When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
So Braineck, you made a blatantly false statement about Trump's misuse of charity's. Would you be so kind to address this as opposed to posting something entirely unrelated to the topic at hand?
So Braineck, you made a blatantly false statement about Trump's misuse of charity's. Would you be so kind to address this as opposed to posting something entirely unrelated to the topic at hand?
What misstatement did I make?
Show me one example of Trump misusing charity funds. Hint: you can't.
I asked for an example of Trump misusing charity funds, and then suggested you can't.
Instead of simply providing one, you instead accuse me of making "blatantly false statement about Trump's misuse of charity's". Seems to suggest you can't provide an example?
Bernie is currently on the receiving end of the Bloomberg controlled media machine that has been raking Trump over the coals for the last few years.
Doubt he likes it any better.
The Attorney General has argued that I should award damages for waste of the entire $2,823,000 that was donated directly to the Foundation at the Fundraiser. In opposition, Mr. Trump notes that the Foundation ultimately disbursed all of the Funds to charitable organizations and that he has sought to resolve consensually this proceeding.
As stated above, I find that the $2,823,000 raised at the Fundraiser was used for Mr. Trump’s political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump’s campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation, in violation of [New York law]. However, taking into consideration that the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans, I award damages on the breach of fiduciary duty/waste claim against Mr. Trump in the amount of $2,000,000, without interest, rather than the entire $2,823,000 sought by the Attorney General.
here's even what the biased Snopes has to say about it:
Trump was ordered to pay $2 million to a list of agreed-upon charities as damages for the waste incurred by the fact that his political campaign orchestrated and benefited from distributing around $2.8 million in donations to veterans groups. (That $2 million in damages was separate from the roughly $1.7 million the Trump Foundation had already agreed to distribute to various charities, as part of the resolution dissolving the Foundation.
Neither Trump, nor his children, nor his charity, were found to have “stolen” or kept the funds, and so none “admitted” to such actions (as Rashid falsely claimed in his tweets). The New York Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged that all the funds raised from the January 2016 Iowa event did ultimately end up with veterans groups.
The irony in those claims was that it was, in fact, the manner in which the Trump Foundation and Trump campaign colluded in distributing the donations to veterans charities that landed the president in hot water, not his having “stolen” the donations.
If all the money raised to benefit veteran's groups was distributed to the veteran's groups, how exactly did Trump "blatantly" and "fraudulently" misuse funds?
The only problem here was the Trump political campaign "benefited" from the charity fundraiser. The funds were NOT misused as you wish to suggest. Both of you are completely misrepresenting the lawsuit and settlement, purposefully to make Trump appear to be some sort of evil thief.
So again, can you provide an example of Trump actually misusing charity funds? Hint: you can't.
Braineck, the only reason they finally made their way to the proper recipients, is because in 2016, after feverish digging into the actual distributions, it turned out not all the 6M raised during the time, had been actually distributed (after Iowa).
In addition, an investigation was launched by the NYAG at the time, at which point trump and his team (only then) decided to distribute the funds.
In Addition, trump used a fair share of the charity funds to settle his own personal legal disputes
It is all detailed here in the Pulitzer prize award handed out in 2017 (it's a long read, so recommend breaking it up into pieces and we can discuss). I will do my best to read it in it's entirely again.
Also below is the lawsuit and investigation launched by the NYAG and why only then, did trump want to dissolve the foundation.
There should be no reason to want to dissolve is the foundation is actually functioning as it should and donations are still coming in. In addition, the move to dissolve AFTER the NYAG launched an investigation is common practice to hide funds appropriations. https://www.npr.org/2018/12/18/67777...-investigation
Braineck, the only reason they finally made their way to the proper recipients, is because in 2016, after feverish digging into the actual distributions, it turned out not all the 6M raised during the time, had been actually distributed (after Iowa).
In addition, an investigation was launched by the NYAG at the time, at which point trump and his team (only then) decided to distribute the funds.
In Addition, trump used a fair share of the charity funds to settle his own personal legal disputes
It is all detailed here in the Pulitzer prize award handed out in 2017 (it's a long read, so recommend breaking it up into pieces and we can discuss). I will do my best to read it in it's entirely again.
Also below is the lawsuit and investigation launched by the NYAG and why only then, did trump want to dissolve the foundation.
