Trump pulls the plug on transgenders serving in the military

[boutons_deux]

"my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption going on with Dems"

holy shit, you people are really fucked up, wound up by Fox/Breitbart/WND/Blaze/etc, and going nowhere :lol

[Mikeanaro]

Those Russian Trademarks

One of the questions underlying the ongoing investigation into the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russian officials is whether the president himself is in debt to the country’s government or state-run banks. Though Trump has insisted recently that he does not do business in Russia, that assertion conflicts with 20 years of his (and his sons’) statements to the contrary.

This weekend, The New York Times reported on details that underline his past dealings in the country: On the night of the 2016 presidential election, the Russian government granted extensions to six expiring trademarks that Trump had received between 1996 and 2007. The trademarks cover branding for a variety of products, including one for Trump Vodka, which debuted in 2007 and folded shortly thereafter, and one for the name “Trump Tower,” for a real-estate deal that the president began exploring in 1996 but that ultimately fell through.

By all appearances, the renewals in November were fairly routine and don’t indicate that the Trump Organization has any actual plans for pursuing business opportunities in Russia in the near future. As was the case with the trademarks the company received in China in February, it’s likely that registering the Trump name is more defensive than anything else, a means of securing the name to ward off potential knockoffs or patent trolls, who in some cases register well-known brand names so that, should a corporation try to expand overseas, they will have to pay to wrest the trademark back.

Even if the renewals were a mere formality, they point to the ongoing complications the president’s decision to retain his business while in office creates. Trademarks certainly aren’t direct financial compensation, but they have distinct monetary value as a means of protecting a company’s business interests, especially for a corporation like the Trump Organization, which relies so heavily on its brand appeal that the Trump name is arguably among the family’s most valuable assets. That leaves open the possibility that the president may be inclined to think more highly of a country because it has recently helped his company by approving a trademark request—which in turn opens the possibility that a foreign government seeking to influence the president might seek to curry favor with him by expediting the process or granting trademarks they wouldn’t for a less important person.

Other trademarks that Trump has received in foreign countries since taking office are not only ethically questionable but arguably violate the Constitution. Though part of the ethics arrangement the president and his lawyer laid out before the inauguration was that the Trump Organization would cease pursuing new deals in foreign countries during Trump’s presidency, the company has continued to register trademarks around the world. China granted him not only the trademark on his name in February but also 38 others in March, on everything from hotels to insurance to escort services, followed by six more last week; his eldest daughter Ivanka, who serves as an adviser within the administration, has also received trademarks there since her father took office. Mexico, too, approved Trump trademarks in March. These developments, which all came about after Trump took office, arguably violate the Constitution’s foreign emoluments clause, which bars federal officials from “accept[ing] of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

Moreover, as has frequently been the case with the Trump Organization’s dealings in recent months, the timing of the renewals The New York Times reported on raises additional questions about whether Russia may have been trying to influence the president. Since November 8, the Trump Organization has seen unexpected progress on projects in multiple countries, including not only China but also Argentina and Georgia, where long-stalled developments both began moving forward in November. Though it remains unclear whether any of these actions were specifically meant to influence Trump, the cumulative effect suggests that international offshoots of the Trump brand are benefiting from the Trump presidency.
If you believe there was a collusion you have mental issues, please tell everyone how it affected the election result.
Empty.

None of the biggest Dems idiot heads like Obozo had a thing on him when they could ruin him with such an accusation, instead they went the ¨WHY YOU HATE WOMEN¨ ¨WHY YOU HATE CHILDREN¨ ¨YOU ARE AN ABUSER¨ ¨SHOW YOUR TAX RETURNS¨ route, instead discussion politics.

[RandomGuy]

You are talking out of your ass with MSM fake crap, none of that is even real, if it was Donnie would have been in jail long time ago, that crap makes it sound like he is Bernie Madoff.
Yet no evidence all MSM accusations, how is that Russian thing going? closer to the truth?

There is no building in Argentina, you dont know even the kind of relationship Macri and his dad had with Trump 25 years ago.

Its nice to make a list out of nowhere, but then you need the facts to back it up.

Feel free to fact check any of this. I am not even a third of the way through the list.

Don't take my word for it on the horrendous corruption I am showing you. You said that you were concerned about it, so I want to be sure you know about it.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption going on with Dems
That Meeting in Brussels

On the European leg of his first foreign trip, President Donald Trump elucidated the relationship between his business and his presidency, although in a way that only further complicates the already-difficult task of understanding how his financial interests might impact his decisions in office. According to the Belgian newspaper Le Soir, in a meeting with Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel, Trump discussed his skepticism toward the European Union through the lens of his experiences as a real-estate mogul. Per a translation in The Guardian, an anonymous source told the paper, “Every time we talk about a country, [Trump] remembered the things he had done. Scotland? He said he opened a club. Ireland? He said it took him two and a half years to get a license and that did not give him a very good image of the European Union.”

The meeting isn’t the first time the president has discussed the Trump Organization—which he still owns, but no longer operates—with other world leaders: In a phone call with Turkish President Recep Erdogan, one of the first Trump made after his election, he relayed praise from a business partner on the company’s towers in Istanbul; on the line with Mauricio Macri, the president of Argentina, Trump mentioned a long-stalled project in Buenos Aires (which suspiciously began moving forward after the exchange).

His conversation with Michel, though, is different, for one key reason: Trump has no hotels in Belgium—and, unless his company is willing to violate a pledge meant to mitigate conflicts of interest, it won’t be pursuing deals there until Trump is out of office. That doesn’t definitively preclude the possibility that he meant to boost his businesses by venting to Michel, but it certainly reduces its likelihood.

What the conversation does do, though, is demonstrate how inextricable Trump’s businesses are from his behavior as president. It’s not just that Trump has ample knowledge of his holdings to act in his own financial interests and little reason to fear that a Republican-controlled Congress might try to stop him. It’s also that Trump seems to approach every issue with a mind toward how it’s impacted his company in the past—and how it will impact his company in the future. As the aforementioned anonymous source in Le Soir described it, “One feels that he wants a system where everything can be realized very quickly and without formality”—a broad pro-business stance that would just so happen to make it significantly easier for the Trump Organization to operate in Europe as well.

As long as the president retains ownership of his company, it’s possible to impute the Trump Organization’s footprint in a variety of the administration’s policy stances. For instance, the notion that Trump favors leaders of countries where he has property is arguably the least concerning explanation for his affinity for noted authoritarians like Erdogan and Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte. On economic issues as well, the president has supported numerous policies over the years that would mainly help wealthy businesspeople in general and the Trump Organization in particular; for example, he’s in favor of weakening the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which would make it significantly easier for his company to move forward on deals in countries like Azerbaijan where bribery of public officials is more common than it is in the U.S. These questions of where genuine policy positions end and self-interest begins will continue—unless, of course, Trump does what ethics experts have urged him to do and actually sells his business.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption going on with Dems
That Tower in Toronto
President Donald Trump’s properties around the world bring with them business partners from around the world. Several of these ties have already come under scrutiny: A Trump-branded tower in Baku, Azerbaijan, put him in business with allegedly corrupt officials who are themselves connected with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, for example, while two properties in Indonesia link him to officials implicated in a bribery scandal and a racially-motivated attempt to oust a sitting governor.

Now, The Wall Street Journal has reported an additional source of a conflict of interest along these lines: Trump International Tower and Hotel in Toronto. According to the Journal, one of Trump’s partners in the project, Alexander Shnaider, received millions of dollars from the Russian bank Vnesheconombank, or VEB, shortly before investing in the project. Shnaider, who is Russian American and was the main developer on the Trump-branded property, sold his own company’s share in a Ukrainian steelmaker to VEB for $850 million in 2010. Shnaider’s lawyer said in April that $15 million from the sale went into the Toronto tower, although he walked back his statement the next day, writing that he is “not able to confirm that any funds” from the sale went into the project.

VEB is owned by the Russian government; according to its website, its mandate is “to enhance [the] competitiveness of the Russian economy, diversify it, and stimulate investment activity,” and the bank’s supervisory board is chaired by the country’s prime minister, Dmitry Medvedev. At the time of the deal with Shnaider’s company, though, its chairman was the current Russian President Vladimir Putin, who, according to a Russian government official and multiple experts, would have had to sign off on such an exchange.

As with many of Trump’s business holdings, the property represents a conflict of interest because it brings him revenue that’s made possible by money from a bank owned and operated by a foreign government. Though Trump doesn’t own the tower—he merely licenses his name to Shnaider, who owns the building through his company Talon International Development Inc.—the Trump Organization nevertheless profits off of the building and, by extension, from VEB’s deal with Shnaider. This potentially gives the Russian government leverage that it could use should it want to influence Trump’s policies. That means that the Trump Organization’s continued involvement with the tower may represent a violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause, which precludes elected officials from “accept[ing] of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

The Journal’s report highlights the inadequacy of the financial disclosures the president has so far offered. Last week, Trump insisted that his company does not have business ties to Russian “persons or entities.” As my colleague David Graham wrote, the letter from Trump’s lawyers that Trump proffered on the subject last week “doesn’t define several key terms,” leaving open the possibility that one of Trump’s projects benefited from Russian funding through a pass-through corporation or another intermediary. VEB’s role in the financing of the Trump-branded property in Toronto is a perfect example: Because money from VEB went toward enriching Trump (through Shnaider), one can reasonably argue that Trump didn’t do enough to eliminate the conflict of interest that the hotel creates for him in office.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption going on with Dems

That Caribbean Villa

President Donald Trump has another property on the market: Le Château des Palmiers, his estate on the Caribbean island of St. Maarten. The president’s company bought the 11-bedroom beachfront compound in 2013, and the Trump Organization has been using it as a rental property ever since. It’s listed at $6,000 per night on TripAdvisor; according to specialty sites such as Luxury Retreats, which lists the price as between $6,000 and $20,000, and Mansion Global, which places the upper limit at $28,000, the price increases substantially during the winter, when the Caribbean offers an escape from cold weather. According to the disclosure forms Trump submitted to the Federal Election Commission (which remain the only public documentation of his finances), he derived between $100,001 and $1 million from the property in the year leading up to May 2016.

The asking price for Le Château des Palmiers remains unknown. The Trump Organization is selling the property through the real-estate agency and auction house Sotheby’s; according to the listing for the complex, the price is available only upon request. However, there are some clues available. On his FEC disclosure forms, Trump lists the property as worth between $5 million and $25 million, which does correspond with the $19.7 million he paid for it four years ago. According to Mansion Global, 7th Heaven, a real-estate brokerage in St. Maarten, has identified the asking price as $28 million, although 7th Heaven’s current page for the property lists the price as “PoA,” or Price on Application.

Though Trump no longer runs the Trump Organization, he still owns the company and, by extension, the property, meaning that he will profit from its sale. That means that Le Château des Palmiers offers yet another avenue by which somebody could attempt to influence the president’s decisions by putting a large sum of money in his pocket. It would even be possible for somebody to make an offer well above the currently unknown asking price to curry favor with him (and, possibly, through the artful use of a shell company, hide their identity).

As NPR noted, the Trump Organization’s decision to sell Le Château des Palmiers is “the first known major divestiture of a Trump property since he became president.” As such, it demonstrates the insufficiency of the steps the president has taken to eliminate his conflicts of interest. Trump has put the leadership of his company in the hands of his adult sons and a longtime Trump Organization executive with relatively few—and, based on Donald Jr. and Eric’s frequent presence at administration events and Eric’s statement that he will share some business-related data with his father, relatively permeable—barriers blinding him from knowledge of his financial interests.

Had Trump taken the measures suggested repeatedly by ethics experts on both sides of the political aisle, he would by now have put his assets in what’s called a blind trust, which would entail turning over his empire to a third party with whom he will have no contact, who would sell off the properties and reinvest the resulting money in other assets without providing the president any information about the sales or the purchases. Instead, Trump has set up a system under which, even if he does proceed to sell off his business, one property at a time, he will simply create new conflicts of interest as he takes payments from those who are purchasing the Trump Organization’s real estate.

[TSA]

he's going full boutons.
never go full boutons.

[Mikeanaro]

RandomGuy, are you aware that you are posting all MSM crap?
You could still go on for ages, but in the end is all fake crap made to keep liberals like you hysterical.

Hillary conceded, move on.

[Pavlov]

RandomGuy, are you aware that you are posting all MSM crap?
You could still go on for ages, but in the end is all fake crap made to keep liberals like you hysterical.

Hillary conceded, move on.:lol What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

[Mikeanaro]

:lol What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?
Prove that Benghazi never happened.

[RandomGuy]

If you believe there was a collusion you have mental issues, please tell everyone how it affected the election result.
Empty.

None of the biggest Dems idiot heads like Obozo had a thing on him when they could ruin him with such an accusation, instead they went the ¨WHY YOU HATE WOMEN¨ ¨WHY YOU HATE CHILDREN¨ ¨YOU ARE AN ABUSER¨ ¨SHOW YOUR TAX RETURNS¨ route, instead discussion politics.

I am a former intelligence analyst, that entailed a top secret security clearance. My mission when I was in the military (late 80s early nineties) was to be familiar with Russia, its military, strategic goals, operational methodology, and general outlook.

After leaving the military I mulled over moving to the CIA, but opted college instead, keeping abreast of developments geopolitically, as well as militarily.

After I completed college, I became an auditor, with 10+ years experience in a field best described as forensic accounting.

I retain a familiarity with Russian strategic goals, intelligence capabilities, and governmental outlook.

The reason I believe Trump doesn't release his taxes is that he has, at some level, been laundering money for them. This is a professional opinion, from someone holding two levels of professional certification in financial examination. I base this on what is known publicly about his finances, and past dealing.

[Adam Lambert]

MSM

*ding*


fake

*ding*


keep liberals ... hysterical

*ding*


Hillary

*ding*

[Blake]

Hillary conceded, move on.

We could move back to you wanting to pee in the girls bathroom

[Adam Lambert]

Benghazi

:lmao

i changed my mind. stick around, youre like a girl talk mashup of retarded conservative arguments

[Pavlov]

Prove that Benghazi never happened.*ding*

:lmao What an odd meltdown. No one ever said Benghazi "never happened."

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

[RandomGuy]

he's going full boutons.
never go full boutons.

I thought we were talking about horrendous corruption. Have you read anything I have posted?

It details horrendous corruption.

Feel free to factually dispute any of it.

Or just continue to deflect form the horrendous corruption.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption going on with Dems

Those Condos for Sale

President Donald Trump’s finances are infamously opaque. Since he has not followed the long-standing presidential custom of releasing his tax returns to the public, the only publicly available records of where he derives his income are his two filings with the Federal Elections Commission. Even those are difficult to parse: Much of his business empire comprises limited-liability companies (or LLCs), which face very few disclosure requirements, and shell and pass-through corporations, which can obscure ownership and make money trails harder to follow.

Much the same can be said for whoever has been buying up Trump Organization condominiums. A lengthy investigation published in USA Today found that, “since launching his White House bid, Trump’s companies have sold at least 58 units nationwide”—out of a total of more than 400 currently on the market—”for about $90 million. Almost half of those sold to LLCs.” One of those LLCs, a financial firm created shortly before the Republican National Convention named Milan Investment Limited, spent $3.1 million to buy 11 condominiums in the building the president co-owns in Las Vegas.

Normally, such a story would then identify who is behind the purchase and whether they may have some ulterior motive in buying something from the president. In this case, though, repeated efforts by the USA Today to ascertain who exactly is behind Milan apparently came up empty. The company’s headquarters in a strip mall the outskirts of Las Vegas are registered to two individuals named Jun Xu and Qi Huang; however, the reporters were unable to reach Xu and Huang through either their listed addresses and phone numbers or through business associates. A third individual associated with Milan, Chen Huang, also apparently could not be reached for comment, nor did the Trump Organization respond to inquiries about the identities of the buyers. The newspaper’s attempts to find the buyers of other Trump Organization condos met with mixed results: Though reporters were able to track down the real people behind some of the purchases, including a couple who said they bought the property because they’re fans of Trump’s, others proved just as elusive as whoever is behind Milan.

As the USA Today notes, the story highlights one of the major problems underlying Trump’s decision to retain his businesses while in office. There is no law requiring a shell company like Milan to disclose the identities of its owner(s) or the source of its money while purchasing real estate. The Trump Organization still owns hundreds of condominiums, the sales of which will directly profit it and, by extension, the president; this offers plenty of chances for any individual or corporation to purchase a unit to attempt to curry favor with Trump without having to disclose their own identity to the public.

So far, the Republican-controlled Congress has shown little interest in investigating the constitutionality of Trump’s decision to hold onto his businesses. That means that the only real disincentive for those attempting to influence the president by patronizing his businesses is the bad publicity that might ensue. But Milan Investment Limited’s secretive investment in Trump’s properties shows how easy it would be for an individual or a corporation to stay anonymous and avoid that scrutiny.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption


Those Reelection-Campaign Funds

For President Donald Trump, it pays to be in constant campaign mode.

