Perspective: Trump's golf trips this past winter = money being allocated for the Opioide contagion.

#winning

Anonymous wrote:https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/07/02/trumps-leaner-white-house-payroll-projected-to-save-taxpayers-22-million/amp/

His cuts in WH staff are going to save millions as well.

At the expense of a non-functioning government being ruled by a clueless junta.

Yay.

It's only fair, he sure didn't earn it.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/07/02/trumps-leaner-white-house-payroll-projected-to-save-taxpayers-22-million/amp/

His cuts in WH staff are going to save millions as well.

Why doesn't he pay back the money it cost taxpayers to keep Melania in NY for six months? Or all the trips to Mar A Lago when he made money on the SS needing to stay there and pay room rates? What about his 30 golfing trips and his kids trips abroad to further their business interests?

Sorry, Sweets - a billionaire giving back a pay he doesn't even work for doesn't impress me on bit.

Maybe he could also pay his fair share of taxes to help the veterans.

bfd. The amount he will make from his conflicts of interests dwarfs his potus pay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound like a silly servant. Why would we need 110 staffers to vet tweets, when one will do?

I'd rather he hire one person to vet his tweets than save $5m.

Most Americans feel the same.

I might as well wish for a unicorn, because Trump isn't going to stop his unpresidential tweeting.

Unclench your pearls and anal orifice

Howzabout you jerks stop trying to build an army of bureaucrats, committees, commissions and professional paper pushers in DC?

Anonymous wrote:WH has been unable to hire people. That is the reason their payroll is low.

Correct. It's adorable that Trumpsters believe that his staff is small because he's economizing. Is there anything he says that you won't believe?

WH has been unable to hire people. That is the reason their payroll is low.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound like a silly servant. Why would we need 110 staffers to vet tweets, when one will do?

I'd rather he hire one person to vet his tweets than save $5m.

Most Americans feel the same.

I might as well wish for a unicorn, because Trump isn't going to stop his unpresidential tweeting.

Unclench your pearls and anal orifice

Anonymous wrote:You sound like a silly servant. Why would we need 110 staffers to vet tweets, when one will do?

I'd rather he hire one person to vet his tweets than save $5m.

Most Americans feel the same.

I might as well wish for a unicorn, because Trump isn't going to stop his unpresidential tweeting.

You're such a gullible goose.

You sound like a silly servant. Why would we need 110 staffers to vet tweets, when one will do?

I wish he would hire 110 more staffers who would vet his tweets before he sent them. That would definitely be $5m well spent.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/07/02/trumps-leaner-white-house-payroll-projected-to-save-taxpayers-22-million/amp/

His cuts in WH staff are going to save millions as well.