• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Donald Trump vows to shut controversial Trump Foundation

SOFTengCOMPelec

SOFTengCOMPelec

Platinum Member
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38429496

I hear so much controversy about this guy, and he is not even in office yet!
But I guess the people have voted.

Donald Trump has announced that he plans to shut his charitable foundation, although an investigation into its practices continues.

The US president-elect said he wanted to avoid "even the appearance" of any conflict of interest.

New York's attorney general is looking into suspected "impropriety" at the Foundation, which Mr Trump denies.

The attorney general's office said Mr Trump could not shut the Foundation while the investigation was continuing.

Mr Trump's statement on Saturday said that "the foundation has done enormous good works over the years in contributing millions of dollars to countless worthy groups, including supporting veterans, law enforcement officers and children.

"However, to avoid even the appearance of any conflict with my role as president I have decided to continue to pursue my strong interest in philanthropy in other ways."

Mr Trump will be inaugurated on 20 January, succeeding President Barack Obama.

The Republican billionaire beat his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the 8 November elections.

Why has the Trump Foundation become controversial?

New York's Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said in September that his office wanted to ensure the Foundation was "complying with the laws that govern charities in New York".

"We have been concerned that the Trump Foundation may have engaged in some impropriety from that point of view," Mr Schneiderman told CNN at the time.

US media say Mr Schneiderman's office has been investigating the Trump Foundation since at least June, when it formally questioned a donation made to a group backing Republican Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi in 2013.

The $25,000 (£20,350, €23,920) payment was made at a time when Mrs Bondi's office was reportedly considering whether to open a fraud investigation into Trump University.

The fraud investigation never happened, although Mrs Bondi denies the decision was influenced by the donation she received.

Aides to Mr Trump have already admitted the donation was a mistake resulting from clerical errors, according to reports.

What is the Trump Foundation? By BBC's Anthony Zurcher
_93120703_gettyimages-605865374.jpg
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
The Donald J Trump Foundation is a private charitable organisation started by Donald Trump in 1987 with money he earned from his best-selling book, The Art of the Deal.

Up until about 2005, the foundation was primarily funded by Mr Trump himself, including a million-dollar contribution in 1989. Since then, however, it has been bankrolled almost exclusively by donations from Mr Trump's friends and associates.

According to its 2014 filing with the Internal Revenue Service (the most recent on record) the foundation claimed assets totalling $1,273,895 and brought in $500,849 - almost entirely from a gift from New York ticket-reselling mogul Richard Ebers, a regular contributor. The foundation gave out $591,450.

Other past prominent Foundation donors include Vince McMahon, the professional wrestling impresario and NBC Universal (which aired Mr Trump's show, The Apprentice).

Many of the contributions to Mr Trump's foundation appear to be in lieu of payments to Mr Trump himself. People Magazine gave $150,000 after it received rights to publish photos of Mr Trump's son, Barron. Comedy Central donated $400,000 after Mr Trump appeared on one of its celebrity roasts.

Several dozen charitable groups received contributions in 2014 - about an average number for the foundation. They included the Alliance for Lupus Research, the American Skin Association, the Anti-Defamation League and a variety of veterans' charities.
Click to expand...
 
Sinsear said:
It's his version of the Clinton Foundation
Click to expand...
Apparently that also has had or got, some of its own controversies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation

So in fairness, I guess we can't necessarily judge Trump or Clinton that way. Since both Foundations have their own controversies.

As regards the Hillary Clinton controversies:
The acceptance of funds from wealthy donors has been a source of controversy.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation–State_Department_controversy

During Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, a number of individuals, organizations, and countries allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation either prior to, or while, pursuing interests through ordinary channels with the U.S. State Department.
Click to expand...
 
ivwshane said:
For the Clinton foundation, if by "controversy", you mean a bunch of made up scandals, then yeah sure.
Click to expand...

You're right. It is disputed, and I can well believe that Hillary is innocent of any wrong doing.

Whenever I hear such things about Trump. I have to admit, I immediately think they are likely to be true.
Whereas with Hillary Clinton, I immediately think (and hope) that there is a good chance they are not true.

It must be a real nightmare, running for president, these days. If you just looked at someone slightly wrongly, fifty years ago, for a few milliseconds. The press could bring it back to haunt you, throughout the election, and probably afterwords.
 
SOFTengCOMPelec said:
Whenever I hear such things about Trump. I have to admit, I immediately think they are likely to be true.
Whereas with Hillary Clinton, I immediately think (and hope) that there is a good chance they are not true.

It must be a real nightmare, running for president, these days. If you just looked at someone slightly wrongly, fifty years ago, for a few milliseconds. The press could bring it back to haunt you, throughout the election, and probably afterwords.
Click to expand...

People with no qualifications who made vast contributions to the Foundation were magically (apparently) granted access to security sensitive positions in the state department.

Back to Trump I believe he'll cut ties when I see it. Tomorrow he may claim he never made any such statement.
 
