Did Trump Really Try To Implement a Coup?
It seems the worse the pathological lying, serial felon, and sexual predator Trump gets, the more his cult adores him. He went all out at his so-called new conference (I call it a pity party) in slathering on the lies:
1. I think he was referring to his Jan 6 speech that incited his audience to riot and storm the Capitol when he claimed "nobody" every had a crowd as big as his. He lied that MLKs I have a Dream speech was the same size or probably smaller: FACT: Trump had around 10,000 at his speech. MLK had more than a 250,000! (and like with where his father was born, Trump couldn't get the location of each speech correct; his was on the Ellipse while MLK was at the Lincoln Memorial. But hey, give Trump a break, he is old and feeble-minded.)
2. Trump, in a rather sick fashion, said no one died on Jan 6th. FACT: FIVE People died at the Capitol. Further, Trump totally ignored that several police killed themselves as a result of the trauma that Trump's forces inflicted on them. In addition, Trump turned a blind-eye to the hundreds of police who were serious hurt by Trump's troops that day. How disrespectful can you get?. (Maybe another sign his mind is slipping, maybe he forgot all that.)
3. Trump lied when he said "The presidency was taken away from Joe Biden, ... but I tell you what, from a constitutional standpoint, ... they took the presidency away.” FACT: How a party nominates its candidate is solely up to the national committee. It is clear Trump knows nothing of the Constitution since it is totally silent on how a Party selects its candidate. (Is this another sign of mental fatigue?)
4. Trump lied when he suggested there would have been no inflation if he had won; and then said some nonsense about energy. FACT: All economists will tell you that inflation was inevitable because the demand resulting from the recovery after COVID far exceeded what could be produced and delivered due to how much Covid crippled the manufacturing and distribution systems as well as China keeping much of the world's commerce shutdown by keeping its business sector closed. (Obviously, the complexities of this is too much for his mind to grasp.)
5. Trump lied when he claimed "“Twenty million people came over the border during the Biden-Harris administration — 20 million people — and it could be very much higher than that.” FACT: Border patrol estimates that the number of "encounters" was 7.1 million during Biden's term so far. The ACTUAL number of unique people is MUCH LOWER, since the same person was "encountered" on multiple occasions.
6. Trump lied when he claimed that Harris was a border "czar" for Biden. FACT: Harris was given the job to figure out the root causes of immigrants coming to our border and NOT TO secure the border. To secure the border Biden relied on most Trump policies in place and leaving out only the most inhumane ones.
7. Trump lied when he claimed “The New York cases are totally controlled out of the Department of Justice.”. FACT: The NY cases were controlled by NY law, its Attorney General, and the NY prosecutors. The DOJ was simply not involved.
8. Trump lied when he claimed he was on a helicopter with Californian politician Willie Brown which had to make an emergency landing and therefor "knows him well". Willie Brown, after ROFL, said he has never been on a helicopter with Trump. Given who is the proven habitual liar, I believe Brown.
There are more, but this is all the AP listed.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-news-c … 0902e5c004This is how far the Republican Party has descended into Trump's authoritarian world.
"Michele Morrow, the Republican nominee to run K-12 public education in North Carolina, filmed a video after attending the January 6 riot at the US Capitol urging then-President Donald Trump to put “the Constitution to the side” and use the military to stay in power."
And Trump took that to heart in his attempt to circumvent the Constitution to become dictator.Rerun the tapes on Trump's Jan 6 insurrection and the investigation into it. You'll understand.
Trump ‘can’t tell the difference’ between true and false
Former national security adviser John Bolton said Thursday that former President Trump has trouble differentiating between fact and fiction.
“Look, Trump can’t tell the difference between what’s true and what’s false,” Bolton said on CNN’s “The Source with Kaitlan Collins.” “It’s not that he lies a lot, because to lie, you have to do it consciously. He just can’t tell the difference.”
His comments are in reaction to Trump’s Thursday press conference. The session lasted more than an hour, during which Trump answered questions from the press regarding Vice President Harris and the election, as well as strategy and policies.
At one point, Trump claimed others on his team used to call for Hillary Clinton’s imprisonment, saying he never wanted that for the former first lady.
“I was very protective of her,” he said. “I think my people understand it. They used to say,’ Lock her up, lock her up.’ And I’d say, ‘Just relax, please, folks.’”
Trump led rally crowds in “lock her up” chants several times during the 2016 campaign.
“If it doesn’t comport with anybody else, he doesn’t really care, and he’s had decades of getting away with it,” Bolton added. “So in his mind, the truth is whatever he wants it to be.”
During the press conference, Trump also floated a theory that was reminiscent of the election denialism he participated in during the 2020 elections. He told reporters it was likely “unconstitutional” for Harris to be the Democratic nominee without going through the primary.
“It’s another demonstration how little of American history Trump knows,” Bolton said.
Bolton also noted the move could be the former president testing out different arguments to challenge the election results if he loses.
“Trump never loses. And so, if he’s not declared the winner of 2024, as in 2020, it must be because he was treated unfairly, yet again. It was stolen, yet again,” Bolton concluded.The REAL truth about Trump's helicopter story; not only can he not tell fact from fiction, he can't tell short from tall, ROFL.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/10/us/p … brown.html
He not only lied about the helicopter story, he wrote about the lie as well.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/0 … k-00173473Either way, pathologically lying, serial felon, and sexual predator Trump is not fit for office. Either he knows what he is doing is wrong and does it anyway OR he is mentally diminished and needs psychiatric help.
Mr John Bolton would be telling the truth. Trump is an old man. Talking day and night publicly 24/7, he would brainwash himself?
The Trump Party of today: Ditch the Constitution when you need to.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/09/politics … index.htmlThe "Stop the Steal" Lie that won't Die.
https://www.cnn.com/maga-misinformation … index.html"A team of NPR reporters and editors reviewed the transcript of his news conference and found at least 162 misstatements, exaggerations and outright lies in 64 minutes. That’s more than two a minute. It’s a stunning number for anyone – and even more problematic for a person running to lead the free world."
Pathological liar (obviously), serial felon, and sexual predator Donald J. Trump likes to set records, this is probably a new record, even for him, lol.
Obviously, truth is being told. But what else did they found on the other side, the positive side? I think it would be a better and unbiased perspective to list also some if nnt all of the other sides. Fair and square that what they should do.
Why is that "obvious"? What Truths did Trump tell during that interview?
I am looking through the transcript of Trump's interview looking for anything he said that was true. Here is a paragraph that has a truth in it (in blue), the untruths are in red.
DONALD TRUMP: With that being said, we have somebody that hasn’t received one vote for President, and she’s running. And that’s fine with me. But we were given Joe Biden, and now we’re given somebody else. And I think, frankly, I’d rather be running against somebody else. But that was their choice. They decided to do that because Kamala’s record is horrible. She’s a radical left person at a level that nobody’s seen.
DONALD TRUMP: We want to have a safe country. We want to have a strong military. We want low interest rates, and we want to be able to have the American Dream. We want to be able to have our youth be able to buy homes, housing, get good jobs. And we’re really just at the opposite right now. It’s so — it’s so sad to see.
That is basically it from his opening statement. The rest were untruths at best.
https://singjupost.com/full-transcript- … nglepage=1Fair and square. That is what should be done, otherwise, it's bs, hate, and political persecution.
So, you are OK with the rest of his opening remarks being lies? Curious.
I, for one, focus on his policies.
https://secure.winred.com/trump-nationa … 27ayXqXnCgThat's not my point. The thing is that I need an unbiased statement always. That's what I want. Honestly, if this is biden(and Harris now symbolized biden) you close both eyes, and seal lips.
The Right keeps complaining that all the MSM does is report negative things about pathological liar, serial felon, and sexual predator Trump. Well, here is another reason for them to complain - yet another whopper lie told by Trump about one of his favorite obsessions - crowd size. This time the lie the Right can ignore is about Harris' crowd size. It has videos that prove him wrong - AGAIN!
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/11/politics … -nr-digvidI realized I've said something about all the political noise and nonsenses before. Whether it's from Trump's or Harris side, photo or video, that didn't interested me. Such talks even happen in the last election campaign in my country, Nigeria, and elsewhere.
You may be immune to all that political noise and nonsense in Nigeria and elsewhere. Here in America, pathological liars, serial felons, and sexual predators are not accepted as candidates unless you are a Trump supporter.
Trump supporters excuse him, as a pathological liar, a serial felon and a sexual predator. They excuse him because ..... ?
https://theconversation.com/who-likes-d … ple-211166
https://secure.winred.com/trump-nationa … 27ayXqXnCgBecause most of them are either brainwashed or agree with pathological lying, serial felon, and sexual predator Trump's misogyny, islamophobia, racism, and authoritarian views.
What did the Amrican Constitution said about such characters? Bven a prisoner? Are they allow to run for say the presidential race? The answer is in your hands. You can't prove me wrong.
Thank you. To some especially on the Dem side, Trump is all hate, disliked, and a scum.
