salute, could you barf), Pence spent the weekend traveling around the country thanking the troops.

[Doctor Phibes]

Mike Pence has done himself a lot of good over the last 4 weeks.

[89th]

@doctor-phibes said in Why is this not surprising?:

Mike Pence has done himself a lot of good over the last 4 weeks.

Agreed.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Why is this not surprising?:

Mike Pence has done himself a lot of good over the last 4 weeks.

BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!

[Aqua Letifer]

@george-k said in Why is this not surprising?:

@doctor-phibes said in Why is this not surprising?:

Mike Pence has done himself a lot of good over the last 4 weeks.

BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!

They're not mutually exclusive. That fact is still hilarious.

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Why is this not surprising?:

@doctor-phibes said in Why is this not surprising?:

Mike Pence has done himself a lot of good over the last 4 weeks.

BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!

Sorry, I broke the TNCR rule of never saying anything remotely positive about somebody who isn't on my side.

[Catseye3]

@doctor-phibes said in Why is this not surprising?:

Sorry, I broke the TNCR rule of never saying something remotely positive about somebody who isn't on my side.

Really, that was very careless of you, Phibes.

Go sit in the corner.

[Catseye3]

@aqua-letifer said in Why is this not surprising?:

That fact is still hilarious.

I've never found it hilarious. I do think it's kind of weird.

He'd have to relax this rule if he ever won the presidency. Can you imagine the workaround?

Okay, that's funny.

[Jolly]

It's not weird. It's pretty smart.

Over the years, I've worked for a couple of guys like that. Sure does do away with baseless accusations...

[Mik]

In this climate it is the only smart thing to do politically.

It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.

[Catseye3]

@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:

It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.

If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.

[Doctor Phibes]

I have a rule never to be alone with an American unless a psychiatrist is present.

[jon-nyc]

@george-k said in Why is this not surprising?:

BUT HE WON'T BE SEEN WITH A WOMAN WITHOUT HIS WIFE PRESENT!

I think this rule is genius because you save so much money not having to take your mistress out. You can just say “look, I can’t take you to dinner, I’ll just come over.” At most you’re out the cost of a bottle of wine and a box of condoms.

[jodi]

@catseye3 completely agree. I have never ever worried about my husband being seen or being alone in any space with another person who happens to be a woman, he has to meet every day with all sorts of people, often just one person, and I can assure you that kind of distrust and those kinds of thoughts are not on anyone’s mind. And it’s not a trust he had to “earn” from me, the kind of person he is was apparent from the very beginning.

[George K]

@jodi said in Why is this not surprising?:

I have never ever worried about my husband being seen or being alone in any space with another person who happens to be a woman, he has to meet every day with all sorts of people,

Agreed. However, as a public figure, I can see some rando idiot taking a photo of him having lunch with someone, and the next thing you know, The National Enquirer plasters the picture all over the front page: "Veep and his Girlfriend enjoy lunch at intimate setting!"

It's not that they don't trust each other, it's that they don't trust people outside their relationship.

[jodi]

@george-k Yes, you are right - as a public figure - and I think I was (over )reacting to Mik’s statement about building trust at home.

[Mik]

And I think you and Cats are both wrong.

[Doctor Phibes]

What if he's secretly gay?

(It's a joke, dumbass, however it leads to the conclusion that no person should be with any other person they're not married to without a third party being present)

[Jolly]

@catseye3 said in Why is this not surprising?:

@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:

It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.

If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.

@catseye3 said in Why is this not surprising?:

@mik said in Why is this not surprising?:

It also builds trust at home, which is even more important.

If there's trust at home, there's no need for a frankly insulting rule like this one. If trust is lacking, the rule is easily gotten around and is therefore not only silly, but also useless.

Got any bona fides to back that statement up?