There should be no reason to want to dissolve is the foundation is actually functioning as it should and donations are still coming in. In addition, the move to dissolve AFTER the NYAG launched an investigation is common practice to hide funds appropriations. https://www.npr.org/2018/12/18/67777...-investigation
here's even what the biased Snopes has to say about it:
If all the money raised to benefit veteran's groups was distributed to the veteran's groups, how exactly did Trump "blatantly" and "fraudulently" misuse funds?
The only problem here was the Trump political campaign "benefited" from the charity fundraiser. The funds were NOT misused as you wish to suggest. Both of you are completely misrepresenting the lawsuit and settlement, purposefully to make Trump appear to be some sort of evil thief.
So again, can you provide an example of Trump actually misusing charity funds? Hint: you can't.
From your same link another nice quote you forgot to cite:
On October 1, 2019, the Attorney General entered into a stipulation of final settlement (“Final Stipulation”) with the Foundation and Mr. Trump. In the Final Stipulation, Mr. Trump agreed to reimburse $11,525 to the Foundation for the Foundation’s payment of auction items at a charitable benefit, and to pay any additional amount that may be owed in connection with this proceeding, which amount is to be determined by me as set forth in more detail below
Trump did agree he misused the funds and so stipulated in the agreement. Nothing in this NY Supreme Court decision did anything to reverse that fact.
.......Braineck, if you took the time to read, it is all laid out in the links I provided.
It gives dates (timelines), testimonies from the various veterans groups, investigations and when the NYAG launched it's own investigation, etc etc.
Judging by how quickly you responded, it is safe to assume you did not take the time to read any of it........although I took the time to read both your post and the Snopes/PDF file you posted and why I posted what I did to remove any speculation and have a proper discussion
P.S In term leveraging charitable funds to settle his legal disputes, it is all public records.
Here are two examples which are public records
In one case, from 2007, Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club faced $120,000 in unpaid fines from the town of Palm Beach, Fla., resulting from a dispute over the height of a flagpole.
In a settlement, Palm Beach agreed to waive those fines — if Trump’s club made a $100,000 donation to a specific charity for veterans. Instead, Trump sent a check from the Donald J. Trump Foundation, a charity funded almost entirely by other people’s money, according to tax records.
In another case, court papers say one of Trump’s golf courses in New York agreed to settle a lawsuit by making a donation to the plaintiff’s chosen charity. A $158,000 donation was made by the Trump Foundation, according to tax records
Disputes settled against the defense is supposed to be paid for BY THE Defense(in this case, trump or trumps estate personally)!! NOT the charity used solely setup for charitable donations (regardless of if the ruling dictates the funds are to go a charity of the plaintiff's choice. It is still supposed to come out of trump's pocket!!)
.......... Braineack you made a blatantly false statement about Trump's misuse of charity's. Would you be so kind to address this as opposed to posting something entirely unrelated to the topic at hand?
The Atlantic's story writer is purposefully misleading you and you are buying it because it is what you wish to hear.
South Carolina has a large number of welfare recipients and a small population. They pay in nothing receive lots of benefits. Same with North Dakota.
Both also have a large military presence which is counted in this chart as an expenditure (and additionally the military personnel involved pay taxes in their home states).
Florida makes the upper portion of the list since social security benefits are federal money, they have many huge military and space facilities, and we have a significant number of deadbeats collecting public assistance and voting Democrat.
Wonder what the real chart would look like if you took out Social Security, the military, welfare and food stamps. Where do they spend infrastructure money, farm subsidy money, Endowment for the Arts, Department of Education, Department of energy, Department of the interior, and the rest?
Disputes settled against the defense is supposed to be paid for BY THE Defense(in this case, trump or trumps estate personally)!! NOT the charity used solely setup for charitable donations (regardless of if the ruling dictates the funds are to go a charity of the plaintiff's choice. It is still supposed to come out of trump's pocket!!)
According to the NYAG...
So he agreed to donate to a charity, using funds from his foundation established, from his own profits, to donate to charities. big think. monster.
So he agreed to donate to a charity, using funds from his foundation established, from his own profits, to donate to charities. big think. monster.
Again if you read what I posted,
1) the NYAG case is in terms of the 2 million dollar in misuse charitable funds for his 2016 campaign. Case resolved in 2018
2) the two cases I posted above have nothing to do with the NYAG case. Those were earlier cases in 2006 and 2007 which were settled in court in which trump agreed to pay to the plaintiffs charity WITH MONEY FROM THE POCKET OF TRUMP NOT HIS CHARITY!!!
02-19-2020, 08:40 AM
0
