Reply With Quote
Mr. Trump is not racist. That doesn't mean he is articulate or politically correct when it comes to discussing matters involving race, but it's just such a bogus claim altogether that he is racist.
http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-a...lazy-stealing/
As I said you're reaching.
Mr. Trump is not racist. That doesn't mean he is articulate or politically correct when it comes to discussing matters involving race, but it's just such a bogus claim altogether that he is racist.
Mr. Trump will be discussing the money he raised for veterans today. What a hero!
It doesn't matter what he is. it's what he DOES, and that is stealing Repugs 50+ years of dog-whistling bigotry (Goldwater) and make it blatant, attracting racists, bigots, xenophobes, KKK, white nationalist, super-patriot nativists, iow, the typical Repug fring base.
He's doing what he needs to do to win in order to make our country great again. We have to take our country back! We have to!
From whom?
You know who...
I know who, you clearly don't.
The happy merchants?
That was "africans" and an entirely different statement.
Mr. Trump has said some controversial things. We get it. But because he has said so many controversial things, they like cancel each other out, and that's ok. Life goes on. Besides, look at all the good things he's done. He just raised $5.6M for the vets and didn't ask for any credit except to be recognized for doing a great job.
Vet checks sent only AFTER WaPo exposed his vet fund raising as total fraud.
He gets NOTHING but for lying, yet again, about his vet fiasco.
So you admit you're reaching?
It's pretty messed up some vet groups had to basically beg for the remaining money from Trump.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...eterans-group/In recent weeks, other veterans groups had been struggling to figure out how to ask for some of Trump’s remaining money. Trump had provided no formal way to apply.
You make it sound as if ALL the vet checks went out AFTER the WaPo article. This AP article says "More than a dozen big checks flowed out of New York last week, bound for veterans' charities from Donald Trump" and "spoke or left messages with each of the organizations Trump named. Of the 30 groups that responded by Tuesday, about half said they had received checks from Trump just last week." Checks went out to 41 organizations. Seems to me that SOME of them went out earlier.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/44c48...rans-charities.
"some seems" earlier?
Trash guilty of fraud until the vet orgs say they got their checks before the WaPo article.
If I were any charitable organization, I'd be happy to get ANY check - no matter how late. He didn't have to do this fundraiser. And if any of the organizations has anything fishy going on, the press will be the first to jump all over him for not vetting properly. Doesn't the press have anything else to do like questioning the State Department on their "stunning admission, acknowledged Wednesday that an official intentionally deleted several minutes of video footage from a 2013 press briefing, where a top spokeswoman seemed to acknowledge misleading the press over the Iran nuclear deal."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...l?intcmp=hpbt3
Seriously, boutons?"some seems" earlier?
Trash guilty of fraud until the vet orgs say they got their checks before the WaPo article.
yep, seriously. Trash's checks to vets didn't go out until after the WaPo expose.
Fraud is a serious charge, and what happened to innocent until proven guilty. I just showed you the AP article that does not say ALL the checks went out after the WaPo article. This is Trump's problem with the media - the insinuation that he's up to something nefarious/fraudulent - when all it is is LATE - I expect that he directed his people to find/vet the organizations - he didn't hire new staff to do it (no administrative fees) - you know, they have other duties. It's charity, for heaven's sake.
Um, noooo.
Do you admit Trump is a racist for saying blacks are lazy?
Good point.
Why call the failure to actually give money to veterans until someone calls you on it fraud, when it is just plain sloppy or dishonest. Not all dishonesty is fraud.
Except when it is.
Former Trump University Workers Call the School a ‘Lie’ and a ‘Scheme’ in Testimony
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/us...sity.html?_r=0
In blunt testimony revealed on Tuesday, former managers of Trump University, the for-profit school started by Donald J. Trump, portray it as an unscrupulous business that relied on high-pressure sales tactics, employed unqualified instructors, made deceptive claims and exploited vulnerable students willing to pay tens of thousands for Mr. Trump’s insights.
One sales manager for Trump University, Ronald Schnackenberg, recounted how he was reprimanded for not pushing a financially struggling couple hard enough to sign up for a $35,000 real estate class, despite his conclusion that it would endanger their economic future. He watched with disgust, he said, as a fellow Trump University salesman persuaded the couple to purchase the class anyway.
We all expect our politicians to lie a bit.
Trump lies more than than anyone else.
One has to wonder what is hidden in his tax return.
Trump Has a Conflict-of-Interest Problem No Other White House Candidate Ever Had
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...-deutsche-bankIn his most recent financial disclosure statement, Donald Trump notes he has billions of dollars in assets. But the presumptive GOP nominee also has a tremendous load of debt that includes five loans each over $50 million. (The disclosure form, which presidential candidates must submit, does not compel candidates to reveal the specific amount of any loans that exceed $50 million, and Trump has chosen not to provide details.) Two of those megaloans are held by Deutsche Bank, which is based in Germany but has US subsidiaries. And this prompts a question that no other major American presidential candidate has had to face: What are the implications of the chief executive of the US government being in hock for $100 million (or more) to a foreign en y that has tried to evade laws aimed at curtailing risky financial shenanigans, that was recently caught manipulating markets around the world, and that attempts to influence the US government?
Is there anyone who has any doubt whatsoever that a billionaire real estate developer with a history of ethically questionable business tactics probably has things on his tax return that won't stand even a little bit of scrutiny?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions