|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On June 27 2017 22:42 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 22:38 Plansix wrote:President Trump, who is fond of dining at his Trump International Hotel near the White House, will have some company Wednesday — a roomful of people who paid as much as $35,000 or $100,000 each to be there.
The money will go to two joint fundraising operations — Trump Victory, which will take in large donations and Trump Make America Great Again Committee for smaller-dollar donors.
When Trump Victory started sending out invitations four weeks ago, it announced the price points, but kept the venue secret until a prospect had RSVP'd.
"There's nothing flat-out illegal about it, but it's pay-to-play," said Richard Painter, former White House ethics counsel in the George W. Bush administration and a critic of Trump's ethical standards. "The appearances are terrible."
Trump has merged two problems — first, Painter points to the usual Washington practice of powerful officeholders selling access to big donors; and second, the new opportunity for interest groups to steer cash to his businesses.
The fundraiser is emblematic of the way Trump has seemed to close a circle of politics, money and influence unlike any past president. During the campaign, some of Trump's companies did business with his campaign. It paid $8.7 million, for example, to TAG Air (the Trump company that owns most of his airplanes) and $2 million to Trump Tower, the building where he housed the campaign headquarters. His private club in Florida, Mar-a-Lago, received $435,000. Even Trump Ice, his bottled water brand, got $3,000.
In total, $1 out of every $10 that went into his presidential campaign went back to Trump in some way, and $1 out of every $5 Trump donated found its way back Trump brands and properties.
In the White House, Trump uses his properties for official business, and they appear to profit from it. Over the winter, he spent many weekends at Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Florida, sometimes meeting with foreign leaders while club members looked on. The club doubled its annual dues to $200,000 and appears to have upped its revenue.
Trump's 2016 personal financial disclosure showed Mar-a-Lago had revenues of 29.8 million; in 2017, it went up to $37.3 million. (The two reporting periods are not identical, and overlap for several months, so a direct comparison can't be made.)
When Trump International opened for business last fall, a few blocks from the White House, it initially faltered. But after Trump moved into the White House, it became a go-to spot for foreign diplomats and interest groups to hold events.
Earlier this month, Justice Department filings revealed that the hotel benefited from $270,000 in payments tied to Saudi Arabia. (After news broke of the payments, the Trump Organization said it would donate the funds at the end of the year.)
Now, for the first time, Trump is explicitly using Trump International to solicit money to hold onto the presidency. The individual ticket price is $35,000; joining the host committee costs $100,000 (some of it presumably coming from donors invited by a host committee member). And Trump Make America Great Again has been raffling off a small number of tickets, plus accommodations and round-trip travel.
Together, Trump Victory and Trump Make America Great Again raised $372.1 million to elect Trump in 2016, and $9.9 million in the first three months of this year, according to Federal Election Commission reports. (As joint fundraising committees, they distribute their income mainly to the RNC and Donald J. Trump For President.)
The Republican National Committee and the Trump campaign did not respond to queries about the event.
"All it takes is a contribution of $1 or more," the TMAGA event email says.
The fine print at the bottom says, "No purchase, payment or contribution necessary to win. Contributing will not improve your chances of winning." Source I would love to know how much of Trump's constant fundraising has gone into his businesses. It is the clearest example of his voters being conned.
I don’t care if they got conned or not. It is straight up harmful to democracy and our nation. This cannot become the norm or allowable for future candidates, I don’t care which party they are part of.
|
|
|
Making even a half-hearted attempt at source-screening would do you a lot of good.
|
I have to agree. Let’s keep the tweets to reputable reporters and political insiders who are not talking about Russia.
|
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power.
|
|
|
On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power.
So because Clinton did it first, how long do we have to wait until we can discuss Trump also doing it? Just give me a time frame we need to wait to become “Free of Sin” and your whataboutism is not long applicable.
|
On June 27 2017 23:08 xDaunt wrote:Making even a half-hearted attempt at source-screening would do you a lot of good.
It would be interesting to try to gauge what percentage of "breaking news" twits that make it into this thread end up substantiated - and what percentage wind up to be total BS garbage. People still take fools like Eichenwald and Mensch seriously and retweet anything they write - so I can't say that I have particularly high regard for most such twits.
|
United States43987 Posts
On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power.
Except the stuff in Clinton Cash didn't actually happen.
|
On June 27 2017 23:21 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power. Except the stuff in Clinton Cash didn't actually happen.
Never saw that documentary, so I can't comment on if one way or the other. But she was definitely under investigation for wrongdoing that was genuinely terrible, if not ultimately criminal, and she has a long history of profiteering off of politics.
|
On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power.