SOFTengCOMPelec said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38429496

I hear so much controversy about this guy, and he is not even in office yet!
But I guess the people have voted.
Click to expand...
Get used to it, you're going to see rabidly partisan investigations into President-elect Trump, his family, his friends, any and all associates, his dogs, cats and anyone or anything else the left and the Democrats can possibly investigate for the next 4 years. An announcement by a partisan New York AG is to be expected and celebrated.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
Get used to it, you're going to see rabidly partisan investigations into President-elect Trump, his family, his friends, any and all associates, his dogs, cats and anyone or anything else the left and the Democrats can possibly investigate for the next 4 years. An announcement by a partisan New York AG is to be expected and celebrated.
Click to expand...

I'll tell you right now that the moment that Trump breaks faith with Constution or law I want his head on a platter. Not not for petty Lewinsky scenarios, but if he were decide his will takes precedence over the Bill of Rights he's become an enemy of the state.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
I'll tell you right now that the moment that Trump breaks faith with Constution or law I want his head on a platter. Not not for petty Lewinsky scenarios, but if he were decide his will takes precedence over the Bill of Rights he's become an enemy of the state.
Click to expand...
I won't disagree with you at all, but this partisan investigation is to be expected, you know it and I know it.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
People with no qualifications who made vast contributions to the Foundation were magically (apparently) granted access to security sensitive positions in the state department.

Back to Trump I believe he'll cut ties when I see it. Tomorrow he may claim he never made any such statement.
Click to expand...

I agree. He is a man of his word. Unless he changes his mind, or the wind blows in a slightly different direction etc.

imported_tajmahal said:
Get used to it, you're going to see rabidly partisan investigations into President-elect Trump, his family, his friends, any and all associates, his dogs, cats and anyone or anything else the left and the Democrats can possibly investigate for the next 4 years. An announcement by a partisan New York AG is to be expected and celebrated.
Click to expand...

Some people think that it is almost a certainty that Trump will be the next president, to be impeached.
But the thing is, there are so many different things that he could be impeached for. I would not like to guess at this stage, what might finally get him. If it does happen.

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

I guess that the UK's Brexit, Trump getting in, and maybe other changes we may see politically (especially in Europe), in 2017+. Are showing changing times on the world wide political front. Trump winning the presidential election, is probably just part of all the changes we are beginning to see.
It is just not clear at the moment (at least to me), if things are going to end up, better or worse (or maybe the same) for everyone, world wide, in the next few years, and beyond.
 
Here's an example. This in depth Politico investigation on President Elect Trump's height on his drivers license. Yep.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-drivers-license-height-232948
"
Donald Trump and his doctor claim he’s 6-foot-3, but his New York driver’s license says he’s actually an inch shorter.

A copy of Trump’s license, obtained by POLITICO through an open-records request, lists the president-elect at 6-foot-2.


It may just be an inch, but size apparently matters to Trump. A letter that the businessman candidate displayed this summer from his longtime gastroenterologist — while appearing on the Dr. Oz show — stated he was 6-foot-3, though media reports were quick to point out discrepancies."

Slate, for example, posited that Trump was adding an inch to his height to avoid crossing into obesity territory — he also weighed 236 pounds — on the BMI index. That Slate article pointed to multiple media that pegged Trump as 6-foot-2, including Google, though the search engine now has Trump at 6-foot-3.

A special edition of Time published earlier this year profiling Trump also listed him at 6-foot-3 while noting “it irritates him that so many media outlets say 6-foot-2.”

Grounds for impeachment!!!
 
imported_tajmahal said:
Get used to it, you're going to see rabidly partisan investigations into President-elect Trump, his family, his friends, any and all associates, his dogs, cats and anyone or anything else the left and the Democrats can possibly investigate for the next 4 years. An announcement by a partisan New York AG is to be expected and celebrated.
Click to expand...

Highly amusing coming from an adherent to the party of the endless bogus investigation. Birtherism. Fast & Furious. IRS. Benghazi. Hillary's freaking emails. All bullshit.

Poor Donald! So persecuted! It's all so partisan!

I'm sure it never occurred to you that the NY AG would investigate any charity operating out of his state w/o proper certification-

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...29979381495_story.html?utm_term=.d08afa6c3365
 
Jhhnn said:
Highly amusing coming from an adherent to the party of the endless bogus investigation. Birtherism. Fast & Furious. IRS. Benghazi. Hillary's freaking emails. All bullshit.

Poor Donald! So persecuted! It's all so partisan!

I'm sure it never occurred to you that the NY AG would investigate any charity operating out of his state w/o proper certification-

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...29979381495_story.html?utm_term=.d08afa6c3365
Click to expand...


NY would slit your throat and bleed you like a pig before it would let tax revenue like that get away. Get your poop in a group.
 
SOFTengCOMPelec said:
You're right. It is disputed, and I can well believe that Hillary is innocent of any wrong doing.

Whenever I hear such things about Trump. I have to admit, I immediately think they are likely to be true.
Whereas with Hillary Clinton, I immediately think (and hope) that there is a good chance they are not true.