Now we know why sexual predator, serial felon, and pathological liar Trump chose J.D. Vance - he is a fellow failed business man who treats employees poorly.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/13/politics … index.htmlThe pathological liar keeps on lying. This time with Musk.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/13/politics … index.htmlCNN "fact checking" Trump? That's hilarious!
Why hilarious? They, like the MSM outlets are honest networks. It is your side, like Lying Fox News who doesn't know fact from fiction.
Have you heard the latest Joke? Pathological Liar, Serial Felon, and Sexual Predator Trump has sued the DOJ for $100 million over the legal search for stolen documents at his Mar-a-Logo estate. His complaint states that the FBI didn't give his lawyers enough notice ROFL. I guess he need time to hide the incriminating evidence.
What about Biden storing documents in a mere garage? That's fine. But Trump storing documents, (which is allowed,) in a very secure location, his mansion in Florida, where the "FBI didn't give his lawyers enough notice" is not. I do not understand.
You know as well as I that Biden (nor Pence for that matter) did not know they had classified documents. And when they found out, they IMMEDIATELY turned them over.
Trump, on the other hand, KNEW he had stolen classified documents (he said so) and he wouldn't turn them over. This is why the FBI was forced to get a search warrant; they had evidence that said Trump was hiding stolen national security secrets on his property.
His "mansion" was hardly secure, he had spies running all around it on occasion. Trump did not have a SCIF at Mar-a-Lago OR his place in New Jersey, therefore he was not "allowed" to keep them there even if he had the legal right to take them in the first place - WHICH he did not, he was no longer President, thank God.
When have you EVER heard of law enforcement EVER giving the subject's lawyers a heads up that they were coming to retrieve evidence. The answer is Never. How stupid are his lawyers for even putting forth such a ridiculous reason.Things can be said by you which you believe to be true but the documents were allowed to be taken.
https://www.archives.gov/news/topics/pr … ecords-actOh, I don't know... maybe the fact that he is a former President may make it prudent to do so?
But if the hope is to plant evidence, or force a negative situation to occur, or if the whole goal is not justice, but to ruin your political opponent... then yeah, you handle things just as they did.
Actually, it is not. Biden and Pence didn't know they were there and when found turned them over immediately.
Trump knew he had stolen the documents and refused to give them all back.
He was not allowed to keep those documents at either Mar-a-Lago OR in Bedminster and therefore broke the law.
In your country, does law enforcement give the suspect notice when they execute a search warrant? They don't here, the whole point is to be a surprise so that the criminal can't destroy the evidence they are seeking.
Therefore, the point is totally out of order.What does the link Kathryn provide above mean? Thank you.
https://www.archives.gov/news/topics/pr … ecords-act
You mean this link?
"The National Archives and Records Administration has no formal role in how incumbent Presidents manage their records, except when the President proposes to dispose of records; instead, NARA provides guidance and counsel to incumbent Presidents and their designated officials, upon request."
"The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) applies to the Presidential Records Act (PRA) five years after the President has left office. NARA uses this time to begin to conduct archival processing and otherwise prepare for the onset of public access. (Trump Presidential records will become subject to FOIA on January 20, 2026)."MIEBAKAGH57 - It seems crucial facts were left out.
Below are excerpts from the link. I highlighted what was ignored.
Under the Presidential Records Act (PRA), incumbent Presidents have exclusive responsibility for the custody and management of the Presidential records of their administration while in office. The National Archives and Records Administration has no formal role in how incumbent Presidents manage their records, except when the President proposes to dispose of records; instead, NARA provides guidance and counsel to incumbent Presidents and their designated officials, upon request. For more information, see:
Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978
Guidance on Presidential Records
Press Statements in Response to Media Queries About Presidential Records
Each change of Presidential administration requires a massive move of records and materials. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) plays a key role in the physical transfer of hundreds of millions of textual, electronic, audiovisual records, and artifacts from the White House to an outgoing President’s future library. NARA also plans for the transfer of legal custody of those materials when an administration ends, the care of those materials, and the development of the library itself. Presidential records come to NARA at the end of the administration. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) applies to the Presidential Records Act (PRA) five years after the President has left office. NARA uses this time to begin to conduct archival processing and otherwise prepare for the onset of public access. (Trump Presidential records will become subject to FOIA on January 20, 2026).
Looking for information about the Federal Records Act? Find it on this page.
Presidential Records Act (PRA)
In 1978, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which states that any records created or received by the President as part of his constitutional, statutory, or ceremonial duties are the property of the United States government and will be managed by NARA at the end of the administration.
The Presidential Records Act (PRA) changed the legal status of Presidential and Vice Presidential materials. Under the PRA, the official records of the President and his staff are owned by the United States, not by the President.
The Archivist is required to take custody of these records when the President leaves office, and to maintain them in a Federal depository.
There is no Trump Library, nor are there any plans for their to be one.
The law is VERY CLEAR on who owns those records and it is not Trump. Since he kept the records, which were supposed to be at the Achieve already, and wouldn't return them when initially asked (and then returning a few begrudgingly) Trump broke the law.The question is for. MyEso, not you, Kathryn.
Kathryn, MyEso, has given his answer. What would you like to say? Much thanks.
~ already did.
"Trump Presidential records will become subject to FOIA on January 20, 2026."
Adding:
"The National Archives and Records Administration has no formal role in how incumbent Presidents manage their records, except when the President proposes to dispose of records; instead, NARA provides guidance and counsel to incumbent Presidents and their designated officials, upon request."
It's like leaving one's diary behind. It was his stuff. He needed to go through it to determine what to keep. He wasn't planning to dispose of the records/documents.
How do I know?
I don't.
https://www.archives.gov/news/topics/pr … ecords-actThanks again. I'll study it in tandem with all the responses being given.
Headline: "Trump’s continued attacks on Harris’ rise stir fears he could question election outcome if he loses in November"
Does anyone really doubt that Trump won't resort to violence again when he loses? I certainly don't. He strongly alludes that he will and some of his surrogates are calling for it.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/14/politics … index.htmlWhat is Wrong with Republicans not wanting people vote?? It makes no sense and reeks of voter suppression.
Now the Red States are suing to stop the federal government agencies from encouraging people to register to vote. Idiocies.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/14/politics … index.htmlWOW! When I started driving home from work a little bit ago, Trump was ranting at his rally in North Carolina. It takes about 45 minutes to get home so I listened to him for 30 - 35 of those minutes; the remainder was analysis by the talking heads.
In that 30 or so minutes, Trump lived up to one of the adjectives that describe him - pathological liar! I heard him tell only ONE truth in that whole time - that Harris took his no tax on tips idea. The talking heads pointed out one other true thing he said - that credit card debt was at record levels. THAT IS IT!! The rest of it was misinformation, disinformation and outright lies (like 20 million illegals crossed the border under Biden).
It was billed as an "economic policy" speech. Well, he did talk about the economy, lying about every facet of it. Well, he did itemize many of the economic issues facing America and then gave his "policy". "I am going to fix it starting day 1". That is it, he is going to fix it.
He spent probably 5 minutes altogether taking about Biden. The rest of the time he lied about all the problems being Harris' fault and whined SHE had 3.5 years to fix it but didn't. (I guess in his addled mind, he thought Harris was President.)
Anyway, it was a pretty sickening experience listening to him denigrate America."The Right keeps complaining that all the MSM does is report negative things about . . .Trump."
After 50 years in newswriting, I can attest to this fact. The news is not about balance. If there is only evidence pointing to one person, there is no requirement to try to orchestrate similar evidence pointing to someone else. News is ''just the facts, M'am" - not balance.
When/If another public figure states as many lies as are on the record attributed to Trump (usually on video), the news MSM will report it. But up until this point in history, there has never been anyone verified for anywhere close to the number of lies Trump has said in public - and continues to say.
If you want the negative things to stop being reported about Trump - get him to stop doing negative things.You post just made me think of another Republican hypocrisy. They oppose equity for minorities yet they rend their cloths when the news doesn't search for non-existent positive things about Trump to balance out the negative ones, lol.
It's much more about telling a balanced news. All politicians anywhere are given to telling lies. And yes, some of the public at the end of the receiving line are unable to see the lies from the truth.
You still don't see the quality difference between a person who tells one innocent lie or a person who tells 100 dangerous one. As I understand it, you are asserting that either one is just as qualified as the other to be president. Do I have that right?
Are you, MyEso, a politician? I don't agree to suce a thing as 'innocent lies'.
Your wife puts on a horrible looking dress thinking it is very pretty and she asks you how she looks in it. Most men would lie and say she looks nice. Are you saying you would tell her she looks ugly?
And no, not a politician, I am a pragmatist.A pragmatist that want Trump, a politician, cum a chronic liar, being envisage to earn the title Pinnochio, to do the practical good always? Both the Rep and Dem agree to lieing to some extent, isn't it? And its common among every political class. No yardstick or benchmark was set. So why try to limit Trump?
Trump was never a pragmatists:
"an advocate of the approach that evaluates theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application."
Trump does not evaluate theories (not sure he even knows what they are) and he has only one belief - what is best for himself.