Metaphorically, at least, this isn’t unusual; the idea of the “permanent campaign,” a reference to how politicians consider their reelection chances from almost the moment they take office, has been around for decades. Such is the case for Trump, who filed a letter with the Federal Election Commission establishing his eligibility to run for a second term in 2020 just hours after taking the oath of office. Though the letter declares only that he can run, not necessarily that he will run, it gives broad coverage for the president to begin fundraising and holding campaign events, and to do so far earlier in his first term than have previous presidents.

Since doing so, Trump has held several events that, while officially presented as part of his “thank-you tour,” have seemed an awful lot like his campaign rallies. Meanwhile, between merchandise sales and an already-active fundraising effort, he has raised more than $7.1 million, and the Republican National Committee has raised an additional $23 million. That’s not necessarily noteworthy by itself; by this time, President Obama and the Democratic National Committee had raised $15 million. (Obama had not yet filed for eligibility in 2012 three months into his first term, although he had held events to promote his economic-stimulus package.) What does make Trump unusual is that he has already spent $6.3 million of his reelection campaign funds—and, according to reports he recently filed with the FEC, he is paying some of that money to his own personal businesses—for instance, renting space at his hotels or golfing on his courses—thereby literally profiting off of his permanent campaign.

This practice is nothing new for Trump. As early as 2000, he was speculating that he “could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it” by patronizing his own businesses and running the campaign out of one of his properties. During his 2016 bid, he did exactly that, establishing his political headquarters in Trump Tower (and quintupling the rent as soon as he became the Republican nominee and began drawing funds from the party rather than his personal war chest). Shortly before his victory, The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump’s campaign had paid out the unprecedented sum of more than $14 million to his family and companies for such services as flights on his personal airplanes, rent at Trump Tower, and meals and hotel rooms at other Trump buildings.

Similarly, since taking office, Trump has profited off of the federal government’s newfound need to patronize his properties. Both the Secret Service and Department of Defense are renting out space in Trump Tower, for example, with the former believed to be paying at least $3 million per year to do so. This has led to rumblings that Trump may be violating the Constitution’s domestic emoluments clause, which holds that the president “shall not receive ... any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them,” beyond his official salary.

The amount Trump’s reelection campaign has spent at his businesses is comparatively small: According to The Wall Street Journal, more than 6 percent of the $6.3 million it’s spent so far, or almost $500,000, went to Trump’s hotels, golf courses, and restaurants. But that’s a higher rate than when his campaign money was going to his own businesses for the 2016 campaign ($14 million out of a total of $322 million, or about 4.3 percent). At his current rate, if he spends a similar amount over the next election cycle—and given that he’s already started spending, he could easily far outdo himself—he would be directing nearly $20 million to his own businesses.

On top of the arguable impropriety of personally profiting off of his donors’ and his party’s largesse, the situation presents perverse incentives for Trump. Already, elected officials, up to and including the president, to an extent base their behavior in office on what they believe will play well with voters rather than (or, in the best-case scenario, on top of) what is best for America. This is certainly true of Trump, whose every decision seems to prompt discussion of how it plays into the tension between his nationalist base and traditional Republican voters.

The personal financial benefits of campaigning mean that Trump has a little more motivation to delve into his reelection efforts than most politicians in his position. Because he is personally profiting, he has another reason to aim his politics toward his base so that they will continue donating to him and buying his merchandise in the downtime between election years. Moreover, rather than stockpile for 2020, he has an incentive to keep up the campaign rallies—and keep charging for them, as he did in 2016—so that he can continue funneling money from his donors and voters into his personal businesses.

Moreover, that the president is redirecting donors’ money into his own businesses only further highlights the inadequacy of the trust arrangement he has set up to supposedly prevent him from conflicts of interest. Trump and his lawyers have claimed that, by resigning from his positions within the Trump Organization and handing over control to his two adult sons and a long-time business associate, the president has distanced himself from his businesses enough that he will no longer be tempted to act in his own financial interests. Ethics experts (and common sense) immediately disagreed: Unless the president actually sells his businesses, many have said, and has the funds reinvested without his knowledge, he still knows more than enough about his sources of profit to put his own personal gain above that of the country. The almost $500,000 he’s channeled into the Trump Organization via his reelection campaign demonstrates this: Trump doesn’t need to be in charge of his businesses to know how to direct money their way; all he needs to know is where they are.

[Mikeanaro]

I am a former intelligence analyst, that entailed a top secret security clearance. My mission when I was in the military (late 80s early nineties) was to be familiar with Russia, its military, strategic goals, operational methodology, and general outlook.

After leaving the military I mulled over moving to the CIA, but opted college instead, keeping abreast of developments geopolitically, as well as militarily.

After I completed college, I became an auditor, with 10+ years experience in a field best described as forensic accounting.

I retain a familiarity with Russian strategic goals, intelligence capabilities, and governmental outlook.

The reason I believe Trump doesn't release his taxes is that he has, at some level, been laundering money for them. This is a professional opinion, from someone holding two levels of professional certification in financial examination. I base this on what is known publicly about his finances, and past dealing.
You could be a doctor, a lawyer and suck at your field.
You are citing MSM crap, so it doesnt matter who your mom/dad is.
Your Argentinian story is utter crap, you dont even know what you are talking about or what happened 25 years ago between the Macris and Trump.

There is no law that says Trump must release his taxes, if you have accounting degrees you should know that.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption
That Second Hotel in Washington, D.C.

There may soon be more than one Trump Hotel in Washington D.C. According to The Washington Post, the Trump Organization is considering purchasing another property in the nation’s capital to develop for its recently created Scion brand, which aims to offer a more affordable alternative to the upscale properties bearing the president’s name.

Unlike the Trump International Hotel—the upscale property that opened in September 2016 and has become something of a synecdoche for the president’s conflicts of interest—a new Scion hotel in D.C. would likely be a licensing deal. That means that, rather than the Trump Organization owning and operating the property itself, a third-party hotelier will be paying the president’s company for the right to use the Scion name; candidates identified by the Post include Foxhall Partners, which has two properties in the city and a third under development, and the Beacon Hotel in downtown D.C.

But even if it isn’t actually owned or operated by the Trump Organization, the new hotel would likely attract scrutiny along the same lines as the Trump International. A licensing agreement means that the president will not be profiting off of the building directly; payments from individuals or organizations booking rooms or events there will not go straight to the Trump Organization, but to the hotelier. But Trump will still have a financial stake in the hotel’s viability: The longer it stays in business and the more successful it is, the more (and longer) the licensee will pay to use the Scion name, and the more likely other owners may be to commit to similar partnerships with the fledgling brand. Trump has resigned from his positions with the Trump Organization and transferred control of his assets to his two adult sons and a long-time business partner. But he still owns the company, which means he will still profit from his properties. According to his son Eric, the president will even continue to receive quarterly reports on how his real-estate empire is faring financially. The pathway to Trump’s pocketbook may be slightly more complicated, but it still exists.

The proposed new property also engenders some of the same concerns as the broader round of expansions the Trump Organization announced in February. Developing a hotel, even in an existing building, means working with local government bureaucracies, such as zoning offices that sign off on structural changes or licensing boards. In any city, this would create conflicting incentives for government officials who are suddenly being asked to rule on the president’s businesses. On the one hand, Washington, D.C., like many of the cities into which the Trump Organization is looking to expand, voted strongly against the president in the 2016 election; city officials, especially those elected by D.C.’s denizens, may feel a need to factor his unpopularity into their decisions with regard to the newly proposed hotel. On the other hand, the federal government still controls D.C.’s budget, placing additional pressure to green-light a proposal from the infamously mercurial commander-in-chief.

[AaronY]

Prove that Benghazi never happened.
Benghazi :lmao

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption


That Property in Azerbaijan

When it comes to President Donald Trump’s constellation of foreign investments, properties, and companies, much of the attention so far has been on his business’s apparent violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause, which bars officeholders from taking gifts from foreign leaders. According to numerous ethics experts, the clause takes an expansive definition of gifts, encompassing everything from a direct bribe to a foreign official’s approval of construction of a new Trump property. But some of the Trump Organization’s properties raise additional red flags due to the specific partners involved. That’s true in Indonesia, for example, where Trump’s affiliates have been involved in bribery scandals and radical Islamic nationalist parties, and Brazil, where the company pulled out of a branding agreement amid a criminal investigation of a local business partner.

Such is the case in Azerbaijan, which Transparency International ranks as among the most corrupt countries in the world, where the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Baku remains unopened. Though the long-stalled development has generated a steady drip of news and rumors for years, an overview by Adam Davidson in The New Yorker, entitled “Donald Trump’s Worst Deal,” puts into perspective just how convoluted the situation is, and just how much the project has led Trump and his company into a partnership with numerous corrupt officials in the Middle East. The details suggest that, on top of the continual underlying breach of the emoluments clause, the Trump Organization’s involvement may also violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, which forbids American companies from participating, even unknowingly, in bribery schemes in other countries, with a penalty of up to $2 million and up to five years in jail.

According to Davidson, though the project originated in 2008 as a high-end apartment building, the Trump Organization has had a licensing deal with the building’s Azerbaijani developers to turn the property into a hotel since 2012. Though the Trump Organization presented the deal as a straightforward licensing agreement, it was in fact a much more involved agreement granting the company—specifically, Trump’s daughter Ivanka—extensive oversight over the project. Based on his FEC disclosures in 2016, which as of this moment remain the only official record of Trump’s finances, the president has so far made $2.8 million from the partnership.

But what makes this story unique among the dozens of ethical questions surrounding the president is the Trump Organization’s partners on the project. Ostensibly, the main developer behind the property is Anar Mammadov. He is in turn the son of Azerbaijan’s transportation minister Ziya Mammadov, who was once described in a leaked diplomatic cable as “notoriously corrupt even for Azerbaijan.” Also in on the deal, though not initially publicly disclosed, is Ziya’s brother Elton, who founded the company that currently owns the property in Baku while serving in Azerbaijan’s parliament. Then there’s the Mammadovs’ relationships with Iranian oligarchs. For years, the Mammadovs have been closely linked with the Darvishis, whose members include the head of a construction firm implicated in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s possibly illicit financial operations and the former leader of a company that was sanctioned by the United States for its role in Iran’s attempts to develop an arsenal of nuclear missiles. As the Mammadovs’ influence within Azerbaijan has begun to weaken in recent years, they have increased both their wealth and their mutually profitable relationship with the Darvishis, green-lighting a number of deals that will prove lucrative for both families.

Alan Garten, the chief legal officer for the Trump Organization, asserted to The New Yorker that, as the company has never worked directly with Ziya or Elton Mammadov, it has not engaged in any behavior that should trip ethical alarms. He has additionally claimed that the company did “extensive due diligence” in making the deal, which did not raise “any red flags,” although the actual employees who carried out the process are no longer with the company.

Still, merely by partnering with the Mammadov family, the Trump Organization may have violated the FCPA. The law explicitly covers cases in which an American company claims not to have known it was working with corrupt officials; jurisprudence since its 1977 passage has further expanded the law’s definition to include “conscious avoidance,” or active efforts by an American company to not learn of a foreign partner’s corruption. So though Garten claims that, since the Trump Organization did not have enough control over the project and has not itself engaged in bribery, its hands are essentially clean, experts on the law say that the Trump Organization may be legally liable if its foreign partners engaged in corrupt practices.

Adding to all this is the fact that Trump is on the record as opposing the FCPA in May 2012, right when it would have become relevant to his company’s engagement in Azerbaijan. Trump called the law “absolutely horrible” and argued that, since other countries do not have the same provision, American corporations are at a major disadvantage in which bribery is the norm. Trump’s appointee to the Securities and Exchange Commission (which enforces the statute), Jay Clayton, similarly considers the FCPA an obstacle to U.S. companies seeking to expand abroad. A dissenting voice on the topic is Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who stated in his confirmation hearings that he intends to continue enforcing the statute. Which of these voices will end up winning out on the topic remains an open question.

This, then, is the situation in which the Trump Organization—and, by extension, the president, who has stepped down from his position within the business but who retains ownership—finds itself in Azerbaijan: The company’s direct partner on Trump Tower Baku is the scion of a wealthy and notoriously corrupt family that appears to have only stepped up its self-dealing as its political power wanes. That family is engaged in what appears to be a relationship of mutual graft with Iranian oligarchs with deep connections to their country’s Revolutionary Guard, the ideological militia widely suspected by the international community of gross corruption and sponsoring terror at home and abroad.

These families can be added to the ever-growing list of international partners whose relationships with the Trump Organization could create conflicts of interest for the president. The Mammadovs’ arrangement with Trump’s company may not only violate the emoluments clause but could also feasibly put the president and his family in legal trouble should the SEC choose to actively pursue enforcement of the FCPA in Azerbaijan. And the Darvishis could in turn use their relationship to influence the Mammadovs, which could have significant implications should Trump attempt, as he has said he will, to take hard-line stances that could affect the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s activities. And if Trump so chooses, he could direct the Justice Department to curtail its enforcement of the FCPA or even use his bully pulpit to lead a legislative push to undo it, essentially condoning unethical behavior that in many countries enables leaders to personally profit at the expense of their own citizens—which, of course, could be a fair way to characterize the current situation with Trump’s business holdings.

[Adam Lambert]

countdown to :cry but her emails :cry

[Mikeanaro]

:lmao What an odd meltdown. No one ever said Benghazi "never happened."

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?
What are your sources to prove anything corrupt about the Trump presidency?

[TSA]

I thought we were talking about horrendous corruption. Have you read anything I have posted?

It details horrendous corruption.

Feel free to factually dispute any of it.

Or just continue to deflect form the horrendous corruption.

We are supposed to be talking about girls having penises and boys having vaginas.

[Adam Lambert]

What are your sources to prove anything corrupt about the Trump presidency?

reality

[Mikeanaro]

:lmao

i changed my mind. stick around, youre like a girl talk mashup of retarded conservative arguments
You are the dumb person who cant understand Hillary lost and its time to move on.

[Pavlov]

What are your sources to prove anything corrupt about the Trump presidency?:lmao you're really having trouble answering aren't you?

I'm more than content to give Mueller and his Flying Circus as much time to investigate Trump as Walsh and Starr had.

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

[Mikeanaro]

reality
MSM reality?

[Adam Lambert]

You are the dumb person who cant understand Hillary lost and its time to move on.

i have moved on. youre the one whos still talking about benghazi, dumbass.

[Pavlov]

We are supposed to be talking about girls having penises and boys having vaginas.Mikeanaro *ding*ed Democratic corruption, so here we are.

I personally want everyone to read about the Mucci meltdown myself. It's a riot.

[RandomGuy]

You could be a doctor, a lawyer and suck at your field.
You are citing MSM crap, so it doesnt matter who your mom/dad is.
Your Argentinian story is utter crap, you dont even know what you are talking about or what happened 25 years ago between the Macris and Trump.

There is no law that says Trump must release his taxes, if you have accounting degrees you should know that.

MSM or not, everything here can be factually verified, if you choose.

It is either true, or it isn't.

You now get to chose whether to do some fact checking, or be lazy.

Most people who use the "MSM" short hand are vastly lazy in my experience. I think it is part of what I call the intellectual bankrupcy of modern "conservatism" and the Republican party.

Continue ignoring it, without doing any fact checking, and prove me right on that. Please. You chose lazy, I win.

[Mikeanaro]

:lmao you're really having trouble answering aren't you?

I'm more than content to give Mueller and his Flying Circus as much time to investigate Trump as Walsh and Starr had.

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?
You have nothing on him, he mopped the floor with your ass.
You against something without having any solid fact.
So its all a big fart.

[Adam Lambert]

MSM reality?

actual reality that happens to be reported in the msm like many many other real things.

i know its comforting to be an ostrich and reflexively reject bad news if it comes from the msm, but it just means your an ignorant retard with no grasp of reality, and thats why everyone laughs at you and no one loves you.

[RandomGuy]

We are supposed to be talking about girls having penises and boys having vaginas.

I guess. But someone said they were concerned about horrendous corruption.

Are you not concerned about corruption?

[Mikeanaro]

i have moved on. youre the one whos still talking about benghazi, dumbass.
Lol, thats why you are talking all the time against Trump? look at your signature, is that moving on?
By the way, what was the bomb Trump was dropping today?
Oh yeah, a giant nothing.

[Pavlov]

You have nothing on him, he mopped the floor with your ass.
You against something without having any solid fact.
So its all a big fart.Are you trying to steal my broken English shtick?

Anyone can be against Trump even if he's completely innocent.

