Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

hotmail.com

Quin_Dub wrote: »

So , to be clear here. Your concern is about what awful things Hilary Clinton might say about Trump supporters in private?

But you have yet to comment on what Trump has said in public about people that do not support him?

If he calls them "Human Scum" in print, on Twitter - What on earth did he call them in private before Dan Scavino dialled him back to "Scum"????

So I have to comment on what Trump says before I make any comment.

Isn't there enough people doing that on here?

aloyisious

Manic Moran wrote: »

Perhaps you should read more closely.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/vindman-fired-nsc/

Further, a typical tour of duty at any posting for an active officer is two or three years. He could be expected to rotate out next year.

I'm hazarding a guess here that he was a leftover from a person who's since left the Admin seeing as he has a Ukrainian family background, which some-one probably thought an advantage when it came to affairs close to Ukraine.

Manic Moran

aloyisious wrote: »

I'm hazarding a guess here that he was a leftover from a person who's since left the Admin seeing as he has a Ukrainian family background, which some-one probably thought an advantage when it came to affairs close to Ukraine.

It's possible, but I don't think so as he's branched functional area of Foreign Area Officer. Functional Areas are something you can focus on when you hit Field Grade (Which in his case would have been over a decade ago, I think). Basically, as an FA 58, he will have been focusing on a specific region for the last decade. It's possible that he chose FA58 as he's a Ukrainian and wanted to go that way, but his position on the NSC is more likely the case of the Army working as intended and finding a trained and experienced FAO who knows something about the subject matter than some random officer who happens to have a Ukrainian family.

Which reminds me, I need to put in my FA selection request soon...

Water John

Rice is willing to say what Trump did was very troubling.

Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state under George W Bush, said she found reports of Rudy Giuliani’s shadow diplomacy in Ukraine to be “deeply troubling.”

“What I see right now troubles me. I see a state of conflict between the foreign policy professionals and someone who says he’s acting on behalf of the president but frankly I don’t know if that is the case,” Rice said at a conference in Abu Dhabi. “It is troubling. It is deeply troubling.”

Rice added she thought it was “out of bounds” for the president to call for a foreign country to investigate one of his political rivals. “The call is murky, it is really murky,” Rice said of Trump’s conversation with the Ukrainian president. “I don’t like for the president of the United States to mention an American citizen for investigation to a foreign leader. I think that is out of bounds.”
Guardian

brooke 2

Water John wrote: »

This was Guilfoyle's contribution;
Guilfoyle, forced to shout to make herself heard, told students in the crowd: “You’re not making your parents proud by being rude and disruptive.”

Oh yeah, that will make them go quiet.

She sounded unhinged at the very end, screaming at the audience. :eek:

Itssoeasy

So trump has tweeted that to remain the "most transparent president in history" that he'll be releasing the first call he had with the Ukrainian president.

Firstly he wouldn't know transparency if it jumped up out a river and bit him. Secondly given his selling of the call we have seen a partial trancscript what's to say that the first call won't potentially have something bad for trump in it ?

Overheal

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So trump has tweeted that to remain the "most transparent president in history" that he'll be releasing the first call he had with the Ukrainian president.

So Trump admitted there are tapes of WH phone calls but he's not releasing the July 25 call, or is he referring to the July 25 call?

Itssoeasy

Overheal wrote: »

So Trump admitted there are tapes of WH phone calls but he's not releasing the July 25 call, or is he referring to the July 25 call?

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1194035922066714625?s=21

This is the tweet from trump I was referring to.

amandstu

"First and therefore most important"....?

Yes ,that is very transparent.Transparently specious.

Wonder if he got his doctor to write this "transcript" that we are sure to see.

Rjd2

aloyisious wrote: »

MSN ran a story on his "triggered" book launch event that the hecklers were from a conservative group [America First] unhappy with what they claimed were Deep State Fakers on Dons staff and the No Q&A instruction riled them. Apparently no anti-Trump protestors were in the building, they and the anti anti-Trump protestors were held outside behind barriers. The MSN story seemed slanted towards mocking Don Jnr over the event failure.

Edit: the group in the event weren't Pro-Trump as such, but America First people.

https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1193932688169881607

Pretty detailed article about it from as always excellent Jane Coaston.

Basically its Nazi's who dislike the likes of Kirk, Shapiro and even Trump jr etc because they are to inclusive (I know) friendly towards Israel and are not constantly banging on about Demographic replacement.