Trump is a situational, transactional dangerous narcissist.
I hope one day you will see him for what he is - a pathological liar, a serial felon, a sexual predator, and a dangerous narcissist whom over 30 mental health professional have gone on record that he is dangerously mentally ill.I don't say Trump, is a pragmatist. You are read my first sentence again.
Mie57: I get it, you want to play the balanced role, but there is nothing balanced about one person lying 1 time and the other person lying 1,000 times. Yes, by definition of the word, they are both liars, but one is much worse than the other. please watch this video. Make sure the sound is enabled
https://youtu.be/NsQ2hX_noNw?si=AnswlFP4Wfje9r5OBut a single lie, don't ever do good to anyone.
Did you answer the question about your hypothetical wife and the ugly dress? Would you tell her she looks ugly in it?
Maybe if you rephrase your first sentence, I might understand it better.
Okay. Seems there's a lacuna in punctuation on my side. And here's what. I originally wrote: 'A pragmatist that want Trump, a politician, cum a chronic liar,...' Let me re-punctuate it. 'A pragmatist, that want Trump, a politician, cum a chronic liar,..'. Can you get that now? Forgive my short comings. Thanks.
I still can't understand what you are trying to say, even with changing the punctuation.
"A pragmatist, that want Trump, a politician, cum a chronic liar,..'."
Are you saying a pragmatist sees Trump as a chronic liar, so it's O.K because Trump is a politician and all politicians lie?Not that Trump is okay with his lieing habit as all politicians are. The pragmatist is MyEso, not Trump, period
Not only Rep and Dems lie to some extent, ALL people do, even you I bet. So if everybody does it to some small extent, why point it out. The issue is the volume and dangerousness of Trump's lies and rhetoric.
If you translate what Hitler says in his speeches to English and bring the references up to 2024, I seriously doubt you could tell the difference."So why try to limit it to Trump." By asking that question you bring us back to the jay-walker and murderer analogy where you appear not to appreciate the degree of seriousness between the two. You seem to suggest that both the jay-walker and the murder should get the same fine or both should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
Why do you feel that way?
Yes he can exaggerate.
He thinks in sweeping generalities.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics … _manual_11Just heard Trump once again display his ignorance about basic economics, this time at a rant session in Bedminster. To demonstrate inflation he had a bunch of props (items) to show how much prices have increased. Of course he repeated the standard lie that Harris CAUSED it to happen.
Then he proceeded to tell the audience that within 12 to 18 months of taking office, he would cut those prices in HALF, lol. Boy is he stupid.
First, he didn't realize that his promise means he will lower prices of goods and services to a price that is BELOW what they were prior to the pandemic.
Second, he hid the fact that to do that, he will have to cause a massive deflationary depression. I wonder why he didn't tell them that part of his plan?Another example of Trump's mental illness. Today at Bedminster:
"Former President Trump on Thursday dismissed calls from allies for him to refocus on policy, saying he was “entitled to personal attacks” against Vice President Harris as polls show her erasing his polling lead."
What a morally corrupt, pathological lying, serial felon, and Sexual Predator Trump is.Listen, you will probably get that you want. Don't worry
Be happy. Plus, you presently have Biden still leading the country toward ... ?
Meanwhile, I can't bear to hear you call poor Trump all those names any more.
Please.I am not "calling" him anything. I am describing him with facts.
Is he not a pathological liar?
Is he not a serial felon?
Is he not a sexual predator?Then you apparently don't believe in juries, at least ones that don't give you the results you want.
Too bad, that means Trump is winning in defeating democracy in America.
My Kathryn, I'm with you in that. As at now, these things that the Dem and certain Rep(s) members are holding against 'real' Donald Trump, since 2016, are past tence. Critically, certain of the questions are controversal. The Stormy Daniels case, for instance. Critically again, while the Democrats here are sing: 'Trump, a sexual predator, a pathological liar, a convicted felony, la la la la', not minding the appear in a higher court. This is what divide the men and women from the boys and girls.
I will continue to remind everybody the kind of terrible person they support. Maybe it will sink in someday that this guy, as Nikki Hailie said, is UNFIT for office.
Trump wants to save the country from people who are set on destroying it.
Take a look at Venezuela. Do you understand Trump can save us from falling in the same way?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-48121148
We cannot let the government become (more of) a monopoly.Yet he, and apparently you, want him to become the Putin of America. You do realize that Putin (who Trump admires a lot) is the definition of a monopoly don't you?
As to Venezuela, you do recognize that Maduro is doing what Trump did in trying to cling to power after losing an election. The difference is Trump lost again in his attempt to overthrow the election results and Maduro looks like he will win his coup.Trump respects Putin as the leader of Russia and a force to reckon with.
Trump won the election. Biden acted Like Murduro, taking a presidency which did not belong to him and now look, his karma caught up to him. Trump should be in office right now. If we were smart we would install him ASAP.
Then the whole country and world would not be going absolutely crazy.
Thank you for this freedom of speech.Kathryn: I'm glad you brought that up. Maduro cannot accept that he was not elected as president so he just took over with military might. On Jan. 6 Trump did not accept the fact he lost as president, so he used para-military troops to storm the white house, most of whom are now in prison.
Until this day, he is still broadcasting that the election was stolen from him, when in fact, he tried to steal it from Biden. If Kamala Harris wins the election, do you think he will go away peacefully after losing twice?
I'm so sorry that you have been so brainwashed by Trump that you think he should just step into the White House and remove the duly elected president of The United States of America so that Trump can become president You also believe Biden endorsing Harris as running for office is bad Karma on Biden. I don't know what you are drinking, but it must be KoolAid.OMG, you are one of those who believe that Trump won. I am sorry, he clearly did not and no amount of wishing he had won is going to change the TRUTH - Biden won in what Trump's people called the "fairest election in our history".
Here is another giveaway to the rich pathological lying, serial felon, and Sexual Predator Trump is proposing to eliminate taxes on Social Security Benefits.
Here is the catch, the benefit largely goes to the wealthy (again).
"Currently, seniors don’t owe taxes on their benefits if they earn less than $25,000 per individual, or $32,000 for married couples, of so-called combined income, which takes into account their adjusted gross income, half their Social Security benefits and nontaxable interest.
Above that threshold, they may have to pay income tax on up to 50% of their benefits, with the revenue going to the Social Security retirement trust fund. Those with combined incomes of at least $34,000 per individual, or $44,000 per couple, could pay income tax on up to an additional 35% of their benefits, with those funds going to Medicare’s hospital insurance trust fund, known as Medicare Part A.
Eliminating the levy on Social Security benefits would reduce taxes by an average of $550, though lower-income households would see little to no benefit next year, according to the Tax Policy Center.
However, the proposal would harm the popular entitlement program, as well as Medicare and the federal budget, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The tax is expected to bring in about $94 billion in revenue this year.
Eliminating the tax would increase federal deficits by between $1.6 trillion and $1.8 trillion through 2035, a committee analysis found. The Social Security retirement trust fund would be depleted more than a year earlier, and Medicare’s hospital insurance trust fund would run dry six years earlier.
Many seniors could ultimately be hurt if Social Security and Medicare’s trust funds run dry sooner and benefits have to be cut.
Trump has not specified how he would pay for the proposal."Pathological lying, serial felon, and Sexual Predator Trump is proposing to increase costs to middle income Americans by $1,700 per year! by imposing a 10% tariff on all products from all countries.
He already bankrupted thousands of farmers with his previous tariffs. Now he wants to bankrupt more people? Why would you stand for that?
"Trump has repeatedly claimed that new tariffs will bring back jobs and raise revenue for the country. But economists generally agree that tariffs are a costly way to boost some US manufacturers. In April, Moody’s estimated that even if Trump cushioned the blow from tariffs with tax cuts, his trade proposals would cost the US economy 675,000 jobs, worsen inflation and shrink gross domestic product by 0.6 percentage points.
Plus, tariffs are paid by US importers rather than foreign countries as Trump often suggests. Americans have paid more than $242 billion to date for tariffs that Trump imposed on imported solar panels, steel and aluminum, and Chinese-made goods during his administration, according to US Customs and Border Protection."
Other Trump proposals would also increase INFLATION.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/15/politics … index.html"A tariff is a type of tax levied by a country on an imported good at the border. Tariffs have historically been a tool for governments to collect revenues, but they are also a way for governments to try to protect domestic producers. As a protectionist tool, a tariff increases the prices of imports. As a result, consumers would choose to buy relatively less expensive domestic goods instead."
What Is the Purpose of a Tariff?
Tariffs are a way for governments to not only collect revenue but also protect domestic businesses. Tariffs increase the price of imported goods, making domestic goods cheaper in comparison.
Who Benefits From a Tariff?
The importing countries usually benefit from a tariff, as they are the ones imposing the tariff and collecting the revenue. Domestic businesses also benefit from tariffs because it makes their goods cheaper than imported goods, hence driving up the demand for their products."
https://www.investopedia.com/news/what- … ffect-you/I understand what Investopedia is saying about the theory of tariffs. In practice, there have only been a few times were selective tariffs have produced the desired outcome.