Now, what are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

[RandomGuy]

What are your sources to prove anything corrupt about the Trump presidency?

The article I have linked to you has hundreds of them.

If you like, I can compile a list for you to fact-check. I am not lazy. I do the reading and heavy lifting.

[Mikeanaro]

actual reality that happens to be reported in the msm like many many other real things.

i know its comforting to be an ostrich and reflexively reject bad news if it comes from the msm, but it just means your an ignorant retard with no grasp of reality, and thats why everyone laughs at you and no one loves you.
Says the guy that uses Adam Lambert the colossal faggot as an avi.
Very clever.

[Adam Lambert]

Lol, thats why you are talking all the time against Trump? look at your signature, is that moving on?

because hes the president of the united states you pathetic fucktard.


By the way, what was the bomb Trump was dropping today?
Oh yeah, a giant nothing.

:wtf
are you talking about the bomb tsa was predicting he would drop?

we had a good laugh about that. you should keep up better if youre going to contribute here.

[Pavlov]

Says the guy that uses Adam Lambert the colossal faggot as an avi.
Very clever.Lots of people love Adam Lambert though.

The real one. IDK this dude.

[Adam Lambert]

Says the guy that uses Adam Lambert the colossal faggot as an avi.
Very clever.

nothing triggers retarded faggots than another faggot keeping them in line.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Resort in the Dominican Republic

The Trump Organization’s January 11 pledge that it would no longer be pursuing new deals in foreign countries is looking increasingly toothless. Shortly after President Donald Trump took office, The Guardian reported that the president’s business would be moving forward with a planned expansion of its golf course in Aberdeen. Now, the Associated Press has reported that the company is working on a licensing deal in the Dominican Republic.

As was true with the Aberdeen plans, the Trump Organization has provided a narrow justification under which it argues that the news does not violate its promise. Technically, it argues, the deal is not new: The Trump Organization has had a contract with Ricardo and Fernando Hazoury, the brothers who own the Cap Cana Resort in the Dominican Republic, since 2007. But the financial crisis and disagreements between the Trump family and the Hazoury brothers, which climaxed with Eric Trump accusing the pair of “textbook fraud” in a 2012 lawsuit, had stalled the arrangement for nearly a decade, and the two parties haven’t written a new contract since the 2007 deal was struck. Even other real-estate developers have said that the resumption of the relationship between the Trumps and Hazourys caught them by surprise. For their part, the Hazourys have said that the relationship with the Trumps “remains incredibly strong, especially with Eric, who has led this project since its conception.”

The development in the Dominican Republic epitomizes the way the Trump Organization seems intent to violate the spirit of their “no new foreign deals” pledge, and arguably even the letter. Asked about the Organization’s justification for the deal, Richard Painter, who served as the ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, noted that the company “can take the tiniest little past involvement in something and then extend it into an enormous new deal” and hasn’t presented a meaningful way “to distinguish between new business and old business.” Already, the Trump Organization has provided excuses for moving forward with two projects based on an interpretation of its own pledge that seems predicated on the idea that a deal can only be described as “new” if there had never been any relationship whatsoever between the Trump family and the property in question. As the company finds more explanations to broaden what initially seemed to be a clear-cut policy to reduce conflicts of interest—arguably, the only step in Trump’s plan that actually would have helped him do so—the pledge will likely become increasingly meaningless.

The Cap Cana story is yet another conflict of interest that only became public because of reporting from local media—and because of the nonchalance with which the Trump family handles the relationship between their business and the presidency. The first outlet to report on Eric’s trip was the Dominican newspaper Diario Libre, shortly after Cap Cana posted a picture of the Hazourys with Eric on its website. This follows stories like the president’s phone call with the president of Argentina and his company’s plans to expand into Taiwan, both of which were similarly broken by local newspapers before getting picked up by American press outlets. Further, like the president’s post-election meeting with business partners from India and Eric’s trip to Uruguay, the Trump family’s propensity for photo ops played a role: Even amid intensifying scrutiny of the Trump Organization’s actions, Eric seems unworried about having not only taken the trip but also taken pictures with his business partners.

The president’s putative pick for his ambassador to the Dominican Republic only adds to the perception that Trump will intermingle business and politics in the country. Trump has picked Robin Bernstein, a campaign donor, business partner, and founding member of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club, to be his administration’s representative in the country. Bernstein and her husband Richard have been in business with the president and his company for decades through The Americas Group, a consulting and marketing firm focused on construction projects in Latin America and the Caribbean. Choosing personal friends and supporters to be ambassadors is relatively common, especially in countries with which the United States has relatively uncomplicated relations. However, Trump’s decision to appoint somebody with whom he has long maintained a financial relationship—his second such appointment, after having named fellow billionaire real-estate developer and business partner Steven Roth to head his infrastructure program—suggests a continued willingness to blur the lines between his endeavors as a businessman and his duties as president, all while contributing to the perception that the president is willing to reward those who have done business with him in the past.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption


That Meeting at Mar-a-Lago
Of his first three weekends in office, President Donald Trump spent two of them away from Washington, D.C., at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. On his first trip to the resort, which he has dubbed his “Winter White House,” Trump spent time on the golf course, attended a ball held by the Red Cross—a federally chartered organization over which he will likely be tasked to wield authority while in office—and held a Super Bowl party at which he hobnobbed with wealthy patrons.


His third weekend in office, Trump brought a guest of honor along with him: the prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe. After first meeting with Abe at the real White House, Trump took his Japanese counterpart to Florida for a weekend on the links. The biggest controversy out of the weekend was over the president’s handling of a situation that developed on Saturday, February 11: As news of a North Korean missile test broke during dinner, Trump and Abe discussed the situation in public, using light from phones of gathered onlookers to read briefing documents, an incredibly lax approach to information security, particularly ironic given that Trump won in part because of his opponent’s own lapses in information security.

The situation perfectly encapsulates the way the president’s business interests are coming up against those of the country. Already, the Trump Organization’s decision to double Mar-a-Lago’s initiation fees led to accusations of profiteering, premised on the notion that people would be willing to pony up in the hopes of earning an audience with the commander-in-chief.

The events of Saturday, February 11 took the problem to a whole new level. By discussing the recently obtained intelligence with Abe without leaving the table, the president committed a breach of international-security protocol in a very public setting. Even had the meeting been taking place in the White House, Trump’s lackadaisical approach to information security would have been cause for concern; for self-evident reasons, briefings on urgent security situations do not typically happen in somewhat open settings around civilians. But on the patio at Mar-a-Lago, the situation becomes much more dangerous, because the patio is not a secure setting, and the administration does not appear to have taken measures to make it one. This is a perfect example of a conflict of interest in practice: Trump has an incentive to host an event at Mar-a-Lago (personal financial gain) that runs directly counter to what would be best for the country’s security (hosting the event at the White House or an otherwise secure location). Not only that, part of the appeal of Mar-a-Lago is that guests will have a front-row ticket to see Trump at work. Previous presidents like Barack Obama, meanwhile, took a more conventional, and far more secure, approach, setting up a mobile security perimeter known as a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF, to ensure that nobody in the area could look in on or overhear the president’s dealings.

According to the president’s Press Secretary Sean Spicer, Mar-a-Lago does, in fact, have a SCIF on site that they used for the remainder of the Trump’s conversation about North Korea with Abe. That they apparently began their discussion at the dinner table before deploying the SCIF underscores the problem of the situation at Mar-a-Lago: Trump has a financial incentive to hold an open-air meeting like Saturday night’s to keep up the appearance that, by paying to be a member of his exclusive club, anyone can have access to the most powerful man in the world.

Who could have been present? The club’s membership list is private, meaning that the American public has no way of knowing who was around to overhear the conversation. (Two Democratic senators, Tom Udall and Sheldon Whitehouse, have introduced a bill to change this fact, but there is little evidence suggesting it has any hopes of passing through the Republican-held Congress.) Nor have the Trump Organization and White House been forthcoming as to how they intend to screen club members and employees for security clearance; though Udall and Whitehouse reached out to the administration to ask how Mar-a-Lago vets guests for security risks, but received no response. In such a public place, and without protective measures like a SCIF, there may not be anything to stop an agent of a foreign government or other malicious actor from paying the $200,000 initiation fee to stay at the club, effectively paying to be near to the president when he receives sensitive information. Unless Trump takes significant steps either to erect barriers between himself and the guests at Mar-a-Lago—which he certainly didn’t do this time, and which could reduce his ability to profit from the property—there is a real possibility that he will continue to compromise his country’s interests when he travels to his resort in Palm Beach.

One patron of the club, Richard DeAgazio, demonstrated just how much of a breakdown the situation represents. DeAgazio, who, according to a photo he posted on Facebook, joined the club in December after Trump’s election, snapped several pictures of the president and prime minister’s conversation, which helped corroborate a CNN report on the public nature of the ad-hoc meeting and details such as the use of cellphone flashlights to illuminate documents; he also took pictures with Trump’s chief strategist Steve Bannon and the president’s “body man,” whose job is in part to carry the “nuclear football” containing missile-launch codes (and who was initially identified by name in the photo’s caption). As if to reinforce impression that Mar-a-Lago members gain unprecedented access to the the president, even in the middle of a crisis situation, another patron was able to film Trump giving a toast at a wedding shortly after his press conference with Abe.

There is no reason to believe that DeAgazio had any intention of compromising international security with his pictures; he appears to simply be a wealthy Trump supporter who was excited at the chance to see his commander-in-chief in action and wanted photographs with which to remember the occasion. (He has since apparently either deleted his Facebook profile or increased his privacy settings so that it is no longer publicly accessible.) Nevertheless, he demonstrated just how Trump’s continued commingling of his business interests and his presidency places not just Americans but the entire global community in jeopardy.

In a way, the sheer enormity of the situation at Mar-a-Lago briefly crowded out the fact that merely bringing Abe to Mar-a-Lago demonstrates Trump’s conflicts of interest neatly. Though diplomatic meetings outside the White House are not unprecedented, Trump’s trip with Abe is likely the first instance of the president actually making money from such a meeting. Though Trump said that he was footing Abe’s bill, with both increased Secret Service presence and Abe’s retinue on hand, there’s a distinct possibility that, at some point in the weekend, somebody from the U.S. or Japanese government made a payment that ended up in Trump’s pocket. On top of that, the visit generated an inordinate amount of free publicity for Mar-a-Lago, which Trump repeatedly mentioned (and posted photos of) on his social media accounts and was continually noted in coverage of the weekend.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Defense Department Trump Tower Rental

President Donald Trump’s most iconic property is about to get a new tenant: the Department of Defense. According to CNN, the Pentagon, hewing to a longstanding policy of establishing an offshoot headquarters near the president’s private, non-White House residence, is planning to lease space in Trump Tower in New York City to maintain close proximity to Trump should he choose to spend time there instead of Washington, D.C..

The Department of Defense’s decision is yet another example of how Trump’s decision to hold onto his business interests is rewriting norms surrounding the presidency and creating problems in what were once uncontroversial procedures. As mentioned above, the Department of Defense’s decision is not unique to Trump’s presidency: They took up residence in Chicago, for example, during Barack Obama’s two terms for the exact same reason.

The difference, as is true in so many of the stories surrounding Trump and his family’s conflicts of interest—the Red Cross’s decision to hold its annual ball at Mar-a-Lago, for example, or Eric Trump’s business trip to Uruguay—is that the president himself is now making money off of routine governmental functions. Exactly how much money remains unknown, as the Department of Defense has yet to publicly state how much space they will be renting and for how long. However, details of the Secret Service’s decision to do the same are instructive as to the general scope of the bill. When that news first broke back in November 2016, the New York Post used publicly available information regarding rents at Trump Tower to deduce that, at a cost of up to $105 per square foot, the Secret Service’s decision to occupy two 3,000- to 5,000-square-foot floors of the building could cost taxpayers more than $3 million a year, a significant portion of which would be going to the Trump Organization, and, by extension, the president himself.

Just how much the DoD will be paying the Trump Organization for the privilege of working out of the president’s property is not the only outstanding question. Trump’s protestations to the contrary aside, scientific evidence shows that the mere knowledge that one has profited from a relationship in the past often leads to preferential behavior, which could lead Trump to favor the Pentagon in his decision-making. As a result, beyond the overarching problem of a government agency paying the president himself a large sum of money to set up shop in the president’s property, the Department of Defense’s decision to rent space in Trump Tower could have significant ramifications for how the Trump White House operates.

[Mikeanaro]

Are you trying to steal my broken English shtick?

Anyone can be against Trump even if he's completely innocent.

Now, what are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?
Its useless to argue with you, you are like a retarded version of Hal from 2001 Space Odyssey.
Try to play logic games but then you dont have any material on your own, excepting try to ask the poster dumb questions while deflecting from the main subject.
How do you know 1+1=2 Blah Blah

After all you are the guy that switched accounts after the giant meltdown, nobody had a photoshop thread ever, except you.

http://i57.tinypic.com/xm79lv.jpg

Thats reality, can you prove otherwise?

[Mikeanaro]

nothing triggers retarded faggots than another faggot keeping them in line.
Triggers? you started messaging me faggot.

[RandomGuy]

Well shit, only half-way through the horrendous corruption. I do have to eat at some point, so I will have to finish later.

TSA, feel free to answer my question:

Does corruption concern you?


Mike, be sure to let me know what you choose. Lazy or not. I'm good either way.

[Mikeanaro]

Well shit, only half-way through the horrendous corruption. I do have to eat at some point, so I will have to finish later.

TSA, feel free to answer my question:

Does corruption concern you?


Mike, be sure to let me know what you choose. Lazy or not. I'm good either way.
Go eat, but everything remains the same, if those things were solid, Trump would be doing time long ago.

[Pavlov]

Its useless to argue with you, you are like a retarded version of Hal from 2001 Space Odyssey.
Try to play logic games but then you dont have any material on your own, excepting try to ask the poster dumb questions while deflecting from the main subject.
How do you know 1+1=2 Blah Blah

After all you are the guy that switched accounts after the giant meltdown, nobody had a photoshop thread ever, except you.

http://i57.tinypic.com/xm79lv.jpg

Thats reality, can you prove otherwise?Man, your meltdown gets better with every post.

I ask you this simple question: What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

after you bring up the subject. Now you have to go back to SA210's failed pho.to jihad after he melted down.

Desperate times for you. You must be feeling overwhelmed when asked for a simple source.

[Blake]

Its useless to argue with you, you are like a retarded version of Hal from 2001 Space Odyssey.
Try to play logic games but then you dont have any material on your own, excepting try to ask the poster dumb questions while deflecting from the main subject.
How do you know 1+1=2 Blah Blah

After all you are the guy that switched accounts after the giant meltdown, nobody had a photoshop thread ever, except you.

http://i57.tinypic.com/xm79lv.jpg

Thats reality, can you prove otherwise?

Uhoh....SA210 jpeg

[Pavlov]

Uhoh....SA210 jpegYeah, the gloves are off. Mikeanaro is pulling out the big guns, right?

To be fair, I did ask him where he got his information about Democratic Party corruption, so I should expect my family to be assassinated soon.

[Mikeanaro]

Man, your meltdown gets better with every post.

I ask you this simple question: What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

after you bring up the subject. Now you have to go back to SA210's failed pho.to jihad after he melted down.

Desperate times for you. You must be feeling overwhelmed when asked for a simple source.
Its very easy actually, you are a Dem, you have your ¨experts¨ and you trust their info.
They said Hillary was going to win by a landslide.
Hillary lost by a landslide, even in Florida.
98,1% chances of winning, and you want to ask me about democratic corruption?
:bobo

[Mikeanaro]

Uhoh....SA210 jpeg
Good times.

[Pavlov]

Its very easy actually, you are a Dem, you have your ¨experts¨ and you trust their info.
They said Hillary was going to win by a landslide.
Hillary lost by a landslide, even in Florida.
98,1% chances of winning, and you want to ask me about democratic corruption?
:boboWell, yeah -- you brought up Democratic corruption, so I am asking you.

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

[Blake]

Good times.

Retarded times.

But hey, I searched and can't seem to find the thread. You pulled up that jpeg pretty fast. Gimme the link to it.

[ducks]

transgender people want me to accept who they are yet they were not able to accept themselves for who they were

[Mikeanaro]

Well, yeah -- you brought up Democratic corruption, so I am asking you.

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?
Already answered in #303.

[Pavlov]

Already answered in #303.
No.

Its very easy actually, you are a Dem, you have your ¨experts¨ and you trust their info.
They said Hillary was going to win by a landslide.
Hillary lost by a landslide, even in Florida.
98,1% chances of winning, and you want to ask me about democratic corruption?
:boboIs not an answer to this question:

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

Just answer the question. You brought it up.

[Mikeanaro]

Retarded times.

