Report: Trump Appoints 14 Inauguration Donors To Ambassadorships

Literally for decades, I have written about the continued and disgraceful use of ambassador positions to reward campaign donors and friends of sittings presidents. While most countries properly confine ambassadors to professional diplomatics and government officials, the United States routinely appoints embarrassing individuals who have no cognitive skills or talents for the positions. Now a  NBC news report  shows that President Donald Trump has followed this poor practice in giving ambassadorships to at least 14 donors to the inaugural fund. It is a pay to play arrangement that is not only legal but steadfastly defended by both parties who effectively sell these positions to the continued irritation of our allies.

Ethical relativists of course shrug and just say that people are naive in objecting to such practices. However, this is in my view an easy test for any administrative committed to good government. Years ago, I was at a dinner with an extremely wealthy Democratic donor was talking about how easy it is to get one of these posts if you give enough money to the President Obama’s campaign and how he passed the position to his wife who is delighted to now be called “Ambassador.”

Go deeper: U.S. ambassadors have become less quali

167 thoughts on “Report: Trump Appoints 14 Inauguration Donors To Ambassadorships”

  1. Judicial Watch Uncovers ‘Cover-Up’ Discussions in Latest Production of Clinton Email Documents
    Judicial WatchAPRIL 08, 2019
    Intelligence IG Details ‘Hundreds’ of Classified Emails and Suggests Entire ‘Collection’ Could Be Classified

    (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it uncovered 422 pages of FBI documents showing evidence of “cover-up” discussions related to the Clinton email system within Platte River Networks, one of the vendors who managed the Clinton email system. The documents also show Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) Charles McCullough forwarding “concerns” about classified information in former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails. …


    From: [Redacted]

    Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 2:46 PM

    To: Grafeld, Margaret P [Peggy]

    Subject: Concerns about the HRC Review …

    While working with this inspector, I have personally reviewed hundreds of documents in the HRC collection. I can now say, without reservation, that there are literally hundreds of classified emails in this collection; maybe more. For example, there are comments by Department staff in emails relating to the Wikileaks unauthorized disclosures; many of the emails relating to this actually confirm the information in the disclosures. This material is the subject of FOIA litigation, and the emails will now have to be found, reviewed and upgraded. Under the EO 13526, it would be in in our right to classify the entire HRC collection at the Secret level because of the “mosaic effect.” While there may be IC equities in the collection, I am very concerned about the inadvertent release of State Department’s equities when this collection is released in its entirety — the potential damage to the foreign relations of the United States could be significant.

  2. Maybe someday site will periodically publish the most verbose commenters by volume of words.
    I don’t bother tallying up the pro/con numbers here, like our resident statistician has recently undertaken as a recent project.
    I have noted and posted examples of the heroic, hopelessly outnumbered L4B doing a syrupy round of thank yous to 15 or so of her supporters.
    I suspect that when L4D is roaming the street preaching to motorists or pedestrian passers-by, the number of negative comments about L4D would far exceed the number of positive comments she makes about herself.

  3. Fat Comrade not Fat Cat

    Professor Turley, thank you for the revealing cartoon of the Body American Welfare State. It is, however, a Fat Comrade not a Fat Cat. Communists love wanton extravagance. Your illustration represents all of the unconstitutional positions and revenue confiscated and consumed by American communists. Understanding that Congress has the power to tax merely for “…general Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for “…individual Welfare…,” affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, rent control, social services, forced busing, minimum wage, utility subsidies, WIC, TANF, HAMP, HARP, Education, Labor, Obamacare, Obamaphones, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing,” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc. are all unconstitutional, anti-American communistic redistribution of wealth and social engineering.

  4. For Anon who denies any possible wrong doing at the FBI and DOJ.

    Mark Meadows

    The right move from @DevinNunes. More criminal referrals to come. And certainly more deserved. Overwhelming evidence shows multiple FBI + DOJ executives abused their power to undermine a duly elected President Trump. They will be held accountable.

    I think that wa 8 criminal referrals by Nunes.

    1. this just in…..

      Oh so petty Maxine She-Male Waterrs

      Steve Mnuchin Clashes With Maxine Waters During Testimony: ‘You’re Ordering Me to Stay’

      Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin clashed with House Financial Services Chairwoman Maxine Waters after he tried to end his testimony before the congressional committee.

      After Mnuchin requested an end to the testimony to meet with a foreign official, Waters acknowledged that he could “choose to do whatever you want” but wouldn’t close the hearing as other lawmakers had questions for the cabinet secretary.