Trump Jr is a troll, but I can understand somewhat why he would not want anything to do with them as they are not just looking for viral content.

Leader of the group is a Latino who wants to shut down immigration. :rolleyes:

Overheal

OK I'm back from watching John Oliver presents Eat ****, Bob!: The Musical and I just have to tell you I love it.

26000 Elephants

amandstu wrote: »

"First and therefore most important"....?

Yes ,that is very transparent.Transparently specious.

Wonder if he got his doctor to write this "transcript" that we are sure to see.

Doesnt matter really. The contents of the July 25th call are impeachable. Even a 'perfect' first call will have no impact. Just more attempts by GOP to create talking points to deflect.

But I bet the details of the 2017 calls will become relevant. They might even establish previous behaviour.

Outlaw Pete

Interview with United War Veteran Council members who speak about how Trump has always been there for them over the years and how he is also the first ever sitting POTUS to accept their invitation to attend the NYC Veterans' parade.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=451Adb9IkZE

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Interview with United War Veteran Council members who speak about how Trump has always been there for them over the years and how he is also the first ever sitting POTUS to accept their invitation to attend the NYC Veterans' parade.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=451Adb9IkZE

Trump was fined 2 million dollars for spending money raised for veterans as a slush fund for his campaign. He's not "there for them".

aloyisious

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Interview with United War Veteran Council members who speak about how Trump has always been there for them over the years and how he is also the first ever sitting POTUS to accept their invitation to attend the NYC Veterans' parade.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=451Adb9IkZE

I saw photos of Don saluting at an event, didn't know that he was at the Veterans Day parade at which the Marine Corp Commandant was the Marshall. Reference the VA issues that Don took action on/ordered his Admin team to sort out, it's good to see he pulled his finger out rather than let the rot there continue. The sackings were necessary for the good of the patients.

aloyisious

Mick Mulvaney has withdrawn his request to join Charles Kupperman's case due before federal court for decision on whether a presidential instruction not to attend a congress committee hearing carries more legal standing than the subpoena requiring his attendance issued from the congress committee. It seems, according to the report on CNN, MM will take his own legal steps on the issue.

aloyisious

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's possible, but I don't think so as he's branched functional area of Foreign Area Officer. Functional Areas are something you can focus on when you hit Field Grade (Which in his case would have been over a decade ago, I think). Basically, as an FA 58, he will have been focusing on a specific region for the last decade. It's possible that he chose FA58 as he's a Ukrainian and wanted to go that way, but his position on the NSC is more likely the case of the Army working as intended and finding a trained and experienced FAO who knows something about the subject matter than some random officer who happens to have a Ukrainian family.

Which reminds me, I need to put in my FA selection request soon...

On a bye the bye, is an FA an obligatory step for promotion within the field grade, a specialisation course done at college as necessary as a senior officers course for promotion to general staff grade? I know a lot of senior officers over here went for barristers training. To avoid derailing the thread any more than I have already with this ask, can you make your reply succinct please.

Overheal

Trump just lost in another key battleground: Spicer is out on Dancing with the Stars

Outlaw Pete

Deleted User wrote: »

Trump was fined 2 million dollars for spending money raised for veterans as a slush fund for his campaign. He's not "there for them".

Oh give me a break. So everything Trump has done for New York Veterans gets fcuked out the window because of carelessness with regards to how a non-profit was run?? See this is the kind of crap that makes people doubt the sincerity of the daily criticism from you folk and see it for what it really is: pure anti-Trumpism.

The (politically motivated) case largely (with regards to the $2.8m) centered around rule breaches with respect of non-profit laws, political campaigns and how funds resulting from donations are supposed to be distributed. Essentially the Trump Foundation was guilty of lacking oversight when it delegated campaign staff to distribute funds raised by the foundation. A crossover they wouldn't have been used to having to consider in previous years given there was no danger of such a crossover before Trump began his campaign for president.

There was no 'Let's spend the money we raised and nobody will ever notice' attitude (which is laughably being implied) but for sure there was a lot of carelessness with the foundation's financing, shit happens, doesn't remotely mean what people so badly want it to mean though.

There's been a good few posts on this thread about it I noticed (of course) but yet none pointing out that the judge said:

“the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations; charitable organizations supporting veterans"

Odd that. Course when you're trying to destroy someone's character such things that would dilute that effort tend not to get cited.

It does work though, as the liberal dominated media ran headlines for days suggesting Trump stole money that was donated to Veterans and a certain amount of the public will no doubt believe that scurrilous narrative and vote accordingly in 2020 (which of course is the objective, let's not pretend otherwise).

