Trump refuses to provide proof salary donated as promised

[Chiropteran]

This is all kind of meaningless anyway as the issue is whether he has actually separated himself from his business or not. He obviously has not.

Which is 100% completely legal. He could be running it himself, directly, and it would still be within the law. This is the stupidest thing to complain about.

 

[Exterous]

It was literally in the quote you provided.

If that is what you are referring to then its obvious that this wasn't going to be a blind trust. My quote shows that Trump didn't know if it would be a blind trust but thats how he was going to structure it anyway. If anyone was thinking that this was going to be a blind trust based off that quote they were deluding themselves

 

[Chiropteran]

Why wouldn't it be reasonable to require that? Nobody forced him to run for president, and closing avenues of obvious corruption potential is just good public policy.

Where was this line of thinking when Clinton was using his position to make millions by publicly speaking?

 

[fskimospy]

Which is 100% completely legal. He could be running it himself, directly, and it would still be within the law. This is the stupidest thing to complain about.

The fact that you think it is stupid to complain about the most powerful person on earth using their public office for private enrichment or even raising questions about whether they would do that is frankly baffling to me.

The same people who complained for years that the Clintons were corrupt now not only accept corruption from Trump but say that it's stupid to even have a problem with.

This once again shows just how sick partisanship has made some people in this country.

 

[Chiropteran]

The fact that you think it is stupid to complain about the most powerful person on earth using their public office for private enrichment or even raising questions about whether they would do that is frankly baffling to me.

The same people who complained for years that the Clintons were corrupt now not only accept corruption from Trump but say that it's stupid to even have a problem with.

This once again shows just how sick partisanship has made some people in this country.

You don't understand the difference between coming into the office while already being worth billions vs coming into the office and using the office of the president to make hundreds of millions?


edit:

Additionally, any money Trump has made due to being president is conjecture and theory. With all the idiotic liberal boycotts, he may well have seen a net loss by running for president.

Although it is pretty funny seeing the double standard.

 

[Exterous]

nm

 

[fskimospy]

Where was this line of thinking when Clinton was using his position to make millions by publicly speaking?

Hahaha, thank you so much for proving my point.

You are bringing up speeches by Bill Clinton after he was out of office as some sort of corruption but then dismiss as stupid concerns that Trump could literally run a for-profit enterprise with government contracts while controlling the government as not a problem.

Jesus, this sort of thinking is not rational. Partisanship has driven you insane.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

He said exactly what he would do, and he said he wasn't sure if it was considered a blind trust or not. What is the problem?

There was a difference of opinion and so I quoted the "horse's mouth". "Problem" doesn't apply, at least for me.

 

[Chiropteran]

Hahaha, thank you so much for proving my point.

You are bringing up speeches by Bill Clinton after he was out of office as some sort of corruption but then dismiss as stupid concerns that Trump could literally run a for-profit enterprise with government contracts while controlling the government as not a problem.

Jesus, this sort of thinking is not rational. Partisanship has driven you insane.

You don't seem to have the molst basic grasp of how a conversation works. You are the one that was calling Trump's dealings "corruption" I had to assume you meant that making money from public office was corruption, because that is the only fucking thing being discussed that is even remotely similar to corruption. So I ask you: where was that line of thinking when Clinton did it, which is 100% known and verified, not just a lot of guesses, assumptions, and conjecture?

I'm not the one who thinks making some incidental money off of the office is corruption, in fact I think it would be unfair to force a president to break up his/her business before taking office. The insanity is firmly inside your own head.

 

[Exterous]

Hahaha, thank you so much for proving my point.

You are bringing up speeches by Bill Clinton after he was out of office as some sort of corruption but then dismiss as stupid concerns that Trump could literally run a for-profit enterprise with government contracts while controlling the government as not a problem.

Jesus, this sort of thinking is not rational. Partisanship has driven you insane.

This isn't a defense of Trump's actions but I do find it interesting that this has sparked such an outrage while Congress has been able to do this for decades. They just have to promise to never let anything slip to their children or spouses *nod nod wink wink*

My biggest hope for Trump's presidency is that people get so worked up about things he is doing that changes are made despite the fact that other elected officials have been doing it for much longer and no one really cared that much

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Actually we don't really know that. Haven't seen a receipt. Remember we are dealing with a guy that lies more then he tells the truth.

Seek help.

 

[fskimospy]

You don't seem to have the molst basic grasp of how a conversation works. You are the one that was calling Trump's dealings "corruption" I had to assume you meant that making money from public office was corruption, because that is the only fucking thing being discussed that is even remotely similar to corruption. So I ask you: where was that line of thinking when Clinton did it, which is 100% known and verified, not just a lot of guesses, assumptions, and conjecture?

You're going to have to provide examples of what you think is '100% known and verified' because my strong suspicion is that you have no idea what you're talking about.

I'm not the one who thinks making some incidental money off of the office is corruption, in fact I think it would be unfair to force a president to break up his/her business before taking office. The insanity is firmly inside your own head.

Lol, 'some incidental money'. Is that how you're rationalizing this in your head? He is now literally his own landlord and appoints the people who adjudicate labor disputes with his employees, among many many other things.

Incidental money. Lol.

 

[fskimospy]

Seek help.

In all fairness history clearly indicates that when Trump has said he has donated money that is most likely a lie. Why is simply going off of his own history a problem?

 

[Chiropteran]

How can someone be so inept at using google?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/index.html

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

In all fairness history clearly indicates that when Trump has said he has donated money that is most likely a lie. Why is simply going off of his own history a problem?

Excellent logic! lol

 

[fskimospy]

Excellent logic! lol

You disagree with the logic of using past behavior to evaluate current behavior?

 

[fskimospy]

How can someone be so inept at using google?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/index.html

How can someone be so inept at reading comprehension. None of those speeches took place while either was in any public office.

Total fail.

 

[fskimospy]

This isn't a defense of Trump's actions but I do find it interesting that this has sparked such an outrage while Congress has been able to do this for decades. They just have to promise to never let anything slip to their children or spouses *nod nod wink wink*

My biggest hope for Trump's presidency is that people get so worked up about things he is doing that changes are made despite the fact that other elected officials have been doing it for much longer and no one really cared that much

I imagine the primary difference is that the presidency is so vastly more powerful than a congressional seat and it's so much more visible. Nobody knows who most individual congressmen are and so it's hard to get worked up off of what some guy from Montana is doing who you don't know. Everyone knows who the president is and his ability to influence public policy to his financial advantage are almost limitless. In all I think it's half publicity and half scale of corruption.

Some changes have already been made for Congress (STOCK Act, for example) but yes I hope more are put into place. There seems to be a reasonably high probability that Trump will become embroiled in some major corruption scandal during his tenure so that will probably help spur further anti-corruption legislation.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You disagree with the logic of using past behavior to evaluate current behavior?

I believe that mental depravity is a serious problem.

 

[HomerJS]

Seek help.

The fact that you are willing to accept a serial liar indicates you need help first.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The fact that you are willing to accept a serial liar indicates you need help first.

Derp.

 

[fskimospy]

I believe that mental depravity is a serious problem.

Can you explain how you believe that relates to this topic?

 

[brycejones]

Derp.

A perfect description of your posts.

 

[brycejones]

Can you explain how you believe that relates to this topic?

Who he?

 

[zinfamous]

I thought I saw in the news that he donated his pay to the Park Service. Dude...you're acting like a rabid dog. Pathetic.

Should probably get some clarification on those two points before you make further judgments based on what you "think you 'know'"