Let's play "Equivalency: Yay or Meh?"
We often hear about "False Equivalency," where defense of an action is simply comparing it to another action and saying "they're both the same." I was about to do that (and technically, I'm still going to do so), but instead I thought I throw it out there under the guise of calling out simple bullshit -- because I really do think there is a case to be made to those who feel what Bill Clinton and CGI were wrong, BUT...what about the Trump Foundation?
Setting aside for a moment the blatant outright illegal activity of The Trump Foundation -- using donations to pay legal bills, buying personal gifts for The Donald, bribing an AG -- what is it that Bill Clinton did that was any different than what Trump supporters tout as being "good business?" I heard one of the MSNBC talking heads express outrage that Bill Clinton was using his name as a way to make money. But isn't this exactly what Trump has based the largest part of his business upon, leasing his name for profit? Remember, Donald Trump owns very few of the properties which bear his gilded all-caps name. One of the very-plausible theories about the secrecy of Trump's true net worth is that is real worth is very much lower than has what he claims, in that Trump bases a large portion of his worth in the monetary value of his name. How is this different than Bill Clinton leveraging his good name in order to make a living (a very good living, at that)?
Further, despite the fact that no one has been able to find any indication of any quid pro quo in Clinton's dealings with donors and his network of friends, the talking heads are saying that it "smells funny." Yet, the book which thrust Trump's name into the public's eye was called "The Art Of The Deal." He regularly brags about making deals, calling upon friends, bringing resources together in order to achieve his desired outcome. The only serious difference I can see here (the falseness, IMHO, in the False Equivalency) is that Donald Trump actually did illegal things with his foundation! The Trump Foundation was a scam which didn't even file the proper paperwork to be called a foundation! It was a money-churning operation for Trump, whereas CGI actually does real charity work and contributes huge amounts of money to various vital causes around the world. But according the talking heads on MSNBC, CGI should be shut down, just as the Trump Foundation was shut down.
So, I ask...Equivalency, Yay or Meh?
= new reply since forum marked as read