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Oh give me a break. So everything Trump has done for New York Veterans gets fcuked out the window because of carelessness with regards to how a non-profit was run?? See this is the kind of crap that makes people doubt the sincerity of the daily criticism from you folk and see it for what it really is: pure anti-Trumpism.

The (politically motivated) case largely (with regards to the $2.8m) centered around rule breaches with respect of non-profit laws, political campaigns and how funds resulting from donations are supposed to be distributed. Essentially the Trump Foundation was guilty of lacking oversight when it delegated campaign staff to distribute funds raised by the foundation. A crossover they wouldn't have been used to having to consider in previous years given there was no danger of such a crossover before Trump began his campaign for president.

There was no 'Let's spend the money we raised and nobody will ever notice' attitude (which is laughably being implied) but for sure there was a lot of carelessness with the foundation's financing, shit happens, doesn't remotely mean what people so badly want it to mean though.

There's been a good few posts on this thread about it I noticed (of course) but yet none pointing out that the judge said:



Odd that. Course when you're trying to destroy someone's character such things that would dilute that effort tend not to get cited.



It does work though, as the liberal dominated media ran headlines for days suggesting Trump stole money that was donated to Veterans and a certain amount of the public will no doubt believe that scurrilous narrative and vote accordingly in 2020 (which of course is the objective, let's not pretend otherwise).

LOL

They fixed their fraud only after they were caught out on it. A judge was over their shoulder by the time funds went to their intended, charitable destinations. The reparations were made as a part of the court-supervised dissolution of the Trump Foundation. You make it sound as if Trump made sure the money got where it was meant to go - only after violating federal law (sense a pattern?) to further his own electoral campaign - and you say 'he doesn't cheat because he doesn't have to.' lol

"The foundation agreed to dissolve under the supervision of a judge. Underwood's office will supervise the disbursement of the foundation's remaining assets to charities. " (2018)

https://www.npr.org/2018/12/18/677778958/trump-foundation-to-dissolve-amid-new-york-ags-investigation

woohoo!!!

Has the most transparent president in history relased his tax returns yet? Of course he will have to be dragged kicking and screaming like the petulant man child with a massive chip on his shoulder that he is. He and WH think that being president is like being in charge of the Trump business, where people are fired at will and personal loyalty are expected. He's so far in over his head.

Midlife

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Oh give me a break. So everything Trump has done for New York Veterans gets fcuked out the window because of carelessness with regards to how a non-profit was run?? See this is the kind of crap that makes people doubt the sincerity of the daily criticism from you folk and see it for what it really is: pure anti-Trumpism.

The (politically motivated) case largely (with regards to the $2.8m) centered around rule breaches with respect of non-profit laws, political campaigns and how funds resulting from donations are supposed to be distributed. Essentially the Trump Foundation was guilty of lacking oversight when it delegated campaign staff to distribute funds raised by the foundation. A crossover they wouldn't have been used to having to consider in previous years given there was no danger of such a crossover before Trump began his campaign for president.

There was no 'Let's spend the money we raised and nobody will ever notice' attitude (which is laughably being implied) but for sure there was a lot of carelessness with the foundation's financing, shit happens, doesn't remotely mean what people so badly want it to mean though.

There's been a good few posts on this thread about it I noticed (of course) but yet none pointing out that the judge said:



Odd that. Course when you're trying to destroy someone's character such things that would dilute that effort tend not to get cited.



It does work though, as the liberal dominated media ran headlines for days suggesting Trump stole money that was donated to Veterans and a certain amount of the public will no doubt believe that scurrilous narrative and vote accordingly in 2020 (which of course is the objective, let's not pretend otherwise).

So it's s spectrum going from 'not fit to run a charity' to 'illegally using charitable donations for personal gain'.

You're on the 'not fit to run a charity' end.

Good to know.

Outlaw Pete

Overheal wrote: »

They fixed their fraud only after they were caught out on it.

A judge was over their shoulder by the time funds went to their intended, charitable destinations.

lol. Gets it wrong while so called "fact checking" me

This all started long BEFORE the courts got involved, which is why it was so obviously politically motivated and all just a concerted effort at embarrassing Trump by dragging him through the courts. Sure just add the New York AG's office to the list of officials that did everything in their power to sway the public away from voting for Trump in 2016. Charity cheat!!