But hey, I searched and can't seem to find the thread. You pulled up that jpeg pretty fast. Gimme the link to it.
Because that thread doesnt exist anymore.
This one still does http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225474

[Mikeanaro]

No.
Is not an answer to this question:

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

Just answer the question. You brought it up.
I wont help you this time, go a little further than your electronic calculator logic.
This is not a spelling bee contest.

[Pavlov]

Because that thread doesnt exist anymore.
This one still does http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225474Did you have it bookmarked?

[Pavlov]

I wont help you this time, go a little further than your electronic calculator logic.
This is not a spelling bee contest.I asked you:

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

You have not answered with any sources where you read/watch/hear about all the Democratic Party corruption.

You've just gotten bizarrely angry.

[Mikeanaro]

I asked you:

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

You have not answered with any sources where you read/watch/hear about all the Democratic Party corruption.

You've just gotten bizarrely angry.
Really mad, went to the street and punched an old lady in the guts.
You should not be asking others about sources when yours were awful ¨wrong¨ all the time.

[Pavlov]

Really mad, went to the street and punched an old lady in the guts.
You should not be asking others about sources when yours were awful ¨wrong¨ all the time.But you're saying yours are all right.

So what are they?

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

[Blake]

Because that thread doesnt exist anymore.
This one still does http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225474

That boy George pic isn't there. Where'd you get it

[TSA]

transgender people want me to accept who they are yet they were not able to accept themselves for who they were

:rollin

[Pavlov]

That boy George pic isn't there. Where'd you get it:rollin

[TSA]

Did you have it bookmarked?

ST notebook, duh

[clambake]

transgender people want me to accept who they are yet they were not able to accept themselves for who they were

i don't think its humanly possible to explain this to you.

[TSA]

I asked you:

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?

You have not answered with any sources where you read/watch/hear about all the Democratic Party corruption.

You've just gotten bizarrely angry.

I assume he's talking about the rampant corruption seen from the DNC during the election. And also now what is still happening with Wasserman-Schultz. Do you deny any of that corruption?

[Mikeanaro]

But you're saying yours are all right.

So what are they?

What are your sources for all the Democratic party corruption that is your biggest concern?
You should not be questioning or asking sources when yours were epic ¨wrong¨ all the time
Its like accusing someone saying he smells like ass, but then yours stinks.
Get your info right and I will reveal my ¨sources¨.

[Blake]

i don't think its humanly possible to explain this to you.

ducks wants you to accept ducks for what he is

[Mikeanaro]

That boy George pic isn't there. Where'd you get it
Google.

[Blake]

You should not be questioning or asking sources when yours were epic ¨wrong¨ all the time
Its like accusing someone saying he smells like ass, but then yours stinks.
Get your info right and I will reveal my ¨sources¨.

That's awful logic

[clambake]

You should not be questioning or asking sources when yours were epic ¨wrong¨ all the time
Its like accusing someone saying he smells like ass, but then yours stinks.
Get your info right and I will reveal my ¨sources¨.

you could tell me. my sources weren't wrong.

[Blake]

Google.

What were the search words you used

And why did you link that other thread?

[Mikeanaro]

I assume he's talking about the rampant corruption seen from the DNC during the election. And also now what is still happening with Wasserman-Schultz. Do you deny any of that corruption?
Can you believe Yahoo and Huffington Post, those respectable info places have no articles on that matter? They talk about Tomi Lahren...

[Mikeanaro]

What were the search words you used
¨Chumpdumper¨ then search images and voila!

[Mikeanaro]

That's awful logic
Why, if someone has everything wrong what kind of base has to be judging others? specially with a distorted point of view.

[Pavlov]

http://www.nordicfx.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/stone_001_nordicfxnet_diffuse_reduced.jpgSo easy. It's especially entertaining when the stone waller insists he's right.

[clambake]

Why, if someone has everything wrong what kind of base has to be judging others? specially with a distorted point of view.

i don't have that problem. you can tell me.

[Pavlov]

¨Chumpdumper¨ then search images and voila!:lol Dude searched "Chumpdumper."

[Mikeanaro]

So easy. It's especially entertaining when the stone waller insists he's right.
Following your logic Hillary won, TRUMP CONCEDED!

[Pavlov]

Following your logic Hillary won, TRUMP CONCEDED!Is logic a different thing where you live?

[Mikeanaro]

i don't have that problem. you can tell me.
You have, you are a liberal, TRUMP CONCEDED! :tu

[Mikeanaro]

Is logic a different thing where you live?
You can bet.

[Pavlov]

You have, you are a liberal, TRUMP CONCEDED! :tu:rollin you guys broke him

[Pavlov]

You can bet.Can I?

Where would someone bet on that?

[TSA]

So easy. It's especially entertaining when the stone waller insists he's right.

I assume he's talking about the rampant corruption seen from the DNC during the election. And also now what is still happening with Wasserman-Schultz. Do you deny any of that corruption?

[I. Hustle]

Yeah, bible beaters pushing their nonsensical agendas upset me. I won't lie.

What's your reason for showing up here every time this crap gets brought up?

To see your reaction.

I'll be honest with you, I'll back any person serving our country. You just crack me up.

[Pavlov]

I assume he's talking about the rampant corruption seen from the DNC during the election. And also now what is still happening with Wasserman-Schultz. Do you deny any of that corruption?I don't know what he's talking about TBH. You of all people should know what stonewalling is.

[Mikeanaro]

Can I?

Where would someone bet on that?
Anywhere excepting NY and California, TSA has a good question there, very logical too.

[Pavlov]

Anywhere excepting NY and California, TSA has a good question there, very logical too.What are the betting limits on the definition of logic in Texas?

[Mikeanaro]

What are the betting limits on the definition of logic in Texas?
Go ask to the governor, Im not in charge...

[clambake]

Go ask to the governor, Im not in charge...

are you mavsfan1000?

[Pavlov]

Go ask to the governor, Im not in charge...But you claim betting on the definition of logic is legal there.

Was that a lie?

[Mikeanaro]

But you claim betting on the definition of logic is legal there.

Was that a lie?
Did I say it was a lie? thats no 1978 personal computer logic...

[Pavlov]

Did I say it was a lie? thats no 1978 personal computer logic...I asked you if it was a lie.

Now you can answer yes or no.

[Mikeanaro]

I asked you if it was a lie.

Now you can answer yes or no.
Did I say it was a lie? never talked about the moon, did I say it is flat?
Never talked about Texas, why assume I said something about it? You need the whip boy... that computer needs a change of battery.

This will do the job.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61xfItVxQEL._UX342_.jpg

[Pavlov]

Anywhere excepting NY and CaliforniaThat includes Texas.

[SnakeBoy]

I am a former intelligence analyst, that entailed a top secret security clearance. My mission when I was in the military (late 80s early nineties) was to be familiar with Russia, its military, strategic goals, operational methodology, and general outlook.

After leaving the military I mulled over moving to the CIA, but opted college instead, keeping abreast of developments geopolitically, as well as militarily.

After I completed college, I became an auditor, with 10+ years experience in a field best described as forensic accounting.

I retain a familiarity with Russian strategic goals, intelligence capabilities, and governmental outlook.

The reason I believe Trump doesn't release his taxes is that he has, at some level, been laundering money for them. This is a professional opinion, from someone holding two levels of professional certification in financial examination. I base this on what is known publicly about his finances, and past dealing.

You used to say you were an insurance adjuster

[spurraider21]

how can you even have a professional opinion of what trump is doing if you haven't seen his financials?

[SnakeBoy]

This is just pandering. Trump is always looking for a diversion away from all that is Russia related.

Or just trying to drive lefties off the cliff with nothing more than a tweet. Worked on RandomGuy

[Pavlov]

3D chess!

[Blake]

To see your reaction.

I'll be honest with you, I'll back any person serving our country. You just crack me up.

I hate seeing a group of people get shit on and say so on a message board. Hilarious!

[RandomGuy]

Go eat, but everything remains the same, if those things were solid, Trump would be doing time long ago.

(sighs)

That isn't the way conflict of interest works, and much of the potential money-laundering remains uninvestigated.

Are you not worried about horrendous corruption?

[RandomGuy]

I wont help you this time, go a little further than your electronic calculator logic.
This is not a spelling bee contest.


No it is not.

I noticed you seem to have chosen the "lazy" route of not bothering fact checking any of the details of the horrendous corruption I posted.

I wasn't even half-way done, and you read exactly none of it, nor did you bother fact-checking any of it. If it were really all that bad, it would be easy.

I can only assume you were lying when you said you were concerned about corruption, then.

Lying.
Lazy.

Conservative to a "T".

[RandomGuy]

You used to say you were an insurance adjuster

Nope. Auditor, i.e. "financial examinations".

[Adam Lambert]

I hate seeing a group of people get shit on and say so on a message board. Hilarious!

dont you know that caring about the rights of weird people is hella lame bro?

[Mikeanaro]

(sighs)

That isn't the way conflict of interest works, and much of the potential money-laundering remains uninvestigated.

Are you not worried about horrendous corruption?
Im worried about your sourcers, the ones that said Hillary had 98,1% chances of winning, where the hell did they get those numbers? ¨experts¨

[Mikeanaro]

No it is not.

I noticed you seem to have chosen the "lazy" route of not bothering fact checking any of the details of the horrendous corruption I posted.

I wasn't even half-way done, and you read exactly none of it, nor did you bother fact-checking any of it. If it were really all that bad, it would be easy.

I can only assume you were lying when you said you were concerned about corruption, then.

Lying.
Lazy.

Conservative to a "T".
Because its crap, you dont have an idea about the Macri-Trump relationship, so you dont even check your claims.
Thats being lazy.

[RandomGuy]

Because its crap, you dont have an idea about the Macri-Trump relationship, so you dont even check your claims.
Thats being lazy.

If you cared about corruption you would fact check what I posted.

You didn't check.

So you don't care.

You lied about being concerned with it.

Hand-waving is exactly what people who think the moon landings were faked do.

"Here is evidence showing we went to the moon"

"It's crap".

"Did you look at it?"

"No, why should it, it must be fake."

"How do you know its fake?"

"Because it is".

You get to stand in the corner with the asshats who argue that the moon landings were faked.

[RandomGuy]

Im worried about your sourcers, the ones that said Hillary had 98,1% chances of winning, where the hell did they get those numbers? ¨experts¨

https://i.imgflip.com/1ohmpf.jpg

[Mikeanaro]

https://i.imgflip.com/1ohmpf.jpg
Sure, now that never happened.
Makes your sources even more legit.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Red Cross Ball

The web of President Donald Trump’s conflicts of interest has grown to encompass the American Red Cross, which held its annual ball on Saturday, February 4, at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. By hosting the ball, the Trump Organization accepted money from an organization that, while not a federal agency per se, is subject to federal oversight that at some point in the next four years will likely involve President Trump.

Unlike a number of the events at Trump properties that have been featured in this list of Trump’s conflicts of interest, the Red Cross Ball, which celebrated the organization’s centennial anniversary, appears to have been scheduled before Trump even received the Republican nomination for president; a calendar listing on the website of the Coastal Star, a local newspaper covering events in the Palm Beach area, is recorded as having been placed in April 2016. Additionally, though the event has been held elsewhere in the past, this was not the first time it has taken place at Mar-a-Lago: Not only was last year’s ball held there, but the very first Red Cross Ball was hosted there by the property’s prior owner, the famous socialite Marjorie Merriweather Post.

Given all that, there is no indication that the decision to hold the event at Mar-a-Lago had anything to do with Trump’s election, and the fact that Trump will likely be attending the event is not unusual—President Barack Obama also attended as the honorary chairman of the organization while in office. Nevertheless, the ball perfectly encapsulates why Trump’s continued refusal to relinquish his business interests complicates even situations that would have taken place had he not become president.

Thanks in part to the makeup of the Red Cross’s leadership and its unique relationship with the federal government, the ball creates a particularly complicated situation. According to its website, the Red Cross “is not a federal agency, nor [does it] receive federal funding on a regular basis to carry out our services and programs,” instead relying on donations and fees for services like health-and-safety training courses. However, the organization operates under a federal charter as a “federal instrumentality … to carry out responsibilities delegated to [it] by the federal government.” The best-known of these duties include overseeing blood-donation drives and disaster-relief efforts; according to its website, it is also the Red Cross’s duty “to fulfill the provisions of the Geneva Convention” and “provide family communications and other forms of support to the U.S. military.” Further, the organization has a chairperson appointed by the president; currently, the chairwoman is Bonnie McElveen-Hunter, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2004. The charter also periodically comes before Congress for review and amendments to be signed into effect by the president.

On multiple occasions in recent years, the Red Cross has come under scrutiny for how it handles its multi-billion-dollar budget, most of which comprises donations from the American public. Prompted in part by reporting on the organization’s inadequate response to Hurricane Sandy, misleading statements about how it uses its money, and a September 2015 report by the Governmental Accountability Office, two congresspeople—one Democrat and one Republican—have independently introduced measures to increase the organization’s transparency. Neither has been enacted, but there will likely be another push to improve the relationship between the federal government and the Red Cross during Trump’s presidency, whether via a review of the Red Cross’s charter, the need to appoint a new chairperson, or the introduction of reform-minded legislation. If and when Trump is called upon to weigh in on these decisions, he will be asked to do so having directly profited from the organization while in office, which could limit his ability to act in the best interests of the American people.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That D.C. Labor Dispute

One month before he took office, President Donald Trump managed to sidestep a potential conflict of interest at his hotel in Las Vegas. In the fall of 2015, several hundred employees at the city’s Trump International Hotel had voted to join the local branch of the Culinary Workers Union, only to find their efforts stalled by Trump and the hotel’s co-owner, Phil Ruffin. The case languished for more than a year until, after the National Labor Relations Board found Trump and Ruffin in violation of federal law, the workers successfully negotiated their first collectively-bargained contract. If this hadn’t been resolved, a conflict of interest would have arisen: The case would have gone to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, to which Trump will soon be able to appoint members.

Now, the same issue is cropping up at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. Already a centerpiece of the controversy over the likely violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause, the property may soon be the site of another legal tussle: According to The Washington Post, 40 workers at the hotel have also voted to unionize, the first group to do so at a Trump-owned establishment since his election.

As was true in Las Vegas, the push for unionization in D.C., if it’s met with resistance from the hotel, would create an opportunity for the president to place his own financial interests above those of the hotel’s workers. In Las Vegas, the dispute appears to have been resolved partly because of the NLRB’s intercession; if the Trump Organization similarly contests the case in D.C., the NLRB may once again be asked to weigh in. And now that Trump is president, he will be appointing new board members to fill two vacancies on the agency’s five-seat panel, which could very well tip it from its current left-leaning, labor-friendly composition to a more conservative, pro-owner bent. If, as in Las Vegas, the NLRB finds in favor of the workers, but the Trump Organization chooses to continue its opposition, there is a possibility that the case could come before a federal appeals court, where judges who Trump himself may have appointed will be asked to review the NLRB’s decision. And if the conflict continues even beyond the Court of Appeals, it will fall to the Supreme Court, to which Trump recently nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch, to render a final verdict. (It should be added that each appointee will be faced with the possibility of ruling against the financial interests of the infamously vindictive man to whom they owe their position.)

Appointing labor-unfriendly officials and justices might fairly be said to be in keeping with Trump’s long history of questionable labor practices, but this does not mean that the conflict-of-interest question will dissipate. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to determine how much his pro-business stances are dictated by a sincere belief in their efficacy rather than an understanding that he himself has benefited from them in the past and will likely continue to do so in the future. As such, Trump’s motivations will continue to occupy an ethical and legal gray area until he eliminates the overlap between his roles as a businessman and as presiden

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

Those Expansion Plans

Of the measures that President Donald Trump and his lawyer Sheri Dillon laid out at his January 11 press conference to address conflicts of interest, only two actually ameliorate any of the concerns critics have raised: the cancellation of all of the Trump Organization’s pending deals and the promise not to pursue expansion in other countries (although developments since the announcement suggest that those pledges leave plenty of wiggle room). Conveniently left out of the plan, however, is any prohibition on expanding holdings within the United States—which is apparently something that Trump Hotels plans on doing while Trump is in office.

On January 25, Bloomberg reported that Eric Danziger, the CEO of Trump Hotels, said after a panel discussion in Los Angeles that the company is considering tripling the number of Trump-branded properties within the U.S. According to Danziger, “There are 26 major metropolitan areas in the U.S., and we’re in five. I don’t see any reason that we couldn’t be in all of them eventually.” Danziger listed Dallas, Seattle, Denver, and San Francisco as among the cities where the Trump Organization is looking to build in the near future.

As the Trump Organization’s holdings expand, so too does the potential that business considerations will have undue effects on the president’s behavior in office, or at least appear to. Each location presents another opportunity for businesspeople or foreign dignitaries to choose to stay in a hotel in an attempt to burnish Trump’s opinion of them, their company, and/or their country. Each location increases the number of municipal governments with whom Trump will be interacting both as president and as the owner of a real-estate empire.