There have many times when they created a catastrophe; the most notable one President Hoover's tariff in 1930, which made the depression of 1929 into the Great Depression of 1931.
Here is a list of notable tariffs that failed
1. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (1930)
Background: The Smoot-Hawley Tariff was passed during the early stages of the Great Depression with the intention of protecting American farmers and industries by imposing high tariffs on imported goods.
Outcome: Instead of stimulating the domestic economy, the tariffs worsened the economic situation. Other countries retaliated with their own tariffs, leading to a sharp decline in international trade. This contributed to a deepening of the Great Depression globally, and many economists view the Smoot-Hawley Tariff as a significant policy failure.
2. The Chicken Tax (1964)
Background: In the 1960s, the U.S. imposed a 25% tariff on light trucks in response to European tariffs on American chicken exports. This tariff, known as the "Chicken Tax," was intended to protect U.S. automakers from foreign competition in the light truck market.
Outcome: While the tariff did protect American automakers, it had long-term negative consequences. It limited competition in the light truck market, leading to higher prices for consumers. The tax also complicated trade relations with other countries and is still in place today, despite its original purpose being largely obsolete.
3. Tariffs on Canadian Lumber (1980s-2020s)
Background: The U.S. has periodically imposed tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber, arguing that Canadian subsidies give Canadian producers an unfair advantage. These tariffs are intended to protect American lumber producers.
Outcome: The tariffs have led to higher prices for lumber in the U.S., increasing costs for homebuilders and consumers. The dispute has been long-running, with both countries taking the issue to international trade bodies like the WTO. The tariffs have not resolved the underlying trade tensions and have often led to retaliatory measures from Canada, affecting broader trade relations between the two countries.
4. Steel and Aluminum Tariffs (2002)
Background:[/b] In 2002, President George W. Bush imposed tariffs on steel imports to protect the U.S. steel industry from foreign competition. The tariffs were intended to give domestic producers time to modernize and become more competitive.
[u]Outcome: The tariffs led to higher steel prices in the U.S., which harmed American manufacturers that relied on steel as an input. It also prompted international retaliation, particularly from the European Union, which threatened tariffs on American goods. The economic impact was negative, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled that the tariffs violated global trade rules. The Bush administration eventually lifted the tariffs in 2003.
5. Trump Administration's Tariffs on China (2018-2020)
Background: Beginning in 2018, the Trump administration imposed tariffs on a wide range of Chinese imports as part of a strategy to reduce the U.S. trade deficit and pressure China to change its trade practices.
Outcome: The tariffs led to a trade war between the U.S. and China, with both countries imposing retaliatory tariffs. While the tariffs did cause some disruption to China's economy, they also had significant negative effects on U.S. businesses and consumers. American farmers, in particular, were hit hard by China's retaliatory tariffs on agricultural products, leading to a need for government bailouts. The tariffs did not achieve the intended reduction in the trade deficit, which remained large, and many analysts believe the tariffs contributed to economic uncertainty without leading to meaningful concessions from China.
Summary
In these examples, tariffs often led to unintended consequences, such as higher prices for consumers, retaliatory tariffs from other countries, and disruptions to international trade without achieving the desired economic or political outcomes. While tariffs can be a useful tool in certain circumstances, these cases demonstrate the risks and complexities involved in using tariffs as a trade policy instrument.
NOW, ALL THAT SAID, tariffs "can" be good IF used for a specific purpose like raising revenue when the nation was poor or needed money for war efforts OR to protect certain industries in concert with other economic actions.
Here is a list of tariffs that worked:
While tariffs have often had mixed results, there are instances in American history where tariffs produced positive outcomes, particularly in fostering domestic industries, generating government revenue, or achieving strategic economic goals. Here are some examples:
1. Early U.S. Tariffs (1790s-1860s)
Background: In the early years of the United States, tariffs were a primary source of government revenue and were used to protect nascent American industries from foreign competition. The Tariff of 1789, one of the first acts passed by Congress, was designed to generate revenue for the federal government and encourage domestic manufacturing.
Outcome: These early tariffs helped to protect and nurture American industries, particularly in the North, allowing them to develop without being overwhelmed by more established European competitors. The revenue generated by these tariffs also helped fund the federal government during a time when other sources of income were limited.
2. The Morrill Tariff (1861)
Background:[/b] The Morrill Tariff, enacted in 1861, raised import duties to protect American industries, particularly in the North, during the Civil War. The tariff was part of a broader strategy to support the war effort by increasing revenue and encouraging domestic production of goods needed by the Union Army.
[u]Outcome: The Morrill Tariff successfully raised government revenue, which was crucial for financing the Civil War. Additionally, it provided protection to American industries, allowing them to expand and become more competitive. The industrial growth spurred by this protection helped lay the foundation for the rapid economic expansion of the United States in the post-war period.
3. The Tariff of 1816
Background: Following the War of 1812, the Tariff of 1816 was implemented to protect American industries, particularly the textile industry, from British competition. Britain had flooded the U.S. market with cheap goods after the war, threatening to stifle the growth of American manufacturing.
Outcome: The Tariff of 1816 is often considered the first protective tariff in U.S. history. It successfully shielded American manufacturers from foreign competition, allowing the U.S. textile industry to grow and become established. This was an early example of the U.S. government using tariffs strategically to support industrial development.
4. Tariffs During World War I (1914-1918)
Background: During World War I, the United States imposed tariffs on various goods to protect domestic industries from disruptions caused by the war and to reduce reliance on foreign imports. The tariffs were part of a broader economic strategy to ensure that American industries could meet the demands of the war effort.
Outcome: These tariffs helped stimulate American manufacturing by reducing foreign competition and encouraging the production of goods needed for the war. The war effort led to a boom in industrial production, which continued into the post-war period, contributing to the economic prosperity of the 1920s.
5. The 1980s Semiconductor Tariffs
Background: In the 1980s, the U.S. imposed tariffs and negotiated trade agreements to protect its semiconductor industry from what it viewed as unfair competition, particularly from Japan. The U.S. accused Japan of dumping semiconductors at below-market prices to undermine American manufacturers.
Outcome: The tariffs, combined with trade agreements, helped revive the U.S. semiconductor industry. By the late 1980s, American semiconductor companies had regained market share, and the industry remained a key part of the U.S. economy. The intervention is often cited as a successful use of trade policy to protect and revitalize a critical technology sector.
6. The Auto Industry Tariffs (1980s)
Background: In the early 1980s, the U.S. imposed tariffs on imported motorcycles and pressured Japan into voluntary export restraints on automobiles. The goal was to protect struggling American auto manufacturers, particularly Harley-Davidson and the Big Three automakers (GM, Ford, Chrysler).
Outcome: The tariffs and export restraints gave American manufacturers time to restructure and become more competitive. Harley-Davidson, in particular, credited the tariffs with saving the company from bankruptcy, allowing it to modernize its operations and regain market share. The Big Three automakers also benefited from the temporary protection, helping them to weather the economic difficulties of the time.
Summary
These examples show that tariffs have been successfully used in American history to protect nascent or strategically important industries, generate government revenue, and achieve specific economic objectives. However, the success of tariffs often depends on the broader economic context, the design of the tariff policy, and how it is implemented and enforced.
It is easy to see the difference between general punitive tariffs like what Trump id and is proposing AND helpful tariffs that are specific and targeted toward limited outcomes.
If I see these words again I will exit from this discussion and never come back.
"Pathological lying, serial felon, and Sexual Predator Trump."I am sorry if you can't handle the truth.
Pathological lying, serial felon, and Sexual Predator Trump
(Just checking)What Pathological Lying, Serial Felon, and Sexual Predator Donald Trump thinks about our soldiers and sailors is, to put it nicely, despicable!
Before I get to his lates insult of our heroes, let me rehearse his past comments and actions:
1. Faked a bone-spur to stay out of the draft.
2. 2015: Insulted and belittled a real war hero, John McCain saying he was "Not a War Hero": during his presidential campaign, Trump famously said of Senator John McCain, a former Navy pilot and POW during the Vietnam War, "He’s not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured." This comment was widely condemned by veterans and military supporters.
Refusal to Acknowledge McCain's Contributions: After McCain's death in 2018, Trump continued to criticize him, even as many others honored McCain’s military service and public career.
3. 2016: Gold Star Family (2016)
Khizr and Ghazala Khan: During the 2016 campaign, Trump criticized Khizr Khan, a Gold Star father whose son was killed in Iraq, after Khan spoke at the Democratic National Convention. Trump suggested that Khan's wife, Ghazala, who stood silently by his side, was not allowed to speak because of their Muslim faith, which many saw as an attack on a grieving military family.
4. 2017: Insulted John McCain again. In addition he took on his generals by referring to them as "Losers": Trump reportedly referred to military generals as "a bunch of dopes and babies" during a 2017 meeting at the Pentagon, according to an account in the book A Very Stable Genius by Washington Post reporters Philip Rucker and Carol Leonnig.