It must be a real nightmare, running for president, these days. If you just looked at someone slightly wrongly, fifty years ago, for a few milliseconds. The press could bring it back to haunt you, throughout the election, and probably afterwords.
Click to expand...

The difference would be the right wing's 30 years of Hillary Hate. After Reagan, the Republicans thought they would rule for a while. And then Clinton happened. And they lost their minds.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
People with no qualifications who made vast contributions to the Foundation were magically (apparently) granted access to security sensitive positions in the state department.

Back to Trump I believe he'll cut ties when I see it. Tomorrow he may claim he never made any such statement.
Click to expand...

No they weren't liar.
 
Oops I saw that the NY AG said Trump can't dissolve the trust and that's most interesting. Cuomo is a bit of disgusting himself and unless I'm greatly mistaken has Presidential plans and is sort of like James Moriarty smart. He conspired with Elliot Spitzer to advance their careers. I was a witness to how this played out. Pharmacy laws and regs in NY are a bureaucratic nightmare we have to deal with. Some are completely obscure and contradictory. Depending on the inspector one can follow the law but violate another so a win win for finers is guaranteed.

Cuomo being the AG hired temps with no knowledge to investigate pharmacy records going back to the statue of limitations. Millions in triple fines were collected to properly filled prescriptions done in good faith. Why? One huge one was that the law requires a prescription called in to be recorded in a particular format. That includes the date on the prescription, but in the case of Medicaid there is an ambiguious reference which implies that a time be put on paper as well as a date, although it is not a law in any way.

Cuomo stole millions on an obscure technical point and made himself and Spitzer look to be the anti-fraud heroes.

With that as a background, Cuomo knows how to get what he wants and what better feather in his cap to go after Trump for purposes of impeachment, even if Trump didn't know (which is a possibility since such anyone in Trumps financial situation has others to do clerical duties). Cuomo saves us from Trump and fast tracks to the Dem ticket for 2020.

Not guaranteed by any means but I know Cuomo is unscrupulous and extremely bright and aggressive. This possible opportunity can not have escaped him.
 
My question: what happens when Trump faces a more serious dilemma, like having to put his businesses in a real blind trust (i.e. not just using his kids as a proxy) or even to close one or more of them? That, to me, is the test... we see if he's actually interested in being President and assuming at least some of the responsibility that comes with it.
 
Commodus said:
My question: what happens when Trump faces a more serious dilemma, like having to put his businesses in a real blind trust (i.e. not just using his kids as a proxy) or even to close one or more of them? That, to me, is the test... we see if he's actually interested in being President and assuming at least some of the responsibility that comes with it.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong but I not believe there is a law saying a President has to invoke a blind trust or similar construction. Traditionally it has been the case to prevent an appearance of conflict of interests, but no one could say that Trump listens to others.
 
Commodus said:
My question: what happens when Trump faces a more serious dilemma, like having to put his businesses in a real blind trust (i.e. not just using his kids as a proxy) or even to close one or more of them? That, to me, is the test... we see if he's actually interested in being President and assuming at least some of the responsibility that comes with it.
Click to expand...

This article (maybe not the best of reference materials available):
http://www.bankrate.com/finance/politics/businessmen-as-us-president-1.aspx

About past history, of Presidents who were already businessmen, before becoming president of the united states of America.

Worries me, because that is what might have caused a tiny, insignificant, historical problem.
Called "The Great depression".

If you work in a skyscraper. Just remember to always wear a parachute. Then you can change your mind, if you decide to jump, even in the middle of your downward journey (joke).

The list of presidents in that article, does not inspire a great deal of confidence, in a number of the past businessman presidents.
 
SOFTengCOMPelec said:
This article (maybe not the best of reference materials available):
http://www.bankrate.com/finance/politics/businessmen-as-us-president-1.aspx

About past history, of Presidents who were already businessmen, before becoming president of the united states of America.

Worries me, because that is what might have caused a tiny, insignificant, historical problem.
Called "The Great depression".

If you work in a skyscraper. Just remember to always wear a parachute. Then you can change your mind, if you decide to jump, even in the middle of your downward journey (joke).

The list of presidents in that article, does not inspire a great deal of confidence, in a number of the past businessman presidents.
Click to expand...

One needs instinct and a lack of remorse to be in Trump's position. That is not always enough and that government is to serve the citizen and not make a profit isn't something that I'm confident he understands.

Commodus does have a point when legal restrictions impinge on Trump's sense of entitlement. I'm talking specifically about having family participating in government. That was done with the Kennedys but the law changed that. So if Trump decides his kids will serve in an official capacity it's not going to happen. The resulting tantrum may be so epic that it will go down in history.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Correct me if I am wrong but I not believe there is a law saying a President has to invoke a blind trust or similar construction. Traditionally it has been the case to prevent an appearance of conflict of interests, but no one could say that Trump listens to others.
Click to expand...

There is the question of the emolument clause in the Constitution. For example, is it legal for foreign diplomats to stay at Trump's hotels knowing that he'll profit from their visit? They might not be handing him a direct bribe, but that's certainly trying to influence government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top