If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.

T O P I C     R E V I E W
reechee	The Eric Trump Foundation, which raises charity money for children with cancer, reportedly paid $1.2 million to the Trump Organization between 2007 and 2015, fees for fundraising golf events held at the Trump National Golf Course, Los Angeles, despite Eric's claims that his charity could use the golf course for free, a report said Tuesday. The Forbes report further stated that the donors to the cancer charity were told their money was going to help sick children. However, a huge amount of money was re-donated to other charities, many of which were directly connected to Trump's family members. The article also stated that the Donald J. Trump Foundation, set up by the president, "apparently used Eric's charity to funnel $100,000 in donations into generating revenue for the Trump Organization." The Trump Organization owns the golf course in Los Angeles, while the Donald J. Trump Foundation is a charitable organization. The $100,000 reportedly funneled to the Trump Organization is a part of the $1.2 million paid by the Eric Trump Foundation. http://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2017/06/06/how-donald-trump-shifted-kids-cancer-charity-money-into-his-business/#7b3ba8e06b4a
cstall	quote: Originally posted by reechee: ... reportedly paid $1.2 million to the Trump Organization between 2007 and 2015, fees for fundraising golf events held at the Trump National Golf Course... There's some info missing: First, it's customary for a charity to pay for the use of a venue where they hold fundraisers. You seem to imply that the charity should get to use the venue for free just because of the family connection. Second, it's not clear what the money was for. Maybe it was for food and beverage served at the fundraiser. Do you think food & booze should be free? (Of course you do - you're a liberal!) Third, there's no mention of how much money was raised at the fundraisers for the charity. If they paid $1.2 million and raised, say $10 million, then they did OK. This message has been edited by cstall on 06-07-2017 at 03:47 PM
reechee	despite Eric's claims that his charity could use the golf course for free. If you read the Forbes article, (Hardly a left wing publication) it gets far sleazier. This message has been edited by reechee on 06-07-2017 at 03:49 PM
silverkat	Nothing could ever approach the sleaziest of them all, Hussein Obama. Well maybe Hilly and Bill.
ALLEY CAT	I was once said, 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.' It is the poor who habitually elect Democrats... yet they are still POOR. "You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence. You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves." ~Abraham Lincoln "Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him had better take a much closer look at the American Indian." ~Henry Ford
cstall	quote: Originally posted by reechee: despite Eric's claims that his charity could use the golf course for free. If you read the Forbes article, (Hardly a left wing publication) it gets far sleazier. i read the article and don't see anything nefarious. Sounds like the charity at first got to use the venue for free, merch and food and staff were comped. In later years the charity had to pay for it. So What? BTW - Forbes may not be a totally liberal pub, but that article sure is - it's a Trump-basher before the 2nd paragraph... Also, who are the "Golf Charity experts" the article cites? More anonymous sources???
reechee	More from the Forbes article. Not all that innocent: Additionally, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which has come under previous scrutiny for self-dealing and advancing the interests of its namesake rather than those of charity, apparently used the Eric Trump Foundation to funnel $100,000 in donations into revenue for the Trump Organization. And while donors to the Eric Trump Foundation were told their money was going to help sick kids, more than $500,000 was re-donated to other charities, many of which were connected to Trump family members or interests, including at least four groups that subsequently paid to hold golf tournaments at Trump courses. All of this seems to defy federal tax rules and state laws that ban self-dealing and misleading donors.
ed monahan	The Clinton Foundation is stealing MILLIONS, possibly billions so Trump has a lot of catching up to do.
cstall	quote: Originally posted by reechee: More from the Forbes article. Not all that innocent: Additionally, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which has come under previous scrutiny for self-dealing and advancing the interests of its namesake rather than those of charity, apparently used the Eric Trump Foundation to funnel $100,000 in donations into revenue for the Trump Organization. And while donors to the Eric Trump Foundation were told their money was going to help sick kids, more than $500,000 was re-donated to other charities, many of which were connected to Trump family members or interests, including at least four groups that subsequently paid to hold golf tournaments at Trump courses. All of this seems to defy federal tax rules and state laws that ban self-dealing and misleading donors. Hey reech - I know you want to believe there's something wicked going on, but there really isn't. Whenever a charity pays for expenses of ANY kind, those payments become revenue to the payee. So what? If the transactions "defy federal tax rules and state laws that ban self-dealing and misleading donors", then i'll wait for charges/indictments to be brought. Won't hold my breath... BTW - For all of you who enjoy donating your $$$ to charity, you might be surprise how LITTLE of it actually goes to the "cause". Salaries, rent and expense get paid first, then what's left goes to the sick kids. The charities that run heart-wrenching commercial 24/7 on every channel are the worst...