Trump Hotels’ expansion plans could put not only Trump but also the cities where new properties may be built in a difficult situation. San Francisco, for example, is currently experiencing a housing crisis, one possible solution to which would be to increase the pace of new home-construction projects, some of which could be funded by federal grants. On the one hand, it is almost certain that the residents of San Francisco, a city that voted against the president by roughly a 9-to-1 margin in November, would strenuously object to a new Trump-branded property in the city. But there is also an incentive for the city government to work with the Trump Organization in finding a suitable expansion plan. With plenty of evidence to suggest that collaborating with Trump’s businesses could influence the president, there’s added pressure for city officials to pursue a potentially costly project residents may otherwise not want in hopes of reaping the benefits down the road. Meanwhile, the officials in charge of doling out federal largesse such as housing grants may similarly feel pressure based on the knowledge that Trump’s feelings toward particular cities may change based on how receptive the locale was of his business’s expansion plans.

Finally, the Trump Organization’s announcement that it would be pursuing expansion further attests to just how little the president’s plan to mitigate his conflicts of interest actually accomplishes its goal. For the Trump Organization to not just expand but do so on such a large scale violates the professed spirit of the measures laid out on January 11 and defies any argument that the company will cease to act in a way that jeopardizes the president’s ability to do his job.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Hotel in Vancouver

Less than a week into his administration, President Trump has a new property opening for business: the Trump International Hotel & Tower in Vancouver. According to The Washington Post, construction on the hotel finished shortly before Trump assumed office, with the building’s finishing touch—the president’s name spelled out in giant letters—revealed on January 19 (the day before the inauguration), and the first guests and permanent residents checking in on January 25.

As with many buildings bearing the president’s name, the new hotel in Vancouver is a licensing deal, with the Trump Organization leasing its branding to a third party—in this case, a real-estate company called the Holborn Group, which operates several luxury hotels throughout Canada. The Holborn Group is run by Joo Kim Tiah, the eldest son of one of the wealthiest families in Malaysia; several members of Tiah’s family are expected to fly in from Kuala Lumpur to attend the opening with the president’s two adult sons, Donald Jr. and Eric.

The building is yet another manifestation of the running problem posed by Trump’s extensive foreign real-estate holdings. Unless the president actually rids himself of his financial stake in his company, every Trump property influences his incentives when it comes to making policy, foreign or domestic: Should he act in the manner that best serves the country, or the one that will protect his profits? Every building provides the opportunity for third parties to curry favor with the infamously capricious president: If he knows that he has taken money from somebody, be it a company, a private individual, or agents of a foreign government, that knowledge, and the goodwill it creates, is likely to color Trump’s decision-making. Moreover, every businessperson who has a licensing deal with Trump now has leverage: If Tiah, or any of the other businesspeople around the world with a Trump-branded property, disagrees with a decision the president makes, he can threaten to pull out of the partnership and jeopardize some of Trump’s cash-flow in an attempt to change his mind.

Hardly a day had passed between the new hotel in Vancouver opening for business and the first report of an organization choosing to host an event at the site, possibly for political reasons. On January 26, The Washington Post reported that The American Chamber of Commerce in Canada, a business organization affiliated with the conservative U.S. Chamber of Commerce, had scrapped longstanding plans to hold a meeting about trade relations at the home of a diplomatic official and would instead be booking space in the new Trump Hotel for the equivalent of roughly $1,900—a relatively small sum, to be sure, but even small sums have been shown to substantially influence decision making. The change initially prompted at least one planned speaker, the University of British Columbia professor Matilde Bombardini, to back out of the event; however, according to the Vancouver Sun, she has since changed her mind after being told that the change of location was due to a leak at the previous site.

As with so many of the instances chronicled here, the venue change demonstrates how Trump’s conflicts of interest often operate in shades of grey. If the Chamber of Commerce did make its decision solely based on logistics, booking a spot in a Trump-branded building still makes possible the appearance of paying for play. In a marked departure from the Chamber’s copacetic relationship with the Republican nominee Mitt Romney in 2012, the aggressively free-market, pro-trade group clashed with the president on multiple occasions during the 2016 campaign over Trump’s protectionist trade policies, but has already made public overtures since the election to reconcile with the president. If it did, in fact, choose to move the event even in part because of the giant name on the new location’s facade, the decision represents another chapter in the ongoing saga of the business community’s desire to both please and sway a president whose ideology is not that of a typical Republican. Additionally, though nearly all of Trump’s rhetoric about NAFTA centers on Mexico, Canada actually trades more with the U.S. than not just Mexico but any other country in the world. As such, there is plenty incentive for the Canadian branch of the American Chamber of Commerce to do whatever it can to reach out to Trump.

[boutons_deux]

Ivanka Trump
✔@IvankaTrump (https://twitter.com/IvankaTrump)

I am proud to support my LGBTQ friends and the LGBTQ Americans who have made immense contributions to our society and economy.
8:22 PM - Jun 1, 2017 (https://twitter.com/IvankaTrump/status/870450538235785217)


http://washingtonjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/rogentweet-900x501.jpg

[Pavlov]

:lol Mikey can't even bring up any examples of the horrendous corruption he's concerned with.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Reality-Television Show

Though President Donald Trump has been a well-known figure in American public life for decades, perhaps the single biggest contributor to his stardom has been NBC’s The Apprentice. Trump himself is no longer the star of the show—former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken over as host in 2017—but the president remains an executive producer on the series for at least the coming year, including receiving a low five-figure salary for the position, according to Variety. Shortly after the news of that income broke, Kellyanne Conway, a counselor to Trump, clarified that he would be taking on his producing duties in his spare time, comparing the situation to previous presidents playing golf or pursuing other leisure activities.

Norm Eisen and Richard Painter, who served as the chief ethics lawyers under Presidents Obama and George W. Bush, respectively, pointed out on NPR’s Fresh Air that Trump’s ongoing involvement with The Apprentice presents yet another conflict of interest. According to AdWeek, 11 companies, including the television-shopping network QVC and Carnival Company (which operates the eponymous cruise line), are providing on-air sponsorships for the newest season of The Apprentice; a twelfth, the Japanese motorcycle company Kawasaki, withdrew from a previously reported deal after customers threatened a boycott because of its sponsorship of the show. All of these companies—plus the numerous companies that run ads during the show’s commercial breaks—are effectively putting money into the pockets of the president, not to mention supporting one of his products.

Trump apparently believes himself immune to such conflicts of interest, both in terms of legal impunity and his ability to ignore them, despite a good deal of research indicating that even minuscule financial incentives (minuscule for a billionaire, that is) can be enough to significantly influence behavior. Additionally, there is little doubt that Trump cares deeply about the ongoing success of The Apprentice: The weekend after the new Schwarzenegger-led season debuted, the then president-elect took to Twitter to voice his thoughts on the new season’s ratings. So when one of the companies that sponsors the show interacts with the executive branch—as when Carnival reached a $40 million settlement with the U.S. government over pollution in the Atlantic Ocean, for example, or when QVC settled a $7.5 million suit regarding deceptive advertising in 2009—the question will necessarily arise how their contributions to Trump’s pocketbook and beloved TV show will affect the outcome.

Even if Trump were able to fully blind himself to the conflicts described above, the president’s role would remain a problem because it provides an unprecedented bargaining chip for both the companies currently sponsoring in the show and those that could seek to use it to attempt to manipulate the president. Consider, for a moment, the potential negotiations between one of Trump’s sponsors and a government agency that finds it in violation of federal regulations. That company, though, has a trump card the likes of which has never been seen in American politics: Should it become apparent that the case is going awry, they can threaten to pull their support of the president’s television show. The move would inevitably make waves on cable news of the kind that Trump has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be susceptible to. Any decision, whether in favor of the company or against it, immediately loses credibility: If the company is found guilty, the decision is easily framed as retaliatory, a vindictive manifestation of the president’s ego and narcissism; if the company is let off the hook, it will appear that the company has manipulated his venality for its own gain. A formerly uninvolved company facing federal investigation could essentially pull the same gambit in reverse: By publicly committing to sponsor The Apprentice, a company could create a situation in which any decision appears to reflect not the facts of the case but the sticky situation created by its involvement with the show. In this sense, then, Trump’s decision to stay on as executive producer, and the conflicts of interest the position creates, jeopardizes not only the president’s ability to carry out his job but also the fundamental legitimacy of the rule of law for any company that currently is or in the future may become involved with the show.

Additionally, the president’s continued involvement with the show creates a strange and tricky situation for NBC. Trump’s reputation is inextricably intertwined with that of the show, meaning that NBC will to some extent be caught between promoting Trump as a successful businessman and doing its journalistic work. The network will likely also be advertising The Apprentice during its other programs, not only through commercials but also possibly in-studio promotions on other shows, creating conflicting incentives for NBC journalists who will be trying simultaneously to talk about the Trump administration fairly while their own network markets one of his products.

[Mikeanaro]

:lol Mikey can't even bring up any examples of the horrendous corruption he's concerned with.
Can you bring any example of the Trump corruption?

[RandomGuy]

:lol Mikey can't even bring up any examples of the horrendous corruption he's concerned with.

But he is so concerned with it. He just must be verklempt with worry.

[Mikeanaro]

That Reality-Television Show

Though President Donald Trump has been a well-known figure in American public life for decades, perhaps the single biggest contributor to his stardom has been NBC’s The Apprentice. Trump himself is no longer the star of the show—former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken over as host in 2017—but the president remains an executive producer on the series for at least the coming year, including receiving a low five-figure salary for the position, according to Variety. Shortly after the news of that income broke, Kellyanne Conway, a counselor to Trump, clarified that he would be taking on his producing duties in his spare time, comparing the situation to previous presidents playing golf or pursuing other leisure activities.

Norm Eisen and Richard Painter, who served as the chief ethics lawyers under Presidents Obama and George W. Bush, respectively, pointed out on NPR’s Fresh Air that Trump’s ongoing involvement with The Apprentice presents yet another conflict of interest. According to AdWeek, 11 companies, including the television-shopping network QVC and Carnival Company (which operates the eponymous cruise line), are providing on-air sponsorships for the newest season of The Apprentice; a twelfth, the Japanese motorcycle company Kawasaki, withdrew from a previously reported deal after customers threatened a boycott because of its sponsorship of the show. All of these companies—plus the numerous companies that run ads during the show’s commercial breaks—are effectively putting money into the pockets of the president, not to mention supporting one of his products.

Trump apparently believes himself immune to such conflicts of interest, both in terms of legal impunity and his ability to ignore them, despite a good deal of research indicating that even minuscule financial incentives (minuscule for a billionaire, that is) can be enough to significantly influence behavior. Additionally, there is little doubt that Trump cares deeply about the ongoing success of The Apprentice: The weekend after the new Schwarzenegger-led season debuted, the then president-elect took to Twitter to voice his thoughts on the new season’s ratings. So when one of the companies that sponsors the show interacts with the executive branch—as when Carnival reached a $40 million settlement with the U.S. government over pollution in the Atlantic Ocean, for example, or when QVC settled a $7.5 million suit regarding deceptive advertising in 2009—the question will necessarily arise how their contributions to Trump’s pocketbook and beloved TV show will affect the outcome.

Even if Trump were able to fully blind himself to the conflicts described above, the president’s role would remain a problem because it provides an unprecedented bargaining chip for both the companies currently sponsoring in the show and those that could seek to use it to attempt to manipulate the president. Consider, for a moment, the potential negotiations between one of Trump’s sponsors and a government agency that finds it in violation of federal regulations. That company, though, has a trump card the likes of which has never been seen in American politics: Should it become apparent that the case is going awry, they can threaten to pull their support of the president’s television show. The move would inevitably make waves on cable news of the kind that Trump has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be susceptible to. Any decision, whether in favor of the company or against it, immediately loses credibility: If the company is found guilty, the decision is easily framed as retaliatory, a vindictive manifestation of the president’s ego and narcissism; if the company is let off the hook, it will appear that the company has manipulated his venality for its own gain. A formerly uninvolved company facing federal investigation could essentially pull the same gambit in reverse: By publicly committing to sponsor The Apprentice, a company could create a situation in which any decision appears to reflect not the facts of the case but the sticky situation created by its involvement with the show. In this sense, then, Trump’s decision to stay on as executive producer, and the conflicts of interest the position creates, jeopardizes not only the president’s ability to carry out his job but also the fundamental legitimacy of the rule of law for any company that currently is or in the future may become involved with the show.

Additionally, the president’s continued involvement with the show creates a strange and tricky situation for NBC. Trump’s reputation is inextricably intertwined with that of the show, meaning that NBC will to some extent be caught between promoting Trump as a successful businessman and doing its journalistic work. The network will likely also be advertising The Apprentice during its other programs, not only through commercials but also possibly in-studio promotions on other shows, creating conflicting incentives for NBC journalists who will be trying simultaneously to talk about the Trump administration fairly while their own network markets one of his products.
Giant copy/paste everywhere, if any of those were true, Donnie would be doing time with Madoff and Wesley Snipes.

[Mikeanaro]

Ivanka Trump
✔@IvankaTrump (https://twitter.com/IvankaTrump)

I am proud to support my LGBTQ friends and the LGBTQ Americans who have made immense contributions to our society and economy.
8:22 PM - Jun 1, 2017 (https://twitter.com/IvankaTrump/status/870450538235785217)


http://washingtonjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/rogentweet-900x501.jpg
http://truthfeed.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Screen-Shot-2017-07-27-at-1.47.14-AM.png

[RandomGuy]

Can you bring any example of the Trump corruption?

How about building a luxury hotel in an industrial district contracting with front companies known to launder money for the Iranian Republican Guard?

[RandomGuy]

Giant copy/paste everywhere, if any of those were true, Donnie would be doing time with Madoff and Wesley Snipes.

Because people always go to jail before the investigations.

Well played.


:rollin

[Pavlov]

Can you bring any example of the Trump corruption?:lmao

Poor Mikey!

[Pavlov]

Giant copy/paste everywhere, if any of those were true, Donnie would be doing time with Madoff and Wesley Snipes.:rollin

Seriously are you not from the US?

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Pipeline

The Dakota Access Pipeline, or DAPL, was the subject of continual controversy during the presidential campaign, drawing months of protests because of the perceived environmental impact it would create by crossing the Missouri River in close proximity to a Standing Rock Sioux reservation. Shortly before the election, the Army Corps of Engineers announced that it would be halting progress on the pipeline for further environmental review and to study potential routes that might avoid crossing both the river and Native American territory. On January 24, however, only four days after President Trump took office, he decided to move forward with both DAPL and the Keystone XL pipeline, which the Obama administration likewise blocked because of environmental and tribal-sovereignty concerns; the Army Corps of Engineers finalized the easement on the project on February 7. Trump has been vocally supportive of the pipelines for months, claiming that they would create new jobs in construction and the oil industry.

Trump’s FEC filings, which remain the only public record of his finances, suggest that he may have had an additional incentive to greenlight the projects: According to financial-disclosure forms he filed in June 2015 and May 2016, Trump has owned stock in Energy Transfer Partners, the company seeking to build DAPL. The stock was worth between $500,001 and $1,000,000 in 2015 and between $15,001 and $50,000 in 2016.

The president and one of his spokesmen, Jason Miller, have both stated, without offering evidence, that Trump’s stock-related conflicts of interest have been resolved. According to Trump and Miller, the president sold off his stocks in June of last year specifically to head off concerns that they may influence his decision-making in office. However, they have offered no meaningful evidence to back up their claims—evidence which, in this case, would likely be fairly easy to provide. They could, for example, offer more details on when exactly the stocks were sold beyond simply “back in June,” or explain why they did not mention the sale until December, just after the election, if the intention was to proactively address conflict-of-interest questions.

Given Trump’s penchant for dissembling about his personal finances and the lack of evidence that he has sold off his stocks, Trump’s decision to push ahead on DAPL and Keystone XL simply underscores the need for him to take larger, and more public, steps to distance himself from his financial interests. Moving forward with the pipelines is not the first instance of Trump making a significant decision that benefits a company whose stock is listed in his financial disclosures. For example, when Trump announced his intention to intervene at the factory of the air-conditioner manufacturer Carrier in Indianapolis, the Indianapolis Star noted that Trump’s filings list stock in Carrier’s parent company, United Technologies.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

Those HUD Grants

As has been noted on several previous occasions, one of the overarching questions about America’s first businessman presidency is just how President Trump’s vast empire will interact with federal agencies that answer to him. One of these potentially sticky situations became something of a flashpoint at the hearing for Dr. Ben Carson, Trump’s appointee to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development. At the hearing, Senator Elizabeth Warren pressed Carson over the fact that, as the head of the department, he would be in charge of numerous programs that the president could manipulate to profit his real estate empire, asking Carson, “Can you assure me that not a single taxpayer dollar that you give out will financially benefit the president-elect or his family?” Though Carson did not respond to the question with regard to Trump specifically, he responded that he “will absolutely not play favorites for anyone” or act with an “intention to do anything to benefit any American, particularly.” (Warren went on to expound on how Trump’s lack of financial transparency makes it borderline impossible to know if a policy will benefit him.)