5. 2018 Went after our soldiers killed in WW 1 by saying they were "Losers" and "Suckers"! A report published by The Atlantic in 2020 alleged that Trump referred to American soldiers who died in World War I as "losers" and "suckers" during a 2018 visit to France. The report was corroborated by several other news outlets, leading to widespread criticism.
6. 2019: Criticism of Military Generals James Mattis (2019): After General James Mattis resigned as Secretary of Defense, Trump referred to him as “the world’s most overrated general” during a meeting with congressional leaders in 2019. He also dis'd General Kelly, his Chief of Staff, and General McMaster, his National Security Advisor.
7. 2020: He went after Pentagon Officials, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff, by accusing them of Warmongering: In September 2020, Trump accused Pentagon leaders of wanting to "do nothing but fight wars" to make defense contractors happy, implying that military officials were acting in the interest of private companies rather than national security.
8. 2024: He belittled Medal of Honor recipients by declaring that the Medal of Honor was less prestigious than the civilian Presidential Medal of Freedom. Why? He told a crowd that the Presidential Medal of Freedom is It’s actually much better, because everyone gets the Congressional Medal of Honor – that’s soldiers. They’re either in very bad shape because they’ve been hit so many times by bullets, or they’re dead,”
I wonder how many veterans are flipping him the bird right now?
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/politics … index.htmlMyEso, you're welcome. But as I've noted John MaCain, was Trump's political foe. Each candidate is trying to get the upper hand in election campaign. So that talk can arise. But I pited Trump, who should know better that the military, service men, POW, Vet and so on are VIP, no matter what's they rank, even a private is a VIP.
What his disrespect shows is that Trump has no ethical boundaries, no moral compass and therefore is unfit for office. We don't want a Vladimir Putin as president.
You still miss the point. Trump, and John MaCain are political foes. They talk against one another to get to the White House. He's not Adolf Hitler, nor Vladimir Putin. You get that?
Actually, no I don't. He needs to stop acting like Hitler and Putin for me to believe he isn't following in their footsteps. I just amazes my you can't see that.
Consider that Putin, Hitler, and Trump are:
* Pathological liars
* Serial felons
* Probably sexual predators (not probably for Trump)
* Megalomaniacs
* Mentally ill
* Incites violence
* Attempts and/or succeeds in coups
* Ordered people to be killed or, in Trump's case, is responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead Americans
* Narcissists of the highest order
* Misogynists
* Extreme nationalists of the White Supremacy variety
and the list goes on.
Which of those do you not think Trump is? Name them and I will provide plenty of examples to show that he is.Mie57; Why do you make excuses for Trump when you don't live here and know what goes on a daily basis? You really don't know his history from when he was not in politics. He has always been a narcissistic master con-artist and a trouble maker.
His parents had to send him to military school to teach him discipline and his first two years there he was a trouble maker. The next two years, he learned how to divide and conquer for his own benefit which he still uses today. On his first day in office, he called the real news the fake news, so that he could divide and conquer the country and its people..
I suggest read his nieces book. I read it and is very revealing who Donald Trump really is.
The book is titled “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man.”
The author is Mary L. Trump, Ph.D., who happens to be Donald Trump’s only niece.
It was published by Simon & Schuster on July 14, 2020. That’s when the curtain rose on this tell-all drama.
The Unveiling:
In this revelatory biography, Mary L. Trump, a trained clinical psychologist, shines a bright light on the dark history of her family.
She explains how specific events and family dynamics shaped her uncle, Donald J. Trump—the man who occupied the Oval Office and threatens the world’s health, economy, and social fabric today. He still does it today, only now it is called MAGA.Thank you. An outsider can get to know what is happen in any country of the world that interested him
I don't believe that. You don't know Trump's history. I suspect, you only know him since he was president and what he is today. I don't think you can really know any country unless you live there and assimilate into their socio=economic culture and ethos. I can probably get all the news source in Nigeria, study about Nigerian culture for decades, but that is not the same as living there.
GOP Rep Comstock join the ever growing list of Republicans who want to save America from Trump by voting for Harris or third-party candidate or writing in a name they like.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ … 2d18ef6a2aMAGA must be so proud to know that not even THEY are immune from Trump's CRIMINAL activities. He is stealing money from them and yet they give him more, ROFL.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/23/politics … index.htmlMAGA made a lot of hay out of the SDNY (Southern District of New York) not indicting Trump when they had the chance (they still do, technically). I just started Elie Honig's book Untouchables where he explains why.
Honig is a former SDNY federal prosecutor who put a lot of mobsters away. His book focuses on why people with power and connections so often avoid justice altogether, or get light sentences. Trump appears often in his book.
As it turns out, the SDNY wanted very much to indict Trump for his hush money crimes, along with Cohen. All the prosecutors on the case thought there was at least a fighting chance they had the evidence to convict and most of them thought they definitely had enough evidence to convict. So why didn't they.
The first reason is the same reason that Mueller didn't indict Trump, DOJ guidance says you can't indict a sitting President. Mueller did the next best thing, set him up to be impeached or to be prosecuted after he left office. Likewise, SDNY couldn't indict either.
Worse, Main DOJ (those political appointees Trump put in place to protect him) wouldn't let SDNY barely mention Trump at all in Cohen's indictment. SDNY wanted to lay out in gory detail Trump's involvement in the hush money payments. They wanted to refer to him as unindicted co-conspirator 1, which is what the NYC jury found that he was when they convicted him of the same crime. Main DOJ said NO!
Next, they wanted to use Candidate 1. Same answer - NO!. They finally were forced to settle on Individual 1.
Further, Trump's protection unit in DOJ stopped SDNY from putting the details of Trump's crimes in Cohen's indictment period. They effectively COVERED UP Trump's crimes from the public. They didn't even want SDNY even indicting Cohen on the hush money crimes at all! If fact, when Bill Barr got in, he tried hard to have Cohen's involvement in the hush money scheme hidden from view as well and not prosecute him on it. CAN YOU IMAGINE?
So, bottom line, it is not that the SDNY didn't think they had enough evidence on Trump to convict, it is that Trump's protection detail in DOJ did their job and protected him.
Here is what Honig thought of Trump.
"Few if any people in American History have flouted the law in as many ways, over as many years, in as public a manner as Trump has. He has been impeached twice, tried twice in the Senate, and acquitted both times. He has been sued, subpoenaed, and deposed dozens of times. He has been the subject of countless adverse findings in reports issued by persecutors, judges, Congress, and other investigative bodies. But, as of this writing, Donald Trump has never been charged with a crime. His rap sheet is blank.
That could change of course. Given several long-pending investigations, some prosecutor as some level might finally take a shot. In my view, the Fulton County, Georgia, district attorney is the most likely to indict Trump, perhaps by the time of this book's publication in early 2023. But the prime opportunities to hold Trump criminally accountable for his actions have passed. Prosecutors, federal and state alike, have fumbled away their best chances an inexplicably" (believe it or not, my cat ate the top portion of the next page and I have no idea how Honig concluded that thought.)
Now, when Honig wrote this, he didn't know that the Fulton County DA WOULD indict Trump nor did he know that the Manhattan DA would indict Trump on the hush money scheme and a jury WOULD hold him accountable.
Further, Honig didn't know at the time that Trump would be convicted on defamation and sexual assault by yet another jury, and of bank fraud by a judge.
So, hopefully people now understand why I put the following descriptive adjectives in front of his name: pathological liar, sexual predator, and serial felon.You're trying. Continued to pry into the Trump affairs, and DIG DEEP. How would you accept, and welcomed it if others began to invest in your negative past?
If I committed crimes like he did, it would be fair game. But, I am not trying to become President of the United States, either.
Yes, 'fair game' indeed. And whether you're 'trying to become the President of the United Stater', or not, or whether you commited any crime or not, what's your take if someone other than you continue digging your past? And again, you're being labeled with variou specific negatives. How d' you take it? Easy?
If all men were angels we wouldn't need government.
If all government officials were angels we wouldn't need the people.
However, the people's job is to determine whether the ones they elect can handle the job. They are also supposed to hold them accountable for breaking the laws of the Constitution.
Yes, Trump can handle the Job. We know this based on four years of peace and plenty.
No, Harris cannot. We know this from almost four years of the exact opposite:
Havoc, mayhem and poverty
Too Big To Rig, People!Thank you. I'm waiting specific for MyEso's response.
I have no "take" on it. It is there right and duty to do so if my past jeopardized the nation.
Okay. Can you recalled that Trump was the 'darly' of politicians before he ventured into poltics?
So what and what is a "darly"? He was a Democrat then as well. Not sure what that means.
And you too a former Democrat, right? And from the context, you're not geting my word 'darly'?
Be really fair. But come on MyEso...but why not test your your manhood in the hot waters of politics? Now, get out out of your present comfort zone, and get into the muddy waters of political la la la la. That's where the acid-base balance test is. You're become the best bride sort after.
And that comes from someone tucked away in another country who supports dictators and pontificates on American politics.
Also, what do my feelings have to do with anything? It is the duty of all citizens to expose crime where it happens. Don't they do that in Nigeria?