      “If you wish to keep me here so that I don’t have my important meeting and continue to grill me then if you do that I will cancel my meeting and I will not be back here,” Mnuchin told the chair after pulling his offer to “voluntarily” return before the committee. “I will be very clear if that’s the way you’d like to have this relationship.”

      Waters also told Mnuchin that “no other secretary has ever told us the day before that they were going to limit their time in the way that you’re doing.”

      After the secretary accused the California Democrat of “ordering me to stay here,” Waters denied the claim and allowed him to leave.

      “Please dismiss everybody, I believe you’re supposed to take the gravel [sic] and bang it, that’s the appropriate way,” Mnuchin snarked, to which Waters replied, “Please don’t instruct me on how I’m supposed to conduct this committee.”

      1. One can easily see that the Congressional Democrats are in an intellectual bind much like almost all the Liberals on this blog.

    2. Wake me when it happens and there are names.

      Nunes is making his biggest news suing Nunes’Cow and NunesMom, and now McClatchey.

      1. “Wake me when it happens and there are names.”

        From Chapter 69, page 666 in the Mueller Report, Appendix HRC loses USA x 2

        Ivan (Иван, “John”), Andrei (Андрей, “Andrew”), Yakov (Яков, “Jacob”), Yuri (Юрий, “George”), Tatyana (Татьяна, “Tatiana”), Maria (Мария, “Mary”), Avdotia (Авдотья, “Eudocia”), Elizaveta (Елизавета, “Elizabeth”, Stanislav (Станислав), Rada (Рада) and Radomir (Радомир), and Dobromila, Zhdan (Ждан), Peresvet (Пересвет), Lada (Лада), and Lyubava (Любава), Vilen (Вилен), Avangard (Авангард), Ninel (Нинель), and Era (Эра). Names borrowed from other languages include Albert (Альберт), Ruslan (Руслан), Zhanna (Жанна), and Leyla (Лейла).

        and Ivanka. Cant forget the next female US President in 2024

        Get back to us with dat collusion thang

        — Igor

      2. “Wake me when it happens ”

        At least, Anon, you recognize that you are asleep at the wheel. That is fine, but then don’t tell us you know what is happening.

        1. If any of the people who conducted the Russia investigation are indicted, then all of the evidence uncovered during the Russia investigation will be discoverable as exculpatory evidence for the defendants. If any of that exculpatory evidence is classified, then the trials would have to be conducted in a Secured Compartmentalized Information Facility under the Classified Information Procedures Act. Lt. Col. Oliver North famously used those facts to graymail the United States into dropping the charges against him. And North had been previously granted blanket immunity in exchange for his Congressional testimony as well.

          Did you know that Trump is currently suppressing evidence relevant to Putin’s counter-investigation against the United States? The only way for Trump to incriminate the United States is for Trump to incriminate Trump. Putin knows that. Why don’t you and Ninny Na-Na Nunes know it, FUBARAllan?

      1. The National Security Division of the Justice Department could have easily prevented Trump from being elected in the first place. The NSD chose not to do anything to damage Trump’s chances of being elected. The idea that the NSD preferred to depose Trump after Trump was elected rather than prevent Trump from being elected is too stupid for any dog, let alone Metzger’s.

        BTW, this is a recurring phenomenon amongst the tin-foil hat conventioneers: The Deep State is, at one and the same time, both exactly as smart and exactly as stupid as the tin-foil hat conventioneers need the Deep State to be. Coincidence?

        1. I wonder how well the tin foil hats protect people like L4B against Putin’s evil Ray Gun. I think every single on of the hundreds of tin foil hat mentions has been brought up by the L4B-type of conspiracy theorist.
          They must know a lot about them, and find them to be necessary.

          1. So the Deep State was convinced that Hillary was going to win. And that’s why the Deep State plotted a coup d’état against Trump. Because there was no way that Trump was going to win. And therefore the Deep State could plot their coup d’état against Trump simply for the purpose of practice. They would never have to execute their plot to depose someone who didn’t stand a chance of being elected. Had they only know that they were wrong, then they would’ve prevented Trump from being elected in the first place. Obviously. Perhaps you tin-foil hat conventioneers could dub this conspiracy theory the Deep State pre-coup d’état.

            1. Yeah, that’s the ticket!

              Adding one sentence to Comey’s October letter. was too easy and not nearly as much fun as the last 2 years.