Warrens’s line of questioning was not entirely hypothetical: Trump does, in fact, own properties the maintenance of which falls under HUD’s purview. Thanks to an inheritance from his father, the president holds an ownership stake in—and has made millions from—Starrett City, a 153-acre, 5,881-unit low-income housing development in Brooklyn. The development, according to ABC News, receives substantial federal funding via HUD’s many programs designed to support low-income renters and homeowners. Trump could easily press for policies that would increase his profits from Starrett, most notably allowing for the sale of the complex, an action HUD blocked in 2007—and, potentially, to other properties from which he may profit in ways that, without more complete financial information, the American public may not even know.

The potential for a profitable relationship with HUD underscores a central problem with Trump’s refusal to fully divest from his holdings before entering office. It’s not just high-ranking officials who will possess the ability to act in a manner that benefits the president’s pocketbook—it’s ordinary civil servants as well. Shortly before his inauguration, The Washington Post noted several additional ways employees in Trump’s executive branch could do so: Trademark disputes, for instance, will be adjudicated by judges appointed by his Commerce secretary, while the EPA could roll back environmental regulations that reduce profits at his golf courses.

Meanwhile, lower-level officials tasked with the day-to-day work of regulating Trump’s properties are likely to face pressure as well—if not explicit from superiors, then from the implicit, inescapable knowledge that enforcement decisions will impact the president personally. Federal Aviation Administration inspectors, for instance, are in charge of on-the-spot, random inspections of aircraft, including Trump’s, and at one point during the campaign grounded one of his planes after its registration expired; the Occupational Safety and Health Administration oversees construction sites, and has fined the Trump Organization on multiple occasions for workplace-safety violations. Only 10 years ago, politically motivated firings within the Justice Department became one of the many enduring scandals of George W. Bush’s administration; with so many executive-branch employees interacting with the president’s properties in so many different ways, some will inevitably face difficult decisions between proper enforcement at his expense or looking the other way to stay in the boss’s good graces.

[Chris]

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20375768_1736610479699765_3188348930345572849_n.jp g?oh=88cf5ac996587cd814cd6a9be66da3d9&oe=59F4BB88

[Chris]

https://media.giphy.com/media/14ceV8wMLIGO6Q/giphy.gif

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption


That Golf Course in Aberdeen

Though his golf course at Turnberry is the more famous of his two properties in Scotland, it is Trump’s resort in Aberdeen that has attracted attention for the conflicts of interest it created when Trump spoke with the British politician and Brexit cheerleader Nigel Farage about blocking a proposed wind turbine that Trump believed would have blocked views from the resort. Now, attention has once again turned to Scotland after The Guardian reported that the Trump Organization will soon be moving forward with a multi-million dollar plan to expand its Aberdeen resort, including a new 450-room, five-star hotel and a second 18-hole golf course.

The announced expansion drew criticism almost immediately, especially coming as it did only three days after the press conference at which Trump unveiled his (woefully insufficient) plan to resolve his conflicts of interest. At the conference, the president and one of his lawyers, Sheri Dillon, announced that the Trump Organization would cease pursuing new foreign investments. Additionally, though neither Trump nor Dillon articulated the promise at the event, a press release detailing the steps Trump would be taking also states that he has “directed the Trump Organization to terminate all pending deals—over 30 in number.”

A representative soon clarified the grounds on which the Trump Organization deemed the expansion permissible in light of these statements. She argued that “implementing future phasing of existing properties does not constitute a new transaction, so we intend to proceed.” In other words, plans for the expansion had been drawn up and agreed upon before Trump made his pledge; simply moving forward with the project does not, in their view, breach their commitments to avoid pursuing new foreign investments or moving forward on pending deals.

As with so many of the defenses of Trump’s behavior when it comes to conflicts of interest, the representative’s justification overlooks the actual concerns regarding conflicts of interest: that Trump’s relationship with the British government and other foreign-policy questions may be colored by his expectations of what a policy will do to his property values, for instance, or whether wealthy guests will pay for a stay in the interest of currying favor with him. Instead, the argument relies on a tactic Trump and his many surrogates have used with alarming frequency. On several occasions, Trump has come out with what appears to be a clear policy statement, which then becomes increasingly vague as he and his surrogates attempt to justify an action or position. One famous example is his proposal to ban Muslims from immigrating to the United States: As critics started to question its constitutionality, and as support for the measure declined, he revised it to a vaguer policy of “extreme vetting,” which itself varied significantly depending on who was describing it to whom and what part of the plan they were defending. Here, the Trump Organization has done something similar: In the face of allegations that the Aberdeen development violated the company’s pledges regarding conflicts of interest, the pledges have been revised to create a more vague, and therefore more permissive, stance. As Richard Painter, who served at the chief ethics adviser for President George W. Bush, put it, the new, more ambiguous policy “clearly illustrates that around the world, he will just simply expand around the various holdings and as they continue to expand, the conflicts of interest expand.”

If, as they argue, the expansion of the Aberdeen golf course constitutes neither a “new foreign deal” nor a “pending deal,” that only further complicates the picture regarding the Trump Organization’s future behavior during Trump’s presidency. The organization currently has several nascent development projects, several of which, including those in Georgia, Argentina, Indonesia, and Taiwan, have already prompted concerns over conflicts of interest. Trump and Dillon’s statements at his press conference appeared to rule out continued development of these properties, but the ongoing development in Scotland calls into question whether other development plans have truly been canceled or whether Trump will find a similarly legalistic framework under which they claim they can proceed. By moving forward in Aberdeen, Trump has demonstrated just how easily he can—and, in all likelihood, will—continue to flout concerns regarding his conflicts of interest by simply redefining the terms of his promises in order to allow for his latest move.

[Mikeanaro]

:lmao

Poor Mikey!
Why poor? you judge but as usual bring nothing to the table.

[Pavlov]

Can you bring any example of the Trump corruption?I will simply say the sheer amount of money laundered through Trump's casino is enough to justify the current investigations of Trump and his minions by federal and state authorities. I am perfectly fine to let them run their full courses.

Now how about your examples of Democratic Party horrendous corruption you're so concerned with?

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Other Billionaire New York Real-Estate Developer

President Trump’s promise to erect a big, beautiful wall between himself and his business lasted slightly more than 48 hours.

Almost exactly two days after the January 11 press conference at which Trump announced plans purported to disentangle himself from his namesake business, the Huffington Post reported that the president had scheduled a meeting with Steven Roth. Roth, a fellow New York-based billionaire real-estate developer, is in charge of Vornado Realty Trust, an investment firm that co-owns two of Trump’s most valuable properties, one in Manhattan and one in San Francisco, and served as an economic adviser during the campaign. What Trump and Roth discussed at their meeting remains unknown, nor is it clear when exactly the meeting was scheduled. Regardless, that the meeting came directly on the heels of the press conference at which Trump and his lawyer laid out a plan supposedly meant to resolve conflicts of interest, throws the reality of the problems that come from having a businessman as president—and one who seems completely uninterested in taking steps that would actually distance him from his business—into sharp relief.

Shortly thereafter, The Wall Street Journal reported that Roth may soon become involved with the Trump administration beyond just his pre-existing friendship and partnership with the president. Trump, it seems, will soon be naming Roth and Richard LeFrak, yet another New York-based billionaire real-estate developer, to oversee a council of 15 to 20 builders and engineers who will be carrying out the president’s $1 trillion infrastructure proposal, a situation which itself provides ripe opportunities for the pair to direct federal dollars toward projects from which they will financially benefit. This news comes on top of a December report in The Washington Post that Roth’s firm had put in a bid to rebuild the FBI’s headquarters, a deal that could be worth as much as $2 billion. In other words, Trump, mere days after promising to remove himself from his businesses, is instead ushering a longtime partner into his administration.

The move could also end up providing yet another avenue by which Trump could enrich himself in office and by which others could attempt to curry favor. Whether or not he intended to do so, the president’s decision to place Roth at the head of such a large pool of money sends a signal to other companies about the continued intermingling of his business and his presidency: that working with the Trump Organization can be a path to increased influence or even appointment. And though Trump claims that he will no longer be in involved in day-to-day operations, he will be actively profiting off from the company, meaning that he will be personally making money off of the attempts of others to gain influence over American public policy.

[Pavlov]

Why poor? you judge but as usual bring nothing to the table.Where are your examples of Democratic Party horrendous corruption, Mikey?

Bring them to the table.

[RandomGuy]

God Damn.

Outlining Trumps corruption is hard work. Good thing I'm not lazy. 2/3 of the way through.

[Blake]

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20375768_1736610479699765_3188348930345572849_n.jp g?oh=88cf5ac996587cd814cd6a9be66da3d9&oe=59F4BB88

Half true according to politifact.

Lol trump parrots declaring victory

[Chris]

Half true according to politifact.

Lol trump parrots declaring victory

You can have the Cinton family. I'm with Trump.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

Those Indonesian Politicians

Despite President Trump’s assurance that he has stopped pursuing deals since the election, his namesake organization apparently moved forward with a pair of projects in Indonesia. According to The New York Times, the two properties that will bear the Trump name, one overlooking a Hindu temple in Bali and the other abutting a theme park in West Java, presented ethical problems even before the election.

To begin with, through his Indonesian partner on the projects, the billionaire media mogul Hary Tanoesoedibjo (known in Indonesia as Hary Tanoe), Trump has forged relationships with several top Indonesian politicians. One such leader is Setya Novanto, the speaker of the country’s House of Representatives who temporarily lost his post for trying to extort $4 billion from the American mining company Freeport-McMoRan (a company which counts Carl Icahn, who will be serving as a special adviser in Trump’s administration, among its largest shareholders, and which has been frequently criticized by labor advocates and environmentalists). Trump had lunch with Novanto and several other Indonesian politicians during the campaign in September 2015 to discuss the Trump Organization’s planned expansion into Indonesia. At a post-luncheon press conference, Trump pulled Novanto in front of the cameras, calling him “an amazing man” and “one of the most powerful men” and asserting, “we will do great things for the United States.” (It is unclear exactly whom Trump meant when he used the word “we.”) Trump then asked Novanto to confirm that “they like me in Indonesia,” which Novanto did.

Another of the politicians who attended the lunch with Trump is Fadli Zon, the vice chairman of Indonesia’s House of Representatives, whose district includes one of the cities in which one of the Trump-branded properties will be built. According to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Zon is associated with a political movement seeking to unseat and jail the current governor of Jakarta, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, also known by his nickname, Ahok, and has spoken at rallies against Ahok. The anti-Ahok movement is rooted partly in centuries of ethnic tension within the country: Ahok is both Christian, which has made him the target of attacks by hardline clerics claiming to represent Indonesia’s Muslim majority, and a member of the country’s historically oppressed Chinese minority, which was the target of a massacre in 1998. Aside from an interim governor appointed half a century ago, Ahok is the first governor of Jakarta to fall into either category, and is currently on trial for blasphemy for allegedly insulting the Koran, although Ahok’s supporters claim that it is Ahok’s accusers who are guilty of blasphemy for denigrating Ahok’s Christianity.

Both Trump’s question to Novanto and Zon’s presence at the meeting underscore another difficulty the president introduces into the United States’ relations with Indonesia. Indonesia is both the largest predominantly Muslim country in the world and the nation with the largest population of Muslims. Novanto received significant blowback for his statement that, yes, Indonesians do like Trump, because it turns out that, no, many Indonesians don’t like Trump, in large part because of his on-again, off-again proposal to ban Muslims from immigrating to the U.S.; in fact, faced with mounting criticism, Novanto’s party apologized not only for Novanto’s statement but also for his mere attendance at the luncheon. Since Trump’s victory, both Novanto and Zon have stood up for the president, arguing that Trump’s hardline stance toward Muslim immigration was merely campaign rhetoric and not actually reflective of the president’s own beliefs, something Novanto claimed Trump personally assured him was the case. Regardless, it is clear that the Trump Organization’s planned expansion into Indonesia—which, again, is the reason Trump met with Novanto and Zon in the first place—could introduce major complications into the relationship between the president and the political leaders of the world’s largest Muslim country, not to mention a significant trade partner and an important ally in the South China Sea region.

As if that weren’t enough, Tanoe himself has shown increasing interest in becoming involved in Indonesian politics. In 2014, Tanoe publicly supported the retired general Prabowo Subianto in the nation’s presidential election; Subianto lost to the country’s current leader, Joko Widodo. Then, in 2015, he helped found a new political party, the United Indonesia Party, or Partai Perindo, which intends to field candidates for national office in the near future, including Tanoe himself: Shortly after The New York Times reported on the project, Tanoe told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that, “If there is no one I can believe who can fix the problems of the country, I may try to run for president.”

If Tanoe does so, it will create the possibility that Trump will be dealing with a head of state with whom he has shared business interests, which, as the ethics lawyer Richard Painter told The New York Times, “makes it impossible to conduct diplomacy in an evenhanded manner”—especially considering that, after Trump’s election, stock in Tanoe’s company rose significantly. Moreover, Tanoe, like Ahok, is both Christian and ethnically Chinese, which some insiders consider an obstacle to his electoral chances, although Tanoe argues that it is not Ahok’s religion but his lack of firm leadership that has led to the large-scale protests against the governor. Nevertheless, if Tanoe does choose to run for office, it is difficult to see how his race, religion, and business partnership with a president many see as blatantly Islamophobic could do anything other than create further difficulties both within Indonesia and in the country’s relationship with the U.S..

Tanoe remains close to Trump. He attended the inauguration as a guest of the Trump Organization; he and his wife posted several photos commemorating the occasion on their Instagram accounts, including pictures with Donald Jr. and Eric Trump and a video taken out the window of a car driving along the inaugural parade route. Then, in a February 7 interview with the Indonesian news magazine Tempo, Tanoe bragged about his access to the president. In the interview, he claimed to have seen Trump as recently as January 4 in New York, though he demurred when asked what they discussed, saying, “It wouldn’t be ethical, especially now that he is the president.” Tanoe also confirmed that “nothing has changed” regarding the branding deals in Indonesia, which he says will be moving forward with Trump’s sons in charge, a statement that would seem to contradict Trump and his lawyer’s January 11 announcement that the company would be suspending unfinished development projects.

[Blake]

You can have the Cinton family. I'm with Trump.

I don't want either. We are very well aware of how latched on to Trumps nuts you are.

[Pavlov]

The World Bank announced Sunday at an event with Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and White House adviser, that Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had pledged a combined $100 million for the bank’s proposed Women Entrepreneurs Fund, which was first proposed by Ivanka Trump.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/saudi-visit-trump-contradictions-campaign/

:cryGive it back!:cry

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Emirati Businessman

Though the biggest controversy over the New Year’s Eve celebration at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida estate, was apparently whether or not Joe Scarborough could accurately be described as having “partied” there, video footage taken by a guest and obtained by CNN the next day brought renewed scrutiny to President Trump’s own presence at the event. During a 10-minute speech given in front of the party’s 800-odd attendees, Trump praised his Emirati business partner Hussain Sajwani and Sajwani’s family, saying, “The most beautiful people from Dubai are here tonight, and they’re seeing it and they love it.” CNN identifies Sajwani as a “billionaire developer in Dubai” who has “paid Trump millions of dollars to license the Trump name for golf courses in Dubai.” Trump’s spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, defended the remarks by clarifying that the president and Sajwani “had no formal meetings of professional discussions. Their interactions were social.”

Whether or not Hicks’s statement was true, Trump’s commendation of Sajwani is part of a pattern in which the president praises his business partners in ways that suggest he has little interest in extricating himself from his company’s interests. Previously, he has name-dropped business partners in Turkey and Argentina while on official calls with the countries’ leaders; he also met, and took photos, with associates from India shortly after the election. Moreover, as with several of the countries in which Trump-branded buildings are located, the United Arab Emirates has a questionable record on human rights; Human Rights Watch specifically states that the nation “uses its affluence to mask the government’s human-rights problems.”