This all began when Trump spoke of how $6m had been raised for Veterans at his Iowa rally at the beginning of 2016 and the media immediately went into overdrive trying to find out if it was true, demanded proof and wanted lists of where the money was going. Basically the left fishing for anything they could get on Trump (what's new) and so he released the list (below) which was then fact checked and shown to be pretty accurate but then the accusations began about how campaign staff shouldn't have been doing what foundation staff did and as funds were raised at a charity, they're weren't tax exempt and it should be looked at and blah blah blah .. gotcha Trump!!

"The foundation agreed to dissolve under the supervision of a judge. Underwood's office will supervise the disbursement of the foundation's remaining assets to charities.

Which they were always happy to do and in fact wanted to do, but were blocked from doing, last year. I know you so bad want this to be some kind of gotcha, but it ain't. Trump has raised a hell of a lot of money for Veterans and it's really pathetic to be trying to suggest he hasn't because some non-profit fiduciary duty laws were breached.

At Least $1.9 Million In Donations Trump Collected For Vets Was Sent Last Week

At least $1.9 million of the donations to veterans groups that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump reported on Tuesday came in last week, after Trump began responding to intense media scrutiny of his earlier claims about raising in excess of $6 million for veterans. Trump said on Tuesday that his efforts raised a total of $5.6 million.

NPR reached out to all 41 of the groups Trump listed as receiving donations. Of those, 31 responded. One group, the Navy SEAL Foundation, said it does not disclose details of its donations. The other 30 confirmed the amounts Trump reported Tuesday, accounting for $4.27 million of the $5.6 million total.

The donations came in from a combination of sources, including the Donald J. Trump Foundation, various groups and individuals who cited Trump's efforts along with their donations, and Trump himself.

The candidate gave a $1 million check to the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation on May 24, as questions from the Washington Post and other news outlets about Trump's prior claims regarding these donations accelerated.

Amazingly, with all of the money I have raised for the vets, I have got nothing but bad publicity from the dishonest and disgusting media.

Trump grudgingly released the list of organizations that he says got the money. He predicted the $5.6 million total that he cited will continue to grow, to eventually top the $6 million figure he claimed back at the event where he first solicited donations to veterans, in Des Moines, Iowa, on Jan. 28.

DrumSteve

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

lol. Gets it wrong while so called "fact checking" me

This all started long BEFORE the courts got involved, which is why it was so obviously politically motivated and all just a concerted effort at embarrassing Trump by dragging him through the courts. Sure just add the New York AG's office to the list of officials that did everything in their power to sway the public away from voting for Trump in 2016. Charity cheat!!

This all began when Trump spoke of how $6m had been raised for Veterans at his Iowa rally at the beginning of 2016 and the media immediately went into overdrive trying to find out if it was true, demanded proof and wanted lists of where the money was going. Basically the left fishing for anything they could get on Trump (what's new) and so he released the list (below) which was then fact checked and shown to be pretty accurate but then the accusations began about how campaign staff shouldn't have been doing what foundation staff did and as funds were raised at a charity, they're weren't tax exempt and it should be looked at and blah blah blah .. gotcha Trump!!



Which they were always happy to do and in fact wanted to do, but were blocked from doing, last year. I know you so bad want this to be some kind of gotcha, but it ain't. Trump has raised a hell of a lot of money for Veterans and it's really pathetic to be trying to suggest he hasn't because some non-profit fiduciary duty laws were breached.

So to paraphrase a well known priest, that money was just resting in his account?

weisses

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

lol. Gets it wrong while so called "fact checking" me

This all started long BEFORE the courts got involved,

He was fined 2 million

Trump also admitted in the agreements to directing that $100,000 in foundation money be used to settle legal claims over an 80-foot flagpole he had built at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, instead of paying the expense out of his own pocket.

In addition, the foundation paid $158,000 to resolve a lawsuit over a prize for a hole-in-one contest at a Trump-owned golf course, and $5,000 for ads promoting Trump’s hotels in the programs for charitable events. Trump admitted these transactions were also improper.

As part of the settlement, Donald Trump Jr. reimbursed the Trump Foundation for the cost of the portrait.

but ofcourse its all politically motivated .... :rolleyes:

duploelabs

DrumSteve wrote: »

So to paraphrase a well known priest, that money was just resting in his account?

