[sonnyblarney]

No. Completely false.

A man who works for a private advocacy firm for years before going into public office, wherein nobody on earth would have had a clue that this guy was going to be the US chief attorney is - does not even hint corruption.

This guy was working this advocacy group in 2014. Are you really indicating that some people knew, in 2014 that Donald Trump would be pres 2 years later, and that 2 years after that, that Drump would put 'their boy' in as Att. General? Because that's what you'd have to insinuate if you think this guy is guilty of something (at least from this non-profit)

You have offered no rebuttal to my position, or remotely any evidence of corruption ... just ad-hominem.

In order to hint at 'corruption' you'd have to indicate that somehow, some time ago - before Trump was even President - that this guy was collecting millions from some vague source so that 'one day' he'd act on it.

It's absurd.

This new Att. General has enough glaring problem that are probably lower hanging fruit. This non-profit is probably not one of them, at least superficially.

[ngcc_hk]

Not absurd.

“Whitaker previously served as Chief of Staff to Sessions from September 2017 to November 2018”.

[sonnyblarney]

Yes - any money he takes while in public office should be disclosed, full stop. Of course. But this 'charity' operation has been in operation for a long time.

The commenters here are creating the controversy, it's not a straw-man I'm making.

This guy's background is shady enough, but not enough to imply that money received before working in government is somehow an implication of corruption.

[Faark]

Nice straw man. He got 500k during 9 month in 2017, as you probably know if you've read the WaPo article... and I'd kind of expect that considering how active you comment on that topic.

And yes, if you want a significant public office, you should disclose mayor conflicts of interests. That definitively includes large share of recent income.