Congratulations! Continue. Every citizen has the right to expose crime.
What do these more than 200 former aides to McCain, Romney and Bushes who signed a letter endorsing Harris know about pathological lying, sexual abusing, serial felon Trump that those who intend to vote for the criminal don't?
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ … index.html"They are also supposed to hold them accountable for breaking the laws of the Constitution."
Yes, they are.
" I swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic." President Trump January 2017
January 2021 Trump incites an insurrection on the US Capitol to stop the certification of the election he lost by 7 million votes.
And he should be re-elected president? Which is it? Honor your oath or incite an insurrection if you lose? An now he is a convicted felon also. What does he have to do to lose support? Actually shoot somebody on 5th Ave.?Clearly, he did not honor his oath. That is why he was impeached twice and has two federal indictments hanging over his head.
I ask any RATIONAL person, who would want a known criminal to be President of the United States?
I ask any RATIONAL person, who would want a known sexual predator to be President of the United States?
I ask any RATIONAL person, who would want a pathological liar to be President of the United States?
They may want that in Russia, Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and China (whose leaders Trump admires and respects), but we do not want that in America nor do we wish it on anybody else.
I am at the part in Elie Honig's book [i]Untouchables[/b] where he is drawing a direct comparison between the way mob bosses act and Trump acts.
Why would anyone elect someone who is killing the country as we speak/type?
Choosing Harris is suicide and Stockholm syndrome both rolled into one.
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/why-does-k … nstitutionExcept that the country is doing great under Biden and will do even better under Harris.
* Crime is DOWN.
* GDP is UP.
* Pandemic caused inflation is basically back to normal.
* At least in my neck of the woods, gas prices are way down. I saw one station advertising $2.95.
* Trump's favorite measure of all, the Dow Jones closed at a Record High yesterday and the S&P 500 and NASDAQ are at near record levels.
* The U.S. remains a global leader in technological innovation.
* The U.S. is energy independent
* There has been growing awareness and action toward social justice issues in America - so long as the Conservative Supreme Court doesn't veto it.
* Border crossings are WAY DOWN.
* Trump's broken promise of new infrastructure in America is now a reality under Biden and will be more so under Harris.
* Biden is very close to bringing a ceasefire in Gaza.
You may think those are all bad things, but I and most of the country certainly don't.Can you tell me why electing a pathological liar to the White House wouldn't be " suicide and Stockholm syndrome both rolled into one."?
Can you tell me why electing a sexual predator to the White House wouldn't be " suicide and Stockholm syndrome both rolled into one."?
Can you tell me why electing an INSURRECTIONIST to the White House wouldn't be " suicide and Stockholm syndrome both rolled into one."?
Can you tell me why electing a serial felon to the White House wouldn't be " suicide and Stockholm syndrome both rolled into one."?
Can you tell me why electing a mentally ill dangerous narcissist who only cares about himself to the White House wouldn't be " suicide and Stockholm syndrome both rolled into one."?Good answer, at least for those that value results over appearance and media accusations.
* Border crosses are way down, thank you for pointing that out.
* Thanks for pointing that Biden beat pandemic caused inflation.
* What wars did Biden start?
Are you going to answer the questions I asked?
This is how a criminal like Trump plays the game (the same way Putin does).
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/28/europe/f … index.htmlI forget which forum this belongs in, but this is where it should be.
The discussion was about Trump being the Houdini of White-collar crime and one of the most accomplished con artists in history. Here are some more of his cons.
Donald Trump has been involved in numerous business ventures and activities throughout his career that have attracted both success and controversy. Some of these ventures and actions have led to accusations of deceptive practices or "conning" people. Below is a historical overview of some notable incidents where Trump has been accused of misleading or taking advantage of others:
1. Trump University (2005-2010)
Overview: Trump University was a for-profit education company that promised to teach students the secrets of real estate success. It offered seminars and workshops, some of which cost thousands of dollars, with the promise of learning Trump’s real estate techniques.
Accusations: Many students claimed that Trump University did not deliver on its promises. They alleged that the courses were essentially sales pitches, pushing students to buy more expensive packages without providing substantial educational value. In 2013, a lawsuit was filed by then-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who called Trump University a "fraud from beginning to end." In 2016, Trump settled three lawsuits related to Trump University for $25 million without admitting any wrongdoing.
2. Trump Foundation (1988-2019)
Overview: The Donald J. Trump Foundation was a charitable organization founded by Trump that claimed to provide funds for charitable causes.
Accusations: In 2016, reports emerged that Trump had used foundation funds for personal expenses, including buying a portrait of himself and settling legal disputes. In 2018, the New York Attorney General’s office filed a lawsuit against the foundation, alleging it engaged in “a shocking pattern of illegality,” including self-dealing and using charity funds for Trump’s political campaign. The foundation was dissolved under judicial supervision, and Trump was ordered to pay $2 million to various charities as part of a settlement.
3. Atlantic City Casinos (1980s-1990s)
Overview: Trump invested heavily in Atlantic City during the 1980s and 1990s, opening several casinos, including Trump Plaza, Trump Castle, and Trump Taj Mahal.
Accusations: Trump’s casinos filed for bankruptcy multiple times due to significant debt. Critics argue that Trump mismanaged the casinos and enriched himself while leaving creditors and investors with losses. Despite the bankruptcies, Trump managed to secure his personal financial interests through complex legal maneuvers and arrangements, often avoiding significant personal financial loss while others suffered.
4. Trump Mortgage (2006)
Overview: Trump Mortgage was a mortgage company founded by Trump in 2006, which aimed to capitalize on the booming real estate market.
Accusations: The company made bold claims about its future success and profitability. However, the timing was disastrous, as the housing market crashed soon after. Trump Mortgage quickly collapsed, and many viewed Trump’s statements about the company’s prospects as overly optimistic and misleading, especially considering the economic conditions.
5. Trump SoHo (2008)
Overview: Trump SoHo was a luxury hotel and condominium development in New York City, launched in collaboration with the Bayrock Group and the Sapir Organization.
Accusations: The project was embroiled in controversy when it was revealed that sales figures were inflated to mislead potential buyers. In 2011, a lawsuit alleged that Trump and his partners made fraudulent claims about the number of units sold to create a false impression of demand. The lawsuit was settled in 2011 without admission of wrongdoing, and buyers received a portion of their deposits back.
6. Trump Network (2009-2012)
Overview: The Trump Network was a multilevel marketing (MLM) company that sold health products and promised participants the opportunity to get rich by recruiting others.
Accusations: MLMs are often criticized for being pyramid schemes, where most participants lose money while a few at the top profit. The Trump Network attracted criticism for its business model, which relied heavily on recruitment. It failed to gain traction and was sold in 2012. Critics argue that Trump leveraged his brand to entice people into a high-risk venture with little chance of success.
7. Trump University "Mentorship" Programs
Overview: Alongside its real estate seminars, Trump University also offered "mentorship" programs where students paid thousands more to receive personal coaching and access to Trump's "secrets."
Accusations: Many former students claimed these mentorships were a sham. The promised personal guidance from experts with insider knowledge of Trump’s strategies turned out to be scripted sales pitches without real content. This was part of the broader lawsuit against Trump University, culminating in the $25 million settlement.
8. Undocumented Workers at Trump Properties
Overview: There have been multiple reports of undocumented immigrants working at Trump’s various properties, including his golf courses, despite Trump’s public stance against illegal immigration.
Accusations: Workers have alleged that Trump Organization managers were aware of their status and sometimes provided falsified documents. This contradicted Trump’s public statements on immigration and his calls for stricter immigration enforcement.
9. Manipulating Stock Prices in the 1980s and 1990s
Overview: In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Trump made public statements about potentially acquiring stocks in various companies, which often caused stock prices to rise.
Accusations: Critics argued that Trump would make these announcements to manipulate stock prices for his benefit. This pattern of behavior raised suspicions of market manipulation, although Trump was never formally charged with any wrongdoing related to these actions.
10. Misleading Investors in the 2006 Trump Tower Tampa
Overview: The Trump Tower Tampa was a proposed luxury condo tower in Florida that used Trump’s name for branding, promising luxury living and high returns for investors.
Accusations: The project never broke ground, leaving many investors and buyers with substantial financial losses. Lawsuits alleged that Trump misled buyers about his involvement and the project's viability. While Trump had licensed his name to the developers, he was not financially involved in the project’s construction or management, which he used as a defense in court.
Conclusion
Donald Trump's career has been marked by a series of business ventures that have sometimes led to accusations of deception, misrepresentation, and self-interest at the expense of others. While some of these cases resulted in legal action and settlements, Trump has often managed to navigate these controversies without significant personal financial loss. These incidents highlight a pattern of leveraging his brand and persona to attract investors, customers, and supporters, sometimes leading to contentious outcomes.I didn't see a link anywhere to a court conviction. Just a long list of accusations...accusations that mean less than nothing without a conviction.
