The ultimate safe spaces for lefties, their own hotel in DC

[Medic007]

You can't make this stuff up. I wonder if illegals will get to eat and stay for free...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...o-washington-an-anti-trump-hotel-for-liberals

 

[CowboyJD]

Private enterprise marketing to a niche.

Don't have a problem with it.

 

[aix_xpert]

I don't mind the premise, but you know if someone created an alt-right hotel with Confederate flags, Statues of Robert E. Lee, etc...that the left would be protesting it. Heck they were protesting the Trump hotel in D.C. after Trump got elected and all it did was have his name on the building.

 

[Ostatedchi]

Self segregation. I just don't get it.

 

[Alpha Poke]

Complimentary Wapo and butt plug.

 

[Medic007]

Private enterprise marketing to a niche.

Don't have a problem with it.

I don't have a problem with it either. It just sounds like a lot of pansy ass snowflake shit.

And I'm wondering if they will be true to the "values" they expect from the rest of us. Surely they'll be picking up the tab for any "undocumented" folks who otherwise can't stay there. Overcharge the patrons who can afford it, barely or otherwise, to provide subsidies to those who have cheaper options but just want to stay there. Make everyone buy a spa package whether they want it or not, and if you don't buy one, you get charged a refusal-to-buy fee.

I don't mind the premise, but you know if someone created an alt-right hotel with Confederate flags, Statues of Robert E. Lee, etc...that the left would be protesting it. Heck they were protesting the Trump hotel in D.C. after Trump got elected and all it did was have his name on the building.

So true.

 

[hollywood]

" Heck they were protesting the Trump hotel in D.C. after Trump got elected and all it did was have his name on the building."- aix_xpert.

That's simply not true, it's not just because his "name" is on the building, it's because he's the controlling owner and by federal law as the President he should not be holding a contract/lease with the Federal Govt due to various ethical standards and the emoluments clause of the US Constitution.

It sets up a very tricky situation where the President can actually taking in money from foreign interest or such foreign interests can use their spending at his hotel as an incentive and potential bribe for favorable treatment.

I would think that should be a concern for anyone if looking at the situation objectively.

 

[Medic007]

I would think that should be a concern for anyone if looking at the situation objectively.

The GSA already stated there was no conflict of interest.

Using the spirit of Democrats, "Nothing but left-wing conspiracy."

 

[CowboyJD]

The GSA already stated there was no conflict of interest.

Using the spirit of Democrats, "Nothing but left-wing conspiracy."

Is this the time to point out the GSA is an executive branch agency answerable directly to the elected official that is Trump and that there is a pending lawsuit to determine if the GSA was right?

Checking.

 

[Medic007]

Is this the time to point out the GSA is an executive branch agency answerable directly to the elected official that is Trump and that there is a pending lawsuit to determine if the GSA was right?

Checking.

Sure. But until another opinion is given by them people in government, it's the one we have to operate on. So, the point still stands that the GSA stated there is no conflict of interest. This is the exact same measure of scrutiny that Democrats apply to the Hillary email server stuff, so it's good enough for me.

 

[JimmyBob]

Checking.

Checking now:



I'm sure they have the answer!

 

[aix_xpert]

" Heck they were protesting the Trump hotel in D.C. after Trump got elected and all it did was have his name on the building."- aix_xpert.

That's simply not true, it's not just because his "name" is on the building, it's because he's the controlling owner and by federal law as the President he should not be holding a contract/lease with the Federal Govt due to various ethical standards and the emoluments clause of the US Constitution.

It sets up a very tricky situation where the President can actually taking in money from foreign interest or such foreign interests can use their spending at his hotel as an incentive and potential bribe for favorable treatment.

I would think that should be a concern for anyone if looking at the situation objectively.

I'd say this is true, except protesters protested buildings he didn't even own just because they had Trump's name on them.

 

[EvilPOKES]

I'll be in DC next month, I will be sure to fart as I walk by the construction site.