              1. You could always cite Buzzfeed, Christopher Steele or Adam Schiff, as your reputable source, no?


                “In January of 2017, Steele’s pile of allegations became public, read by millions. “It is not just unconfirmed,” Buzzfeed admitted. “It includes some clear errors.”

                Buzzfeed’s decision exploded traditional journalistic standards against knowingly publishing material whose veracity you doubt. Although a few media ethicists wondered at it, this seemed not to bother the rank-and-file in the business. Buzzfeed chief Ben Smith is still proud of his decision today. I think this was because many reporters believed the report was true.

                When I read the report, I was in shock. I thought it read like fourth-rate suspense fiction (I should know: I write fourth-rate suspense fiction). Moreover it seemed edited both for public consumption and to please Steele’s DNC patrons.

                Steele wrote of Russians having a file of “compromising information” on Hillary Clinton, only this file supposedly lacked “details/evidence of unorthodox or embarrassing behavior” or “embarrassing conduct.”

                We were meant to believe the Russians, across decades of dirt-digging, had an empty kompromat file on Hillary Clinton, to say nothing of human tabloid headline Bill Clinton? This point was made more than once in the reports, as if being emphasized for the reading public.

                There were other curious lines, including the bit about Russians having “moles” in the DNC, plus some linguistic details that made me wonder at the nationality of the report author.

                Still, who knew? It could be true. But even the most cursory review showed the report had issues and would need a lot of confirming. This made it more amazing that the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, held hearings on March 20, 2017 that blithely read out Steele report details as if they were fact. From Schiff’s opening statement:

                According to Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer who is reportedly held in high regard by U.S. Intelligence, Russian sources tell him that Page has also had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin (SEH-CHIN), CEO of Russian gas giant Rosneft… Page is offered brokerage fees by Sechin on a deal involving a 19 percent share of the company.

                I was stunned watching this. It’s generally understood that members of congress, like reporters, make an effort to vet at least their prepared remarks before making them public.

                But here was Schiff, telling the world Trump aide Carter Page had been offered huge fees on a 19% stake in Rosneft – a company with a $63 billion market capitalization – in a secret meeting with a Russian oligarch who was also said to be “a KGB agent and close friend of Putin’s.”

                (Schiff meant “FSB agent.” The inability of #Russiagaters to remember Russia is not the Soviet Union became increasingly maddening over time. Donna Brazile still hasn’t deleted her tweet about how “The Communists are now dictating the terms of the debate.” )

                Schiff’s speech raised questions. Do we no longer have to worry about getting accusations right if the subject is tied to Russiagate? What if Page hadn’t done any of these things? To date, he hasn’t been charged with anything. Shouldn’t a member of congress worry about this?

                A few weeks after that hearing, Steele gave testimony in a British lawsuit filed by one of the Russian companies mentioned in his reports. In a written submission, Steele said his information was “raw” and “needed to be analyzed and further investigated/verified.” He also wrote that (at least as pertained to the memo in that case) he had not written his report “with the intention that it be republished to the world at large.”

                That itself was a curious statement, given that Steele reportedly spoke with multiple reporters in the fall of 2016, but this was his legal position. This story about Steele’s British court statements did not make it into the news much in the United States, apart from a few bits in conservative outlets like The Washington Times.

                I contacted Schiff’s office to ask the congressman if he knew about Steele’s admission that his report needed verifying, and if that changed his view of it at all. The response (emphasis mine):

                The dossier compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and which was leaked publicly several months ago contains information that may be pertinent to our investigation. This is true regardless of whether it was ever intended for public dissemination. Accordingly, the Committee hopes to speak with Mr. Steele in order to help substantiate or refute each of the allegations contained in the dossier.

                Schiff had not spoken to Steele before the hearing, and read out the allegations knowing they were unsubstantiated.

                The Steele report was the Magna Carta of #Russiagate. It provided the implied context for thousands of news stories to come, yet no journalist was ever able to confirm its most salacious allegations: the five year cultivation plan, the blackmail, the bribe from Sechin, the Prague trip, the pee romp, etc. In metaphorical terms, we were unable to independently produce Steele’s results in the lab. Failure to reckon with this corrupted the narrative from the start.


              2. They should have let Strzok conduct aggressive interviews of Carter Page and George Papadopoulos in late July and early August of 2016. Even if Page and Papadopoulos, themselves, would have kept it secret from the Trump campaign, The New York Office of the FBI would have gone running to Rudy, who would have gone running FOX News screaming bloody murder about the FBI investigating the Trump campaign. And then everybody would have known for sure coming straight from the horse’s mouth.