Trump's voters believe that he's the businessman who doesn't need money, and is doing this for the country's good, and his opponent was Crooked.
|
On June 27 2017 23:25 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:21 KwarK wrote:On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power. Except the stuff in Clinton Cash didn't actually happen. Never saw that documentary, so I can't comment on if one way or the other. But she was definitely under investigation for wrongdoing that was genuinely terrible, if not ultimately criminal, and she has a long history of profiteering off of politics.
Remind me if she is the president? Remind me why this matters?
|
On June 27 2017 23:28 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:25 LegalLord wrote:On June 27 2017 23:21 KwarK wrote:On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power. Except the stuff in Clinton Cash didn't actually happen. Never saw that documentary, so I can't comment on if one way or the other. But she was definitely under investigation for wrongdoing that was genuinely terrible, if not ultimately criminal, and she has a long history of profiteering off of politics. Remind me if she is the president? Remind me why this matters?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
If you want point draw attention away from the wrong doings of the current office, you point out the failings of the “other side” without addressing the topic at hand. Forcing the discussion to be about that other party, rather than the current people in power.
Notice how we are all talking about Clinton now?
|
On June 27 2017 23:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power. So because Clinton did it first, how long do we have to wait until we can discuss Trump also doing it? Just give me a time frame we need to wait to become “Free of Sin” and your whataboutism is not long applicable.
You first - how many times has the excuse for emails been, "but Colin Powell did it too!" or "but Republicans are scummy too so it's all justified in the grand scheme of things" or something of that sort?
I know you like your clever little labels and the like - but there's plenty of "whataboutism" to go around if you want to play that game. If we're talking about how Trump is so bad and how everything he does is evil and Russian, we might as well mention the other side that has and continues to enable him. The Democrats can pride themselves in their string of "closer than they should have been" losses all day until they realize that the reason they keep losing to scum is because they themselves are scum - just a hell of a lot less competent at it.
|
The other side is not President, so why don't you just shut up for 1-2 years about "the other side"?
|
On June 27 2017 23:27 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power. Trump's voters believe that he's the businessman who doesn't need money, and is doing this for the country's good, and his opponent was Crooked.
The latter is true. The rest, few people ever believed - they just saw him as a lesser evil or a necessary wildcard to shake things at their core.
|
On June 27 2017 23:33 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:27 Doodsmack wrote:On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power. Trump's voters believe that he's the businessman who doesn't need money, and is doing this for the country's good, and his opponent was Crooked. The latter is true. The rest, few people ever believed - they just saw him as a lesser evil or a necessary wildcard to shake things at their core.
Oh they believe it, and they believe Hillary was much more Crooked.
|
On June 27 2017 23:31 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:20 Plansix wrote:On June 27 2017 23:15 LegalLord wrote:
Trump wasn't alone in normalizing corruption and lining one's own pockets ahead of the country, nor in potentially criminal incompetence. The politician formerly known as electable on the other side helped create an environment where that shit was acceptable, just as long as the opposition is just marginally more scummy. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum - and he keeps on winning because his opponents don't realize that people aren't blind to the fact that they are the same brand of scum, just with less power. So because Clinton did it first, how long do we have to wait until we can discuss Trump also doing it? Just give me a time frame we need to wait to become “Free of Sin” and your whataboutism is not long applicable. You first - how many times has the excuse for emails been, "but Colin Powell did it too!" or "but Republicans are scummy too so it's all justified in the grand scheme of things" or something of that sort? I know you like your clever little labels and the like - but there's plenty of "whataboutism" to go around if you want to play that game. If we're talking about how Trump is so bad and how everything he does is evil and Russian, we might as well mention the other side that has and continues to enable him. The Democrats can pride themselves in their string of "closer than they should have been" losses all day until they realize that the reason they keep losing to scum is because they themselves are scum - just a hell of a lot less competent at it.
But you notice how after the election I took 90 days to think about shit and have attempted to be more critical of the democrats after the loss? And there is nothing clever about your attempts to bring up Clinton when the topic of the thread even has a whiff corruption associated with it. It became predictably banal months ago.
|
|
|
In a comprehensive report late last week, The Washington Post described how narrow-minded politics and dithering by the Obama administration and congressional Republicans allowed Moscow to go largely unpunished for an assault on the American electoral process.
The intelligence community said in August that President Vladimir Putin of Russia was directing an extensive cyberattack on the 2016 election. The Obama administration’s response, though, was late and weak, despite its concerns.
But President Trump, the intended beneficiary of Moscow’s hacking, has been not just cautious but also remarkably indifferent to what should have been a critical nonpartisan national security concern from his first day in office.
...
Russia’s meddling in global democracies is a deepening threat that requires a united response. As commander in chief, Mr. Trump has a sworn responsibility to protect the nation against threats from foreign adversaries. So far the Russians are winning, while he tweets from the sidelines.
www.nytimes.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