By singling out Sajwani, Trump also runs headlong into accusations that he and his family are selling access to his administration through their organization and family foundations. According to Politico, tickets to celebrate with the president at Mar-a-Lago, went for upwards of $500; the stated attendance of at least 800 people means that the Trump Organization made at least $400,000 off of ticket sales for the event. (There is no indication that the party was a fundraiser for any outside organization, such as a charity or campaign fund, as is often the case when politicians attend such an event.) Whether or not the president sees it as such, the event offered attendees the opportunity to be in the same room as Trump and bend his ear for a price. This follows consternation regarding an auction for a face-to-face meeting with Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, and a charity event that offered a reception with the president and a hunting trip with his two sons, both of which have since been cancelled, as well as ongoing speculation that foreign entities will attempt to curry favor with Trump by booking rooms and events at his hotel in Washington, D.C. That Trump singled out Sajwani at the New Year’s Eve party lends credence to these concerns—it’s an instance of someone receiving the president’s attention simply by buying a ticket to one of his events.

Since footage of Trump’s shout-out emerged in early January, Sajwani has continued to feature in coverage of the president’s business entanglements. At the January press conference where Trump and his lawyer, Sheri Dillon, laid out the president’s plan to ostensibly avoid conflicts of interest, Trump said that after the election, Sajwani offered him a $2 billion deal, which Trump turned down. Rather than acknowledge that being offered billions of dollars from a foreign businessman constitutes a conflict of interest, Trump presented his decision not to accept as an example of his magnanimity, saying, “I didn’t have to turn it down, because as you know, I have a no-conflict situation because I’m president. It’s a nice thing to have, but I don’t want to take advantage of something.” Later, Sajwani attended Trump’s inauguration, although it’s unclear if he interacted with the president while there.

Then, on Tuesday, Sajwani posted a picture of himself eating with Donald Trump Jr. in Dubai on Instagram with a caption reading, “It was great having my dear friend and business partner Donald Trump Jr. over for lunch. Discussing new ideas and innovation always make [sic] our meetings even more interesting.”

Donald Jr.’s meeting with Sajwani prompts concerns about the president’s conflicts of interest, for two main reasons. First, the meeting offers a reminder of the insufficiency of the steps Trump has taken to distance himself from his businesses. Though Trump and Dillon claimed that their plan resolved questions about conflicts of interest, ethics experts disagree: Because Trump still knows what his assets are and the identities of those with whom he does business, they say, Trump still knows more than enough to favor his company. Moreover, in an actual blind trust, Trump would have turned his assets over to a trustee with whom he would have no contact. Instead, he turned it over to a long-time executive within the Trump Organization and his sons, who he has long counted as among his closest advisers and with whom he has remained in contact during his presidency so far. Donald Jr.’s meeting with Sajwani is a reminder of these inadequacies, especially because Sajwani posted the picture to Instagram, thus increasing the lunch’s visibility and, along with it, the likelihood that the president will know about the ongoing interactions between his company and Sajwani’s (that is, if Donald Jr. hasn’t already made his father aware of them).

Second, Sajwani’s caption further undermines one of the few parts of the arrangement that actually would have meaningfully reduced the president’s conflicts of interest. In January, Dillon said that the Trump Organization would be canceling all of its pending deals and would stop pursuing foreign deals during Trump’s presidency. Since then, numerous developments have called those intentions into question: Projects appear to be moving forward in both Scotland and the Dominican Republic, with the Trump Organization offering narrow, legalistic explanations as to why the progress didn’t violate the terms of the trust. Though a spokeswoman for the Trump Organization has said that Donald Jr. was not seeking new deals while in Dubai, the previous stories, coupled with Sajwani’s Instagram caption, undermine that account.

[RandomGuy]

I don't want either. We are very well aware of how latched on to Trumps nuts you are.

Corrupt and competent, or Super-corrupt and utterly-incompetent. I guess Chris knows his peeps when he sees 'em.

[Chris]

I don't want either. We are very well aware of how latched on to Trumps nuts you are.

Is this the quintessential "we" or did you catch some MPD from comrade Pav?

[Pavlov]

Is this the quintessential "we" or did you catch some MPD from comrade Pav?Chris, what is your definition of quintessential?

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Virginia Vineyard

Among the dozens of properties President Trump owns is Trump Vineyard Estates and Winery in Charlottesville, Virginia, the source of his namesake wine. On December 23, the property requested temporary H-2A visas for six foreign workers, according to The Washington Post; on February 17, BuzzFeed reported an additional request that upped the total to 29. The visas, which are administered by the Citizenship and Immigration Services wing of the Department of Homeland Security, allow businesses to temporarily hire foreign, unskilled workers provided that the employer proves that there are not enough domestic candidates to fulfill a one-time or seasonal shortage and that the hiring will not depress wages for U.S.-born employees. Trump, of course, appointed the current Secretary of Homeland Security, which gives Trump authority over the very department responsible for deciding whether to grant the visas that the vineyard has requested. His choice for the position, the retired general John Kelly has a relatively scant track record when it comes to immigration, leaving open the question of how much influence Trump himself will have over the DHS’s policy on the matter.

On top of the fact that Trump will soon be able to influence the outcome of the request, that his organization has continued to request visas after his election underscores a tension in the president’s stance on immigration. From the moment that he announced that he would be running for president, Trump made antagonism toward immigration the central aspect of his campaign, arguing that both legal and illegal immigrants are taking jobs that should be filled by native-born Americans and depressing wages for others. Though he did not specifically single out the H-2B visa, the president has on multiple occasions spoken critically about the H-1B program, which enables employers to temporarily hire foreign workers for skilled jobs like those in the tech industry.

But the Trump Organization has long been a beneficiary of immigrant labor. For example, according to a Reuters report from August 2015, nine companies of which Trump is the majority owner have requested at least 1,100 foreign visas since 2000. The majority of these requests were from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club in Florida, which has requested at least 787 foreign visas since 2006, including 70 applications in 2015. (Meanwhile, The New York Times reported that, since 2010, only 17 of the nearly 300 domestic applicants for positions at the Mar-a-Lago have been hired.) The Trump Organization also famously may have benefited from illegal immigration: There is significant evidence that many of the Polish construction workers at the Trump Tower construction site in New York in 1980 were in the country illegally. In other words, Trump’s track record includes not just taking advantage of the very visa process he claims to abhor but also actually subverting existing law for his own profit. Now, by applying for visas for his vineyard, Trump is signaling that he expects that his business will continue to be able to profit from one of the very immigration programs he continually denounces.

[Pavlov]

Geez, Mikey -- not even one example of horrendous corruption?

You can't be very concerned.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Las Vegas Labor Dispute

On top of owning various properties and enterprises, Trump and his company employ roughly 34,000 people, according to an analysis by CNN. On December 21, several hundred of those workers resolved a labor dispute against the president—one in which, had it continued for even a few weeks more, Trump would have had the unprecedented power to make appointments to affect its outcome.

Here’s the situation: In October 2015, several hundred employees, primarily housekeeping staff, at the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas voted to join the local branch of the Culinary Workers Union. Trump Ruffin Commercial LLC, which owns the hotel and is itself owned by Trump and the casino magnate Phil Ruffin, contested the vote, first by enlisting an anti-union consulting firm (for whose services it paid $500,000) and then by filing complaints with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Shortly before the election, the NLRB not only rejected Trump and Ruffin’s complaints but also found that, because the pair had refused to negotiate with the nascent union, they had violated federal law and their hotel was operating illegally. Trump and Ruffin have since appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

On December 21, more than a year after the hotel’s workers first voted to join the union, the workers announced that they arrived at their first collectively-bargained contract, achieved, according to an employee quoted in ThinkProgress, despite significant pressure from ownership that attempting to unionize would cost workers their jobs. According to the union, the new agreement “will provide the employees with annual wage increases, a pension, family health care, and job security” comparable to that of other Las Vegas hotels. Moreover, the Culinary Workers Union’s parent organization, UNITE HERE, has reached an agreement to represent workers at Trump’s recently-opened hotel in Washington, D.C..

Although this dispute has been resolved, it is included here because it exemplifies the type of situation in which Trump’s business interests are likely to overlap with his duties as president. Trump will be tasked with appointing members to fill current openings on the NLRB, the very body that ruled against him shortly before the election and will be tasked with resolving any future disputes between the hotel’s owners and its employees. Moreover, as Slate noted, the chief justice of the D.C. Court of Appeals is none other than Merrick Garland, whose nomination to the Supreme Court has spent months languishing in the Republican-controlled Congress and was withdrawn once Trump became president. Finally, if disputes of this nature go beyond the Court of Appeals, the case would go to the Supreme Court, to which Trump will be appointing a justice, which is expected to tip the balance decisively in a more conservative (and likely anti-union) direction. In other words, no matter how far up the chain future disputes of this nature go, Trump’s presidency will give him new power to influence the results.

[RandomGuy]

Geez, Mikey -- not even one example of horrendous corruption?

You can't be very concerned.

He is about as concerned as TSA.

My guess:

As long as the corruption is Republican he is fine with it.

[Chris]

Chris, what is your definition of quintessential?

Why don't you look it up for me Pavy and tell me how i'm wrong - saavy?

[Blake]

Is this the quintessential "we" or did you catch some MPD from comrade Pav?

We can leave it to you and me. We both know you'd suck his dick if given the opportunity

[Th'Pusher]

Chris, what is your definition of quintessential?

:lol

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Kuwaiti Event

According to an anonymous source and documents obtained by ThinkProgress, representatives from the Trump Organization pressured the ambassador of Kuwait to hold its embassy’s annual celebration of the country’s independence at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. The event, held annually on February 25, was originally scheduled to take place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Georgetown; the location was allegedly changed after members of the Trump Organization contacted the country’s ambassador. ThinkProgress’s source “described the decision as political,” suggesting that the embassy chose to relocate the event in an effort to curry favor with the president. The Kuwaiti ambassador has since disputed the report, telling The Washington Post that he had not been contacted by the Trump Organization and that the move “was solely done with the intention of providing our guests with a new venue.”

If ThinkProgress’s account is correct, Kuwait’s decision represents an escalation of a situation that has been developing since Trump’s election. The Trump International Hotel has been the subject of continual scrutiny for the conflict of interest it poses, in part because its lease explicitly bars elected officials from holding it, but mainly because Trump’s ownership of the hotel will almost definitely result in a violation of the emoluments clause, which prohibits the president from receiving payments from foreign powers—something that will arguably be happening any time a foreign government books a room at the hotel. Already, the hotel has begun advertising itself as a destination for diplomats and dignitaries, and the embassies of Azerbaijan and Bahrain have both scheduled events in the building. However, before the ThinkProgress report, there was no evidence that the Trump Organization had individually reached out to a foreign government in hopes of getting it to relocate an event to the hotel.

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

Those Certificates of Divestiture

In addition to the many possibilities for President Trump to pursue his financial interests in office, the unique makeup of his cabinet also creates a new set of financial motivations. While Trump’s own fortune automatically makes his administration the wealthiest in history, he has also surrounded himself with an unprecedented collection of billionaires and multi-millionaires whose investments are likely to also come under scrutiny.

Unlike the president himself, those who are up for Trump’s cabinet, such as his proposed Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, will be legally obligated to divest from any holdings which may pose a conflict of interest. However, as The Washington Post noted, even selling off their holdings offers an opportunity for Trump’s cabinet members to enhance their fortunes. A federal program known as a “certificate of divestiture” allows executive-branch appointees and employees to avoid capital-gains taxes when selling their assets. The program has existed since 1989, and most recently received attention when President George W. Bush appointed Hank Paulson, then the chief executive of Goldman Sachs as his Treasury Secretary in 2006. Paulson was forced to sell off $700 million in shares of the bank; the certificate of divestiture enabled him to avoid a potential $200 million in capital-gains tax liability. According to The Washington Post, the Office of Government Ethics is currently researching whether the president himself would qualify for the tax break; even if he doesn’t, the unprecedented wealth of Trump’s cabinet promises to push this provision, and the financial incentives it creates, to the limit.

[Pavlov]

He is about as concerned as TSA:lol TSA's descent from single issue gun nut to full-blown Al4channitylex Jones has been inspiring.

[Pavlov]

Why don't you look it up for me Pavy and tell me how i'm wrong - saavy?:lol No need for me to do anything now, saavy?

[RandomGuy]

my biggest concern is the horrendous corruption

That Carrier Deal

One of President Trump’s first major economic moves as president was the deal that he and Vice President Mike Pence struck with the air-conditioner manufacturer Carrier, which had planned to move 2,100 jobs from its Indiana plant to Mexico. Finalized on November 29, the compromise kept 730 of the plant’s jobs in Indiana in exchange for $7 million in tax breaks over 10 years. The deal immediately attracted praise and criticism on both sides of the aisle, with much of the scrutiny going toward the tradeoff between jobs and tax breaks and Trump’s idiosyncratic, ad-hoc negotiation techniques.

An additional detail soon emerged regarding the deal: According to his FEC filings (which, despite Trump and his spokesman Jason Miller’s unverified statements that the president sold off his stock in June, remain the most recent public record of the president’s finances), Trump holds stock in Carrier’s parent company, United Technologies. In 2014, his investment in the company was between $100,001 and $250,000, while in 2015, the stock is listed as worth less than $1,001, which could indicate that he sold some or most of the stock; each year, his holdings earned him between $2,500 and $5,000.

The paucity of information in the FEC filings makes it difficult to ascertain why his holdings appear to have decreased; regardless, the investment is not only one of several hundred but also a relatively minor one among Trump’s many holdings, some of which are worth over $5,000,000. As a result, it’s difficult to know how much, if at all, Trump may have considered the stock, particularly considering that he didn’t appear to remember his initial promise to save the Carrier plant. Additionally, Trump does not have stock in the next company he called out on Twitter, Rexnord Corporation (which is also based in Indiana), or its parent company, The Carlyle Group. Still, Trump’s deal with Carrier demonstrates the unprecedented challenge the president’s conflicts of interest create: Unless he either puts his holdings in a truly blind trust or divests completely, a significant number of the decisions he makes will involve some level of financial incentive for himself as well as for the country.











----------------

But he did it for the jobs! :lol

[Pavlov]

That Carrier Deal

One of President Trump’s first major economic moves as president was the deal that he and Vice President Mike Pence struck with the air-conditioner manufacturer Carrier, which had planned to move 2,100 jobs from its Indiana plant to Mexico. Finalized on November 29, the compromise kept 730 of the plant’s jobs in Indiana in exchange for $7 million in tax breaks over 10 years. The deal immediately attracted praise and criticism on both sides of the aisle, with much of the scrutiny going toward the tradeoff between jobs and tax breaks and Trump’s idiosyncratic, ad-hoc negotiation techniques.

An additional detail soon emerged regarding the deal: According to his FEC filings (which, despite Trump and his spokesman Jason Miller’s unverified statements that the president sold off his stock in June, remain the most recent public record of the president’s finances), Trump holds stock in Carrier’s parent company, United Technologies. In 2014, his investment in the company was between $100,001 and $250,000, while in 2015, the stock is listed as worth less than $1,001, which could indicate that he sold some or most of the stock; each year, his holdings earned him between $2,500 and $5,000.

The paucity of information in the FEC filings makes it difficult to ascertain why his holdings appear to have decreased; regardless, the investment is not only one of several hundred but also a relatively minor one among Trump’s many holdings, some of which are worth over $5,000,000. As a result, it’s difficult to know how much, if at all, Trump may have considered the stock, particularly considering that he didn’t appear to remember his initial promise to save the Carrier plant. Additionally, Trump does not have stock in the next company he called out on Twitter, Rexnord Corporation (which is also based in Indiana), or its parent company, The Carlyle Group. Still, Trump’s deal with Carrier demonstrates the unprecedented challenge the president’s conflicts of interest create: Unless he either puts his holdings in a truly blind trust or divests completely, a significant number of the decisions he makes will involve some level of financial incentive for himself as well as for the country.











----------------

But he did it for the jobs! :lolAnd they just laid off another 300 Americans! With another 300 to go soon!

#winning!

[RandomGuy]

Well, shit. So much Trump corruption, I am out of time again.

Holy shit that is a lot of corruption. Since I am not lazy, I will finish later today.

Get fact checking Mikeanaro

or, you know, not. Cosmored likes to call all the evidence for the moon landings crap too. Feel free to weigh on on that when you want. Maybe you and he can swap research methods.

[Chris]

nuts
dick

[Chris]

No need for me to do anything

a true Leftist

[Pavlov]

a true Leftist^a quintessential dumbass

[Mikeanaro]

I will simply say the sheer amount of money laundered through Trump's casino is enough to justify the current investigations of Trump and his minions by federal and state authorities. I am perfectly fine to let them run their full courses.

Now how about your examples of Democratic Party horrendous corruption you're so concerned with?
My tummy hurts, is he in jail?

[Chris]

^a quintessential dumbass

^has serious issues

[Pavlov]

My tummy hurts, is he in jail?:lol Poor Mikey -- is that your excuse for failing to bring anything to the table?

[Pavlov]

^has serious issues^lacks confidence

[Mikeanaro]

Well, shit. So much Trump corruption, I am out of time again.