                And that last two years would have been the investigation and impeachment of Hillary Rodham Clinton for who knows what. Everything and the kitchen sink. It wouldn’t even have mattered, really. Since that’s what they’ve always really wanted, anyhow.

                1. So, “they” prevented Strzok from interviewing Carter Page and Papadopoulos in the summer of 2016. Who are “they”? And how did “they” impede Strzok?
                  We might find out exactly what kind of investigation and surveillance was conducted in the case of Carter Page…it’ll be interesting to see if he’s mentioned in the Mueller report.
                  If in fact Strzok was prevented from interview Papdopolous and Page….which I find doubtful….it may have been due to a couple of factors.
                  One of which is that both were probably being closely observed by the FBI, and there was a concern about alerting them that they were being spied on. It’s not uncommon for invedtigators to avoid “tipping their hand” very early on in an investigation .

                  1. The issues you’re raising now have not been “hypothetical” since IG Horowitz issued his report way back when. Strzok argued in favor of aggressive interviews of Page and Papadopoulos in late July and early August of 2016 in meetings with his boss at the NSD, Bill Priestap, and his other boss at the FBI, Andrew McCabe. Strzok was told, “No!.” Moreover, Strzok was told, “No!,” because the NSD and the FBI and the DOJ were afraid that the Trump campaign would leak to the press that the Trump campaign was under investigation. Those are facts. Those have been fact for more than a year now. Treating those facts as hypotheses that have not yet been established is literally uninformed. And that’s why you refuse to answer Anon’s simple question. Because you can’t answer Anon’s simple question.

                    1. If those are “facts”, it is reasonable to expect some documentation/citations to support those “facts”. Given L4B’s history here, it’s more than reasonable; it is essential.

                    2. Let’s see your warrant. And then let’s see your badge. Impersonating a law enforcement officer is against law.

                    3. I don’t have a warrant, but “et’s see” something truely novel and astounding from L4B; a straight answer to a reasonable question.
                      Based on her lack of credibility here and history of deflections/ evasiveness etc., I won’t hold my breath.

                  2. Inspector General Horowitz’ Report. Look it up. It’s in there. Somewhere.

            2. If the objective of the tin foil hats you wear are supposed to protect your brain, I think you deserve a refund.

              1. As a public service to readers of Res Ipsa Loquitur. Step-by-step instructions on how to impersonate a tin foil hat conventioneer.

                1) Purse you lips.
                2) Place the index finger of your right hand against your lips.
                3) Using that index finger, rapidly and repeatedly flap you lower lip against your upper lip while humming your favorite pop tune through your pursed lips.
                4) On the odd chance that your favorite pop tune is The Star-Spangled Banner, then no kneeling allowed at any time during your impersonation of a tin foil hat conventioneer.
                5) Foaming at the mouth is extra credit, but laughing out loud is a double Mulligan.

      1. Interesting, anonymous. There was the movie 7 days in May that preceded it by a couple of decades. There was also an Australian series on Netflix where the military and intelligence community were doing bad things. IMO it was a lousy series because things like that never happen in real life. Who would be so stupid and who would be so arrogant and irresponsible yet rise so high in Australias intelligence and the Australian military. They even had a little niggle against the US.

        The stuff was so unbelieveable and the bureaucrats paid so much attention to themselves rather than the people who appear ignorant that it was too stupid to watch so I turned it off and then realized that we were seeing something similar to what has happened in America with an FBI and intelligence system weaponized against Trump while arrogant and stupid people like Anon, Peter and Diane can’t stop lying to themselves.

        I finished the series, not great, but if we were to recreate what happened here, it too would seem ridiculous, arrogant and stupid.

        1. If Allan had only half a brain, then Allan would still not be even half dangerous. All Allan had to do was click on the link provided and find out what the blazes Metzger’s Dog is about. But no! That would be far too intelligent of a thing for Allan to do. Excerpted from the link at issue:

          The much-loved comic thriller by the author of the Edgar Award–winning The Butcher’s Boy is now, by popular demand, back in print, featuring a new Introduction by bestselling author Carl Hiaasen.