And that portrait of himself that he brought with the charity funds was just resting on the walls of his resort

Christy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

lol. Gets it wrong while so called "fact checking" me

This all started long BEFORE the courts got involved, which is why it was so obviously politically motivated and all just a concerted effort at embarrassing Trump by dragging him through the courts. Sure just add the New York AG's office to the list of officials that did everything in their power to sway the public away from voting for Trump in 2016. Charity cheat!!

This all began when Trump spoke of how $6m had been raised for Veterans at his Iowa rally at the beginning of 2016 and the media immediately went into overdrive trying to find out if it was true, demanded proof and wanted lists of where the money was going. Basically the left fishing for anything they could get on Trump (what's new) and so he released the list (below) which was then fact checked and shown to be pretty accurate but then the accusations began about how campaign staff shouldn't have been doing what foundation staff did and as funds were raised at a charity, they're weren't tax exempt and it should be looked at and blah blah blah .. gotcha Trump!!



Which they were always happy to do and in fact wanted to do, but were blocked from doing, last year. I know you so bad want this to be some kind of gotcha, but it ain't. Trump has raised a hell of a lot of money for Veterans and it's really pathetic to be trying to suggest he hasn't because some non-profit fiduciary duty laws were breached.

I can't believe you will continue to defend a charity cheat? How naieve do you have to believe that the money skimmed just fell into the wrong account? The point of giving the money is for tax breaks and cycling around funds like this.

Every rich person in the states gives plenty to charity for the tax breaks. Trump is not unique here.

everlast75

weisses wrote: »

He was fined 2 million

Did he not plead guilty?

duploelabs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Oh give me a break. So everything Trump has done for New York Veterans gets fcuked out the window because of carelessness with regards to how a non-profit was run?? See this is the kind of crap that makes people doubt the sincerity of the daily criticism from you folk and see it for what it really is: pure anti-Trumpism.

The (politically motivated) case largely (with regards to the $2.8m) centered around rule breaches with respect of non-profit laws, political campaigns and how funds resulting from donations are supposed to be distributed. Essentially the Trump Foundation was guilty of lacking oversight when it delegated campaign staff to distribute funds raised by the foundation. A crossover they wouldn't have been used to having to consider in previous years given there was no danger of such a crossover before Trump began his campaign for president.

There was no 'Let's spend the money we raised and nobody will ever notice' attitude (which is laughably being implied) but for sure there was a lot of carelessness with the foundation's financing, shit happens, doesn't remotely mean what people so badly want it to mean though.

There's been a good few posts on this thread about it I noticed (of course) but yet none pointing out that the judge said:



Odd that. Course when you're trying to destroy someone's character such things that would dilute that effort tend not to get cited.



It does work though, as the liberal dominated media ran headlines for days suggesting Trump stole money that was donated to Veterans and a certain amount of the public will no doubt believe that scurrilous narrative and vote accordingly in 2020 (which of course is the objective, let's not pretend otherwise).

'I am the only person in history to donate 19m to charity' are you willing to accept that's a total and utter lie?

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

Did he not plead guilty?

Mr. Trump and the Foundation have admitted key facts about their illegal political coordination with the Trump campaign, including that a purported Foundation fundraiser in January 2016 was in fact a campaign event, and that Foundation gave the Trump campaign complete control over the timing, amounts, and recipients of the $2.8 million raised through that event. Mr. Trump further admits that he and his campaign took credit for the grants that the Foundation made with funds that had been raised from the public. Justice Scarpulla noted in her decision that “Mr. Trump’s campaign, rather than the Foundation: (1) ‘planned’ and ‘organized’ the Fundraiser; and (2) ‘directed the timing, amounts, and recipients of the Foundation’s grants to charitable organizations supporting military veterans.’”

Additionally, Mr. Trump admitted a number of key facts about the other self-dealing transactions he initiated as chair — specifically, that he used Foundation funds to settle legal obligations of companies he controlled, and that the Foundation paid for a portrait of Mr. Trump that cost $10,000. As separate piece of the settlement Donald Trump Jr. reimbursed the Foundation for the cost of the portrait. The settlement also requires the Foundation to be reimbursed $11,525 for sports paraphernalia and champagne purchased at a charity gala.

Source:
https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2019/ag-james-secures-court-order-against-donald-j-trump-trump-children-and-trump

So yes, despite what's in Trump's press release, in court they admitted they misused Foundation Funds to pay off lawsuits against Trump and to buy a portrait of himself. They fully admitted wrongdoing. They admitted it, in a court of law, as part of a settlement. That cannot be disputed.

But of course, it's other people's fault for finding out about it.