The ONLY question is why you would post such a thing - are you trying to say "Trump Bad Man" because other people said it? I trust you understand that you can ALWAYS find someone, somewhere, that will agree with anything you say - to tout what others say (without proof) simply means you have nothing. Except that Trump has been the recipient of many, many unproven claims of malfeasance. It seems that all of those you listed were wrong: the inescapable conclusion is that Trump Good Man.The old adage is true, where there is a lot of smoke, there is no doubt a fire.
Wilderness, I know you are not stupid or unread. You know as well as I that that list of cons Trump pulled is real; they have been all over the news for the last several decades. I bet even Fox screwed up and reported some of them.
There are no links to convictions because Trump, until recently, has been criminally charged with anything. But, there a bunch of well known, some listed there, cases where the state or individuals sued Trump civilly and he paid up the nose to settle those suits. While those kinds of cases almost always have a clause that says the con doesn't admit to his con, but by paying up, any reasonable person knows that is an admission of guilt; especially if it happens multiple times.
"Except that Trump has been the recipient of many, many unproven claims of malfeasance." - ROFL. So was Al Capone, Hitler (who was never tried), and many mob bosses who were never tried. To use your logic, those people are :"Good Men".I am saying Trump is a Bad Man only because the publicly available evidence makes that conclusion inescapable to a reasonable on-looker.
Evidence that pathological lying, Sexual Predator, serial felon Trump is becoming even more unhinged and getting more dangerous by the day. He is calling for RETRIBUTION (code word for violence) against his enemies.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ … index.htmlUS Army rebukes Trump campaign for incident at Arlington National Cemetery
BACKGROUND: "Trump was visiting the cemetery following a wreath laying to honor 13 US military service members who were killed at Kabul airport’s Abbey Gate in Afghanistan three years go.
A video of the visit posted by the Trump campaign on TikTok showed video of the former president walking through Arlington and visiting grave sites, with audio of him criticizing the Biden administration’s “disaster” of the Afghanistan withdrawal."
Trump had been invited to the ceremony by two families of the veterans interned there.
LAW: “Participants in the August 26th ceremony and the subsequent Section 60 visit were made aware of federal laws, Army regulations and DoD policies, which clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds."
THE INCIDENT: An Alington National Cemetery staffer "who attempted to ensure adherence to these rules was abruptly pushed aside,” the Army spokesperson said in the statement on Thursday. ". (She is currently not filing assault and battery charges for fear of her safety and keeping her identity hidden from Trump supporters.)
Trump and his spokespeople, rather than apologizing, called her "despicable" and "mentally ill".
I am surprised these families bothered to ask Trump to attend given his public statements about our fallen soldiers being "losers" and "suckers".
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald … rcna118543
"Donald Trump did call John McCain a loser" for getting shot down and captured in Vietnam.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politi … 741070002/
Mitt Romney reported that several of his Republican senate collogues support Trump ONLY because they are afraid of what he will have done to them and their families.
https://newrepublic.com/post/175561/mit … ehind-back
A Wisconsin Republican Congressman abruptly resigned from the House earlier this year. It turns out it was because some Trump supporter "swatted" his house and he was in fear for his own like and that of his family. Why was he swatted? Anonymous callers apparently told him he wasn't sufficiently loyal to Donald Trump.
https://thehill.com/homenews/4851359-mi … ly-threat/
Sounds like Trump's cult is copying tactics from Putin or other third world dictatorships.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/29/politics … index.html
1. Hopefully the staffer will reconsider and file charges against the two Trump men who assaulted her.
2. Hopefully, the Army will decide to ask DOJ to press charges against Trump and his campaign for violating the law - AGAIN.Wouldn't the Right consider this gov't overreach? I do.
Trump proposes making government or insurance companies pay for IVF treatments
I wonder how many right-wing votes that will cost him.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/29/politics … index.htmlI actually agree! Why focus on fertilization? Why?
Oh I just read the article.
Well, I am confused and disappointed.
“I’m announcing today in a major statement that under the Trump administration, your government will pay for, or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for, all costs associated with IVF treatment,” the former president said at a campaign event in Potterville, Michigan.
“Because we want more babies, to put it very nicely. And for this same reason, we will also allow new parents to deduct major newborn expenses from their taxes, so that parents that have a beautiful baby will be able, so we’re pro family,” Trump continued.
Is he just trying to get votes?
PS Why don't we just give to those who can't conceive babies, the babies others want to send back to God?
They are on their way here! Just have a match up program for the females who get pregnant too easily with the females who don't!!I dislike babes being send back to God. Those babes have a mission or two here. What if, Samuel Adams, was send back to God? Could America fair better?
Samuel Adams was probably from a loving family with a hardworking mother and father who were committed each other and to caring for their offspring ...
Could we give babies from unfortunate mothers who cannot keep their babies for one reason or another to the parents who are having a hard time conceiving? It sounds easy, but its not. Adoption can sometime be problematic on many levels.
Just don't let the baby start. Let them stay in the arms of the angels.
Keep the sperm away from the egg. It can't be that hard to do, if both (people) try to focus on the concept of pro-life / pro-choice.
The absolute worst aspect of this flagrant disrespect for the traditions of the national cemetery is being overlooked.
The grave photographed (against regulations) belongs to a member of a grieving family who should never - ever - be paraded for the purposes of a political campaign. As a former journalist, I will be the first to call out the media for too often sticking a microphone and a camera in the face of grieving parents and spouses. Yes, it makes good TV. Yes, it is reprehensible.I would have to say that the "grieving family" that was paraded was either there knowing what was to happen, or was not paraded at all.
How much intelligence does it take to know what is about to happen when you walk through a famous cemetery with a Presidential candidate and a huge wreath, surrounded by media, cameras, microphones, etc.?Whose camera's and microphones? What media was there?
Here is what happened:
"US defense officials were concerned that the event could become inappropriately or even illegally political, the Washington Post reports — that it was a campaign event in disguise.
So, officials laid down some restrictions. One was that Trump wasn’t supposed to bring his campaign staff Another was that, after an initial ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier that was open to the press, Trump’s visits to individual veterans’ graves, in a section of the cemetery reserved primarily for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, would be private. (Private means no photographers.)
But Trump brought campaign aides anyway. And two of those aides — a campaign photographer and a videographer — tried to go with Trump to the individual graves. An Arlington cemetery staff member tried to stop the aides, but, per the Post, “a larger male campaign aide insisted the camera was allowed and pushed past the cemetery employee, leaving her shocked.” According to NPR, Trump campaign staff also “verbally abused” the official."
https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/3697 … versy-armyOMG! Just because its Trump again, they the biden administration begin setting restrictions! Has this type of restrictions ever done before to anx or all politicians? Why Trump at this critical stage? Its baffling. However, as no bench press charges arised, the Military declared the matter 'closed'. That's very commendable.
No, no politician except Trump has so abused the sanctity of Arlington. Isn't it logical then that no politician has run afoul of the law protecting the privacy there.
But now that Trump has broken another law, isn't it appropriate that he be held accountable or, because he is Trump, he gets a free pass - AGAIN?
It is not commendable, it is the opposite, it is cowardly.
I can understand why the lady that Trump's staff battered won't press charges, she is in fear of Trump and what he may have done to her.
In another twist, Trump apparently used a grave of a fallen Green Beret in the grave next to one of the ones he was there for. The family, who never gave Trump permission to bring their son into his political activities were highly incensed.
It's a pity that such a challenge will be brought to the fore-front again as a repetition. Has this not been said in the forum before? Again, it's also a pity that Trump and MaCain, become political rivals due to their desire to vie for the White House.
Its all craziness. Read Proverbs of The Holy Bible, I say.
Yes, you don't specified a specific scripture and verse. And yes again, it's an excellent knowledge base. 'The proverbs of Solomon, the son of David, King o Israel. To know wisdom and understanding'
In his book Untouchables by Ellie Honig, he mainly talks about why the "Bosses" never get prosecuted or if they are, generally receive much lighter sentences. He tends to focus on the Mob, but then pivots to comparison to Trump and his "organization".
After going through the mob structure or hierarchy of "associates", "soldiers", "captains", "consiglieri", "under boss", and finally "boss", he then points out it is the lower three levels that generally are the ones caught and punished. He then shows who in Trump's world have met similar fates. They are:
* Michael Flynn
* Roger Stone
* George Papadopoulos
* Paul Manafort
* Steve Bannon
* Rick Gates
* Michael Cohen (consigliore)
* Peter Navarro
* Thomas Barrack
* Elliott Broidy
* Lev Parnas
* Igor Fruman
*Sam Patten
* George Nader
* Alan Weisselberg
* The Trump Organization
This was written before Honig knew of:
* Mark Meadows
* Rudy Giuliani
* Sidney Powell
* Kenneth Chesebro
* John Eastman
* Jeffery Clark
* Jenna Ellis
* all the fake electors
The only other president who came close to this record number of "associates" who have been indicted and/or convicted is Richard Nixon.
Pretty amazing isn't it.Well, why bring Richard Nixon into the picture? Did he not resigned honorably before the USA Senate, when Watergate was exposed under treat of being impeached? And worst still, Richard Nixon, is late. How could he defend himself here?