Holy shit that is a lot of corruption. Since I am not lazy, I will finish later today.

Get fact checking Mikeanaro

or, you know, not. Cosmored likes to call all the evidence for the moon landings crap too. Feel free to weigh on on that when you want. Maybe you and he can swap research methods.
Im fact checking, you cite Washington Post as a source, the same guys that push strong for the Russian Collusion, yet nothing happened.

Jeff Bezos is the richest guy in the world, add Gates and Soros supporting all kind of defamation, why such a ¨respected¨ info source is so one sided?

No Wasserman-Schultz articles, that never happened?
Just a bunch of yellow press, all the money and all the resources yet Trump won after all the bashing and no tangible evidence agaisnt him.

[Pavlov]

Im fact checking, you cite Washington Post as a source, the same guys that push strong for the Russian Collusion, yet nothing happened.

Jeff Bezos is the richest guy in the world, add Gates and Soros supporting all kind of defamation, why such a ¨respected¨ info source is so one sided?

No Wasserman-Schultz articles, that never happened?
Just a bunch of yellow press, all the money and all the resources yet Trump won after all the bashing and no tangible evidence agaisnt him.:lol Poor Mikey.

[Mikeanaro]

:lol Poor Mikey -- is that your excuse for failing to bring anything to the table?
You are the one not bringing goodies, because if you mention something you will be questioned... just like you do when someones says Ahh and doesn not fit your agenda.

[Mikeanaro]

:lol Poor Mikey.
Why poor? did Trump concede?

Poor are you guys trying to make unicorns real.

[Pavlov]

You are the one not bringing goodies, because if you mention something you will be questioned... just like you do when someones says Ahh and doesn not fit your agenda.I already did. The money laundering is a matter of federal record and I am content to let all the current investigations run their respective courses.

:lol Poor Mikey can't bring anything to the table.

[Pavlov]

Why poor? did Trump concede?

Poor are you guys trying to make unicorns real.:lol Poor Mikey is hoping someone will bring something to the table for him.

[Mikeanaro]

I already did. The money laundering is a matter of federal record and I am content to let all the current investigations run their respective courses.

:lol Poor Mikey can't bring anything to the table.
Yeah the Clinton impeachment was real too, yet nothing happened.
Whats your point?

[Pavlov]

Yeah the Clinton impeachment was real too, yet nothing happened.
Whats your point?The point is, Poor Mikey, you still haven't brought anything to the table. :lol

[Mikeanaro]

The point is, Poor Mikey, you still haven't brought anything to the table. :lol
Neither you nor any poster here.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DF2Cst7V0AAtfWD.jpg

[Blake]

Neither you.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DF2Cst7V0AAtfWD.jpg

You were the one that made the original gripe about dems dumbass.

[Mikeanaro]

You were the one that made the original gripe about dems dumbass.
What are you bringing to the table Blake?

[Pavlov]

Neither you nor any poster here.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DF2Cst7V0AAtfWD.jpg


You were the one that made the original gripe about dems dumbass.:lol no shit. P:cry:cryr Mikey shuts the fuck up quick when asked about the thing he claims concerns him most. It's like he simply doesn't know what he's talking about or something.

[Mikeanaro]

:lol no shit. P:cry:cryr Mikey shuts the fuck up quick when asked about the thing he claims concerns him most. It's like he simply doesn't know what he's talking about or something.
Says the WaPo reader...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DF2HsCbV0AEVVIO.jpg

[Pavlov]

Poor Mikey spending the entire day deflecting from the corruption he brought up.

[Blake]

What are you bringing to the table Blake?


I'm sitting at a different gripe table than yours, dumbass.

[Th'Pusher]

^lacks confidence

As well he should. There is nothing worse that a confident moron.

[RandomGuy]

I think fact checking is denying sources are valid

(Sigh)

No, that isn't fact checking. That is doing the same thing that the moon landing deniers do when you show them scientist's statements. "that's crap"

Fact checking is when you go out and independently attempt to verify things.

One example would be, say finding out if Roth really was given a post in the administration, after being a Trump business partner, and given a post he was really unqualified for.

Did you do something like that?

[Mikeanaro]

(Sigh)

No, that isn't fact checking. That is doing the same thing that the moon landing deniers do when you show them scientist's statements. "that's crap"

Fact checking is when you go out and independently attempt to verify things.

One example would be, say finding out if Roth really was given a post in the administration, after being a Trump business partner, and given a post he was really unqualified for.

Did you do something like that?
Exactly and you never fact checked any of those WaPo articles.
Never questioned Soros, Bezos or any info from his friends sites.

[Mikeanaro]

I'm sitting at a different gripe table than yours, dumbass.
The one with intestinal pains?

[RandomGuy]

As well he should. There is nothing worse that a confident moron.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

[Mikeanaro]

Poor Mikey spending the entire day deflecting from the corruption he brought up.
Says the WaPo reader whose only complain is a casino thing that happened 20 years ago, no complains on Clinton´s impeachment or why never Hillary left him and approved his way of life but the pro was retain power and influence on his lame dem party.

Chumpy loves to question every single little thing of anyone, but here nothing happens, system failure?

:depressedPoor Chumpy

[RandomGuy]

Exactly and you never fact checked any of those WaPo articles.
Never questioned Soros, Bezos or any info from his friends sites.

Sure I have.

The original Atlantic article has hundreds of original links, as I noted, to all sorts of news sources.

The inherent conflicts of interest are very, very easy to fact check. The corruption is so easy to find, you would have to be actively ignoring it not to be able to fact check anything within minutes.

[Mikeanaro]

Sure I have.

The original Atlantic article has hundreds of original links, as I noted, to all sorts of news sources.

The inherent conflicts of interest are very, very easy to fact check. The corruption is so easy to find, you would have to be actively ignoring it not to be able to fact check anything within minutes.
Well then explain the Russian Collusion.

[RandomGuy]

(Sigh)

No, that isn't fact checking. That is doing the same thing that the moon landing deniers do when you show them scientist's statements. "that's crap"

Fact checking is when you go out and independently attempt to verify things.

One example would be, say finding out if Roth really was given a post in the administration, after being a Trump business partner, and given a post he was really unqualified for.

Did you do something like that?


Exactly and you never fact checked any of those WaPo articles.
Never questioned Soros, Bezos or any info from his friends sites.

So you didn't do any fact-checking.

You chose lazy again.

You don't really care about corruption, and were lying when you said you did.

[RandomGuy]

Well then explain the Russian Collusion.

Only one of the 30+ instances of Trumps corruption and conflicts of interest dealt with Russia.

Don't you want explanations of the others? It's global.

[Mikeanaro]

So you didn't do any fact-checking.

You chose lazy again.

You don't really care about corruption, and were lying when you said you did.
Nope, Im like Chump I need feasible info, I wont question anyone if it fits my agenda, they are good people to me since there are no broken laws.
How does it sound?

[Mikeanaro]

Only one of the 30+ instances of Trumps corruption and conflicts of interest dealt with Russia.

Don't you want explanations of the others? It's global.
You are not explaining the Russian Collusion, only deflection to other things.

[RandomGuy]

Poor Mike.

If he were old enough to know what a broken record sounded like...

Reading this is like watching a special form of Terets.

"WaPo"!!! (slaps forhead) "SOROS!!!"

[RandomGuy]

You are not explaining the Russian Collusion, only deflection to other things.

Deflecting from Trumps corruption by demanding I explain "the Russian Collusion" and claiming I'm deflecting when I switch back to the original subject.

:rollin

[RandomGuy]

Sorry Mike. I'm stopping here.

I have, rightly, been occasionally criticized for engaging in people who are obviously not up to the task, and making fun of them too much. It is not a good thing, and unkind.

If you want to actually read any of the stuff I have posted, or any real questions, feel free to post that. Otherwise, I wish you well.

[Mikeanaro]

Deflecting from Trumps corruption by demanding I explain "the Russian Collusion" and claiming I'm deflecting when I switch back to the original subject.

:rollin
You are throwing a bunch of stuff but you are not elaborating, explain the Russian Collusion which is a terrible thing.

[Blake]

The one with intestinal pains?


No.

You still haven't brought any meat to your gripe table.

[I. Hustle]

I hate seeing a group of people get shit on and say so on a message board. Hilarious!

You mean certain groups, right?

[Blake]

You mean certain groups, right?

Sure. Some groups deserve it. Some don't.

We both agree that these people don't deserve to get kicked out of the military. But hey, it's funny when I say it though!

[Pavlov]

Says the WaPo reader whose only complain is a casino thing that happened 20 years ago, no complains on Clinton´s impeachment or why never Hillary left him and approved his way of life but the pro was retain power and influence on his lame dem party.

Chumpy loves to question every single little thing of anyone, but here nothing happens, system failure?

:depressedPoor Chumpy:lol Poor Mikey still hasn't said a thing about the corruption that is his main concern.

And no, the money laundering only started 20 years ago -- but corruption just doesn't matter to you.

[Pavlov]

Nope, Im like Chump I need feasible info, I wont question anyone if it fits my agenda, they are good people to me since there are no broken laws.
How does it sound?Actually, you are nothing like me -- you never even tried to bring up Democratic corruption.

:lolPoor Mikey.

[Mikeanaro]

Actually, you are nothing like me -- you never even tried to bring up Democratic corruption.

:lolPoor Mikey.
Of course not I was kidding, Im not like you, never had a photoshop thread and thousands of posters laughing at my expenses.
:lol Poor Chumpy

[Mikeanaro]

:lol Poor Mikey still hasn't said a thing about the corruption that is his main concern.

And no, the money laundering only started 20 years ago -- but corruption just doesn't matter to you.
Lol, only started 20 years ago... why is he free???
:td Boo Hoo

[Pavlov]

Of course not I was kidding, Im not like you, never had a photoshop thread and thousands of posters laughing at my expenses.
:lol Poor Chumpy:lol Poor Mikey still not talking about Democratic corruption.


Lol, only started 20 years ago... why is he free???
:td Boo Hoo:lol Poor Mikey still not talking about Democratic corruption.

s:cry much c:cryncern

[Mikeanaro]

:lol Poor Mikey still not talking about Democratic corruption.

:lol Poor Mikey still not talking about Democratic corruption.

s:cry much c:cryncern
:lol WaPo reader.

[Pavlov]

:lol WaPo reader.Seriously Mike. Just give us a list of all the Democratic Party corruption that concerns you so much.

It can't be that difficult.

[Adam Lambert]

:lol WaPo reader.

the only people who think this is an insult are the fat redneck fucks who get email updates every time breitbart publishes a new article. i guess that includes you?

[Pavlov]

the only people who think this is an insult are the fat redneck fucks who get email updates every time breitbart publishes a new article. i guess that includes you?I really don't think this guy reads anything.

[Mikeanaro]

the only people who think this is an insult are the fat redneck fucks who get email updates every time breitbart publishes a new article. i guess that includes you?
Who cares what you think in the first place? Im not here to satisfy you WaPo reader.

[Pavlov]

Who cares what you think in the first place? Im not here to satisfy you WaPo reader.You're certainly not here to talk about Democratic Party corruption.

[Adam Lambert]

I really don't think this guy reads anything.

breitbarts audience doesnt read the articles. they read the headline and head straight to the comment section.

[Mikeanaro]

I really don't think this guy reads anything.
Prove it.

[Pavlov]

Prove it.This thread.

[Mikeanaro]

You're certainly not here to talk about Democratic Party corruption.
You're certainly not here to talk about Trump/Republican Party corruption.

[Mikeanaro]

This thread.
Proves I dont read WaPo, but nice try.

[Adam Lambert]

Who cares what you think in the first place? Im not here to satisfy you WaPo reader.

im not here to be satisfied by you, bubba. im here to mock you mercilessly in the slim hopes that you will feel some shred of shame for being a worthless idiot on the wrong side of history.

[I. Hustle]

Sure. Some groups deserve it. Some don't.

We both agree that these people don't deserve to get kicked out of the military. But hey, it's funny when I say it though!

It really is.

I don't think they should get kicked out but when you say it it carries a certain... pizazz

[Pavlov]

You're certainly not here to talk about Trump/Republican Party corruption.I've said my peace on it. I'm completely confident in the investigators on the job right now.

Now where's your list of Democratic Party corruption?

[Pavlov]

Proves I dont read WaPo, but nice try.Actually your failure to list any of the Democratic Party corruption you claim to be concerned about is what's killing you.

[Mikeanaro]

im not here to be satisfied by you, bubba. im here to mock you mercilessly in the slim hopes that you will feel some shred of shame for being a worthless idiot on the wrong side of history.
And yet you mocked nothing, epic fail.

[Pavlov]

And yet you mocked nothing, epic fail.Since you are bringing nothing to the table, mocking nothing is legit.

[Mikeanaro]

I've said my peace on it. I'm completely confident in the investigators on the job right now.

Now where's your list of Democratic Party corruption?
You are confident, that doesnt say much or guarantee anything.
Faith is nothing here, are you a cult fanatic?

[Mikeanaro]

Actually your failure to list any of the Democratic Party corruption you claim to be concerned about is what's killing you.
Whats the point of discussing anything with a cult follower?

[Adam Lambert]

And yet you mocked nothing, epic fail.
:lmao
you argue like a 12 year old
you pathetic idiot.

[Pavlov]

You are confident, that doesnt say much or guarantee anything.
Faith is nothing here, are you a cult fanatic?There are no guarantees, but these guys are pretty competent. It's not like they are a bunch of Mikeanaros are running around not reading anything and whining about it.

[Pavlov]

Whats the point of discussing anything with a cult follower?You're the one discussing things with us.

[Mikeanaro]

You're the one discussing things with us.
Exactly and its pointless, you demand to other facts & accuracy while you base your political views on confidence which is a big nothing.
Thats Chump in a nutshell, ethered once more
Good night.

[Chris]

Trump run Barter Town not Hillary

Hgq4w4dqKsU

[Adam Lambert]

Exactly and its pointless, you demand to other facts & accuracy while you base your political views on confidence which is a big nothing.
Thats Chump in a nutshell, ethered once more
Good night.

lol

wapo/msm = "confidence"

stay dumb, faggot

[mookie2001]

I sincerely didn't know trans soldiers was a problem, it seemed like everything was going pretty smoothly.

[mookie2001]

What about Hillary tho

[Pavlov]

Exactly and its pointless, you demand to other facts & accuracy while you base your political views on confidence which is a big nothing.
Thats Chump in a nutshell, ethered once more
Good night.
Actually I just asked you what Democratic party corruption you're all concerned about.

[Blake]

It really is.

I don't think they should get kicked out but when you say it it carries a certain... pizazz

I don't know what that means. Explain.

[I. Hustle]

I don't know what that means. Explain.

You can just tell that your blood pressure is at it's highest point. I liken it to Avante when you call him out on his Olongapo adventures.

[Chris]

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20292842_1273652562761571_7078864839892215414_n.jp g?oh=d7b250d07aa7a12b21ffb6d0aec91c2b&oe=5A36B75D

[Chris]

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20292977_10155411526486163_1599982247160926704_n.j pg?oh=66ae4d9f4f60c8b779c5d3bd8b6d06c4&oe=5A34578B

[monosylab1k]

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20292977_10155411526486163_1599982247160926704_n.j pg?oh=66ae4d9f4f60c8b779c5d3bd8b6d06c4&oe=5A34578B

https://2static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Logical_ef2a38_5615316.jpg

[Blake]

You can just tell that your blood pressure is at it's highest point. I liken it to Avante when you call him out on his Olongapo adventures.

Lol, no.

[CosmicCowboy]

Why should the army pay for transgender surgery like it did for Chelsea Manning? Join the army to get the taxpayers to pay for your surgery?

[Quadzilla99]

Why should the army pay for transgender surgery like it did for Chelsea Manning? Join the army to get the taxpayers to pay for your surgery?

It definitely shouldn't. But it also shouldn't pay for Viagra and it does yet no on the right seems to care about that for some reason. And it pays like 10 times as much for Viagra

[Quadzilla99]

Of course I don't think the surgery of the health cost is the issue pretty sure if the trans people said that they would do it without Healthcare rightwing people still have a problem with them being there

[boutons_deux]

Mattis is reported to have been seriously FURIOUS for Trash ambushing him and the military

[Pavlov]

Why should the army pay for transgender surgery like it did for Chelsea Manning? Join the army to get the taxpayers to pay for your surgery?Why kick all of them out altogether?

[CosmicCowboy]

I dont give a shit if they serve, just join as a man or woman and stick to it.

[boutons_deux]

I sincerely didn't know trans soldiers was a problem, it seemed like everything was going pretty smoothly.

yep, the problem was fabricated to pander to, obey Christian sharia

among many shitty things you can count on the Repugs for is easily exposed and total LYING