Donald Trump McDonald's hit with bad reviews: "Bronzer on my fries"
Donald Trump McDonald's hit with bad reviews: "Bronzer on my fries"
The Pennsylvania restaurant has been targeted on Yelp, with a slew of negative reviews by online jokers deriding the former president's food preparation.
Internet pranksters are trolling presidential-hopeful Donald Trump by leaving bad reviews for the McDonald's he briefly worked at during a photo opportunity on Sunday.
The Republican candidate put in a short shift on the fries station and in the drive-thru window at restaurant in Feasterville-Trevose, Pennsylvania. But the move seems to have riled some online jokers, who have since targeted the venue with reviews mocking Trump's performance.
One reviewer, Karen S, gave a one-star review, writing: "Customer service was a joke. Senile old man got bronzer on my fries, didn't wear gloves."
You're viewing a single thread.
Is this a narcissism thing? The lies and acting are comically bad. It's mindboggling that he would pose with fries handed to him, served to no actual paying customer, and proceed to speak as if he now has proper experience among the working class.
And that's all because they're convinced Kamala lied about working at McDonald's, because she didn't include the job she worked as a teenager in a later resume (because nobody puts their summer jobs on there).
Ehhh, sort of. Federal jobs (or at least clearance) want everything. Full work experience, any gaps 1 day or longer explained. It's a bit ridiculous. Having estranged family is a PITA too.
It's still nobodies business outside of federal agencies.
That's not what Trump's talking about tho.
Are we talking about a security clearance form?
I've heard it was more closer to 10 years for a TS/SCI, though it could possibly be more if the investigation finds a blip or for a high level position like a DA.
The presidency however is exempt from needing to go through the process as they were elected into it. As bad as it sounds, with the way the democracy was built and is run, everything would come to a screeching halt if all of the presidents/elected officials needed to go through a lengthy (1yr +) investigation just to have the possibility of starting their job. Instead, they are actively judged of their in/actions during their tenure and impeached (or worse) if needed.
But as you said, the investigators do not release any info and only provide an approval/denial to whomever sponsored (paid) the clearance check. Their only job is to create a profile so they can determine if the person can be trusted with privileged information and not be coerced to release it.
^
10 years makes sense, I don't believe i even had 10 years of job experience at the time so that explains why I'm a bit off on it.
Number 45 is making me think we should be doing clearance investigations for presidential candidates, not like they aren't campaigning far enough in advance for it at this point.
I definitely agree. There really should be some sort of vetting processes in place. (An in depth psych eval would do wonders)
The biggest issue is that constitution would need to be amended to add the investigation process to the other three requirements, which could take years upon years to ever get approved. Also, going by the current trend of our political system, being denied could be seen as (or may even be) political subterfuge or gatekeeping by whichever side.
Our system, while it is working for the moment, it really does need improvements. This past eight years being the glowing proof of it.
I had to do the thorough federal check once and they only went back 10 years. My summers cutting lawns didn’t have to go on the form.