          When Leroy “Chinese” Gordon breaks into a professor’s lab at the University of Los Angeles, he’s after some pharmaceutical cocaine, worth plenty of money. Instead, he finds the papers the professor has compiled for the CIA, which include a blueprint for throwing a large city into chaos. But how is the CIA to be persuaded to pay a suitable ransom, unless of course someone actually uses the plan to throw a large city into chaos—Los Angeles, for instance? Assigned to cope with the crisis and restore the peace, veteran agent Ben Porterfield steps onto the scene to remind us that the CIA’s middle name is, after all, Intelligence. Enlivening the mix are Gordon’s beautiful girlfriend, Margaret, his temperamental cat, Dr. Henry Metzger, and Metzger’s friend, an enormous half-wild dog with huge teeth.

          [end excerpt]

          So now we know who Allan really is–an enormous half-wild dog with huge teeth who is the friend of a temperamental cat named Dr. Henry Metzger. That’s right. The title dog belongs to a cat with a medical degree. Are you following that, Maxwell Smart? Or would you like The Chief to go back over it one more time more loudly in the Cone of Silence until Agent 99 finally catches on?

          1. Diane, I responded to this statement.
            “Read a novel “Metzger’s Dog” back in the 1980’s. The plot contained a proposed coup to take out the Commander in Chief as discussed by high level intelligence personel including CIA.”

            That leads to a reply from our resident crazy. The ambulence must have been delayed when picking Diane up to take her back to the insane assylum.

    3. Haha. You people will still buy anything; please don’t ever change. nunes is an idiot along the same lines as the day glo bozo buffoon. I’m sure his “referrals” received the attention they deserved; about five seconds worth, followed by hilarity.

      this is to “but hannity said the baddies were in trouble” allan / allen

      1. Mark M we don’t have to mimic your stupidity. We can wait for whatever convictions occurr. In the meantime we have already seen so many names of people that did bad things and made a fool of everything you have tightly held onto over the past year or so.

        Hannity has been right and you have been proven wrong.

  5. The point is the ‘foggy bottom fairies’ amongst other names common in the ranks of the professional military (similar to the military’s version known as REMF’s too often sent us out during The Century of the Great Socialist Wars both large and small starting full tilt with 1909 and Woodrow Wilson. And did so with the full approval of the ‘so called’ establishment aka ‘corporatist, stastist, and labor leader Socialists.

    So I cannot support any effort to shake up The Ranks of The Rancid regardless of what part of FDRs scientific administration system but only regret their ability to succeed in supporting far to often the opposition after voting for those we were sent out to combat.

    Now we have the counter revolution against those who are still in full revolt mode against our Representative Constitutional Republic and find both their parties need a good flushing getting rid of both RINOs and DINOs and replacing Peoples Parties with Citizens of the Republic.

    A shame those like Colin Lamb turned out to be an ex Marine instead of a former Marine. He could have easily taken over that entire group instead of shaming his heritage.

  6. Whenever a topic comes a common Democratic arguement is that the rest of the world does it so I thought I would help them out with their arguments.

    “Along with China and North Korea, the United States is one of only seven countries that allow elective abortions after 20 weeks. But now Democrats in America want to take that even further by pushing for babies born alive to be killed. It’s outrageous. Protecting these babies should be supported by everyone regardless of party affiliation.”

    1. Our side, the Constitutionalists may have been ho hum so what colluding but the side of which you speak was in out and out conspiracy mode. Only the second was and still is a crime.

      1. Eric Holder makes Nixon’s AG, John Mitchell, look like a girl scout

  7. “Obama’s men at the Veterans Administration oversaw a system in which our servicemen lost their lives to bureaucratic incompetence and medical neglect, and then falsified records to cover it up.”

    1. Nice to know that under a Constitutionalist Republic government we are finally getting that mess straightened out and we veterans are getting a chance at what was a contractual promise. NO thanks to those of the left who started those wars. LBJ was not the only one but just one of a long long list,

    1. In case you feel these blurbs aren’t read they are. It actually increases the profits from Zanta, Nexium and Prilosec when Liberals read these things.

  8. “Under the Obama administration, the Secret Service has been a one-agency scandal factory, from drunk agents driving their cars into White House barriers to getting mixed up with hookers in Cartagena.”

  9. “President Obama’s secretary of state was involved in a high-profile case in which she improperly set up a private e-mail system to evade ordinary governmental oversight; she and her associates routinely misled investigators, obstructed investigations, and hid or destroyed evidence. These are all serious crimes.

    The Obama administration made ransom payments to the Iranian government and lied about having done so.”

  10. “The Obama administration oversaw the illegal sale of arms to Mexican traffickers for purposes that to this date have not been adequately explained, and those guns have been used to murder American law-enforcement officers.”

    as above

Comments are closed.