No, Nixon resigned in disgrace.
I guess you would say the same thing about Hitler not being able to defend himself in an effort to excuse his terrible deeds. Frankly, I don't understand you.Nixon resigned with dignity.
He did not want to be impeached.
"Nixon said he was resigning for the good of the country and asked the nation to support the new president, Gerald Ford. Nixon went on to review the accomplishments of his presidency, especially in foreign policy.[255] He defended his record as president, quoting from Theodore Roosevelt's 1910 speech Citizenship in a Republic:
'Sometimes I have succeeded and sometimes I have failed, but always I have taken heart from what Theodore Roosevelt once said about the man in the arena, "whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again because there is not effort without error and shortcoming, but who does actually strive to do the deed, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumphs of high achievements and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.' "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_NixonI am going to have to disagree. While I actually think, and have said, that in the job of President, I think Nixon is in the top 10 because of what he did on both the domestic and foreign policy fronts.
But, and it is a big but, he destroyed it all by being a criminal while in office. He was as dangerously narcissistic then, as Trump is today and just as self-serving. That said, unlike Trump, Nixon actually had the good of America at heart and it showed in his work, it is just to bad his ethics and morals sucked, but not as bad as Trump's.
Nixon ONLY resigned when he lost his Republican support; that was at a time when Republican congressmen weren't cult members of the president like they are today. He saw the writing on the wall that the Senate WOULD convict him after the House impeached him. Trump had no such worries.
Nixon did not want the embarrassment of being convicted for his crimes by his own party. If he had not lost the support of the Republicans, he would have fought to the bitter end.
I will grant that resigning was marginally more dignified that facing trial for your crimes and being found guilty, but only marginally.
Dignified is the way President Biden decided to drop out of the race. Many people, including myself and I am sure he did to, thought he could have pulled it out at the end. But, he was given enough evidence that convinced him the chances of that were pretty low. So, rather than risk Trump actually winning, he dropped out for the good of the Party and the Country. A move that has being proven to be the right one.
Well, almost 44 hours had past, and I saw this post. Nixon, a Capricorn? Good for him to go, or worst than Watergate occured. Now he's almost at peace.
Don't say it can't happen here (with Trump's help)!!!
The far-right, Nazi-adjacent AfD Party in Germany won in one of its states and came in second in another. This would be like they won in Texas and came in second in Alabama. Oh wait, some people think they already have.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/02/europe/a … index.htmlWho, here is understanding that, or you? And because the AFD party wants all 'criminals', 'illegal immigrants', and related offenders out of Germany, you at once related that to Trump? God forbide it!
You see, when AfD says it wants all 'criminals', 'illegal immigrants', and related offenders out of Germany and Trump says he all 'criminals', 'illegal immigrants', and related offenders out of America, I am able to connect those two dots even though you may not be able to.
Also, the AfD Party is the reemergence of the Nazi Party.
Far right AfD cracks Germany's post-Nazi firewalls with success in the east
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/fa … 024-05-31/
So there is another similarity because Trump gives safe haven to the KKK, White Supremist, and Nazis in America.
One of the charges against Trump is based on a law created to put down the KKK. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … ights-law/
"For months, as Donald Trump developed his political repertoire, he adopted an uncharacteristic reply for questions about fascism and the Ku Klux Klan: silence, or something close to it." - https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-des … -a-historyRe-read my 2nd paragraphe above if you think I don't had insight.
OMG! Who told you that? How d' you read? You trying to twist my post? I wrote 3 para. How d' you read, smart alec?
This is the last thing you wrote before referring to a 2nd paragraph.
Who, here is understanding that, or you? And because the AFD party wants all 'criminals', 'illegal immigrants', and related offenders out of Germany, you at once related that to Trump? God forbide it!
Now apologize.You go back and re-read again my original post. I wrote 3 short paragraphe. The last paragraphe is just a sentense. And let me know the type of brandy you're drinking...to give it a go?!
TRUMP SAYS HE IS A CRIMINAL!!!!
Trump flat out admits that he interfered with the election. I hope Jack Smith is drawing up new indictments right now!
When the interviewer gave him a chance to take it back, he doubled down.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/02/politics … tvu-digvidTrump's disgraceful actions at Arlington Cemetery should earn him the condemnation of all veterans around the country. Sen John McCain's son is one that is speaking out at the VIOLATION of hallowed ground by someone who says the people buried there are "suckers" and "losers".
Sexual Predator, Pathological Lying, Serial Felon Trump needs to be charged AGAIN for the laws he broke there.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/03/politics … index.htmlBest quote I saw today from Trump admitting he tried to interfere with a presidential election:
'Trump had a right to challenge an election in which he was robustly defeated, which he did and lost in court. He lost in court many times because his cases were based on lies without a shred of evidence. I guess he was hoping that the justice system would operate much like the MAGA movement which determines something to be true just because Trump said so. But here is the problem. It is a futile act to explain the difference between legal and illegal, constitutional and unconstitutional, and challenging an election vs interfering with an election to Trump. The substantial differences are irrelevant to Trump who does what he wants. Then he celebrates his defiance and makes a mockery of our justice system. And some Americans actually support this kind of behavior by an old man who has never grown up.'Another typical quote from the person some here wants to represent America;
'Let him die': Trump's nephew shares what he says Trump told him when he asked for help with his son"
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/04/politics … bts-digvidTrump wants to give away trillions of more dollars to the very rich. Here is how he wants to YOU to pay for it:
"Trump proposed sweeping tariffs on all $3 trillion worth of imports into the United States, including a 60% tariff on imports from China and a 10% across-the-board tariff on imports from other nations.
Recently, Trump doubled down on the threat, saying he is considering tariffs of up to 20% on most imports in a bid to protect working-class jobs and punish what he labels unfair trading practices. (It doesn't work that way as any economist will tell you).
In theory, the unprecedented tariff hikes could raise trillions of dollars, funds that would help cover the cost of the tax cuts. However, many economists warn that those tariffs could backfire — badly — by raising prices on American families, killing jobs and setting off a global trade war.
It’s part of the reason Goldman Sachs in an analyst note this week said Trump’s economic policies — particularly on trade — would cause America’s economy to shrink. By contrast, Vice President Kamala Harris’ economic policy proposals would grow the economy, Goldman Sachs predicted."
Tell me again why you would vote for someone who will do that to you?Where's Kathryn H Hill? She would have give a better answer than I would do.
So many are all askew with TDS and refuse to see anything beneficial whatsoever about him; Trump! who led us through four good years!
Now, I am concerned about tariffs in general. I actually think the tariffs Trump put on China caused the pandemic. That was China's response to Trump.
I wanted Huckabee. I don't think if he had been chosen for president we would have had a pandemic.
Shows you what I know.
Nothin.You know as well as I do, that I have credited Trump for two or three pretty good policies. The problem is, there are dozens more that brought America down and led to the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
There is a reason why presidential EXPERTS rate Trump as one of the, if not THE, worst president EVER.
So, you are of the opinion that China purposefully caused the deaths of millions of their own citizens let alone from the rest of the world?
Related Discussions
- 43
Is THIS One of the Examples of Trump Obstruction of Justice"?
by Scott Belford 2 years ago
There can be know doubt that the Trump Jr. meeting with various Russians connected with Putin was collusion. It is not important that the those on the Russian side ended up only talking about influencing Donald Trump to end a set of 2012 sanctions against Russia. What is important is that...
- 89
Paul Manafort Indictment Not For Collusion
by ga anderson 7 years ago
This should be a hot one. The much anticipated Special Counsel's first indictments have been unsealed - and they aren't about Pres. Trump and Russian election collusion, (yet???)But like a lyric from a song; 'whoo eee, whoo eee babyyy...' It sure paints an ugly picture. And one that seems to be a...
- 16
The Trump Dossier revisited.
by Randy Godwin 6 years ago
Today Sen. Diane Feinstein released the transcripts of the Richard Steele interview against the wishes of Republican committee members. Steel was worried about Trump being possibly blackmailed if he became POTUS and contacted the FBI as he should have. This was before the election and before the...
- 24
Bombshell Durham Report. Hillary paid to spy on Trump Campaign
by Readmikenow 17 months ago
Some journalists, Republican lawmakers, and other notable public figures responded to an explosive report from over the weekend involving Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe by saying that the Trump White House was spied on.Durham said in the court filing...
- 339
15 People!! close to Trump in contact with Russians. No Conspiracy???
by Scott Belford 5 years ago
Over 15, close or very close associates of Donald Trump or his campaign have had contacts with Russia and Russian spies. How can this not be a conspiracy that Trump didn't know about??- Flynn - National Security Advisor (pleaded guilty)- Sessions - Former Attorney General (fired by Trump for...
- 19
Has Trump already lost the election in 2020?
by Stevennix2001 4 years ago
One of my favorite youtubers, Amazing Lucas, did a podcast covering how he feels the coronavirus could actually hurt Donald's election run; regardless of how you want to spin it. Even if Trump is miraculously able to overcome the virus, the problem is both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can...