Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
gussy

The Trump Years- Every day something more shocking than the last!

Recommended Posts

Whatever you think of Trumps' strengths - reading someone else's speech is not one of them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Trump behind bullet-proof glass?

It looks odd - and seems more likely to keep him from hearing protesters....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Whatever you think of Trumps' strengths - reading someone else's speech is not one of them...

i'd eliminate "someone else's speech" from your post.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, joffer said:

i'd eliminate "someone else's speech" from your post.

We're not doing this here. Thanks. 

Edited by RBM
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lutherman2112 said:

Bookmarked this article listing retiring members of Congress...it seems they are updating it.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/461771-here-are-the-lawmakers-who-arent-seeking-reelection-in-2020

Fun Fact: 

There were 241 Republicans in the House of Representatives when Trump took office in 2017. Now, 101 of them have gone or have announced that they are leaving. "That's 41 percent of that original 241 in the 115th House."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/trump-s-house-gop-down-100-members-ahead-impeachment-fight-n1079431

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, squistion said:

Fun Fact: 

There were 241 Republicans in the House of Representatives when Trump took office in 2017. Now, 101 of them have gone or have announced that they are leaving. "That's 41 percent of that original 241 in the 115th House."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/trump-s-house-gop-down-100-members-ahead-impeachment-fight-n1079431

Fun fact: it was first posted 8 hours ago

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RBM said:
5 hours ago, joffer said:

i'd eliminate "someone else's speech" from your post.

We're not doing this here. Thanks. 

Not doing either of those here. Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Clayton Gray said:

Not doing either of those here. Thanks.

Lol, I feel like I'm looking into a mirror while holding a mirror!  Where does it endddddddddddddddddddddddd?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Ham said:


This is not at all funny. President is in heavy medication, or some drug(s). He is mentally unfit and a danger to national security. At least, his supporters should support an intervention to get him sober.


I think that your sentiment is often justified, but in this particular case I think you are overreacting.

The line is taken out of context, but it seems to me that Trump is just reading an anecdote about a soldier, and his intent is to follow the anecdote with something to the effect of, "Wow, that story sure is something." But in a moment of distraction he forgets to say "Wow, that story sure is..."

It's just a bad segue, not a sign of being mentally unfit.
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mr. Ham said:

This is not at all funny. President is in heavy medication, or some drug(s). He is mentally unfit and a danger to national security. At least, his supporters should support an intervention to get him sober.

He was quoting Roddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Joe Summer said:

 


I think that your sentiment is often justified, but in this particular case I think you are overreacting.

The line is taken out of context, but it seems to me that Trump is just reading an anecdote about a soldier, and his intent is to follow the anecdote with something to the effect of, "Wow, that story sure is something." But in a moment of distraction he forgets to say "Wow, that story sure is..."

It's just a bad segue, not a sign of being mentally unfit.

Right, posting and spreading links like that are disingenuous and what most people would call fake news.  I just call it twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mr. Ham said:

This is not at all funny. 

It isn't funny at all.  Your plea for him to get help pales in comparison to the reaction of a lot of people out there.   There are dozens of posts to that tweet that are the equivalent to this:

Quote

We could try shooting just you and see how it goes.........

Almost like they're trying to solicit violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🤔

Jim Sciutto

!!!: The two policies Trump officials & defenders have cited as him being “tough on Russia” were -

1- the Ukraine military aid and -2- the javelins.

Now we know 1 was delayed for Biden investigation and 2 was blocked due to Russia reacting “negatively”.

  • Thinking 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

🤔

Jim Sciutto

!!!: The two policies Trump officials & defenders have cited as him being “tough on Russia” were -

1- the Ukraine military aid and -2- the javelins.

Now we know 1 was delayed for Biden investigation and 2 was blocked due to Russia reacting “negatively”.

But Ukraine received military aide (including javelins)  in 2016, 2018, 2018. 

Also, one could argue that withholding aide to Ukraine in 2019 was because Trump ❤️ Russia, not as part of an extortion scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, moleculo said:

But Ukraine received military aide (including javelins)  in 2016, 2018, 2018. 

Also, one could argue that withholding aide to Ukraine in 2019 was because Trump ❤️ Russia, not as part of an extortion scheme.

:oldunsure:   I think that was the point of the original tweet - Trump has gone out of his way to be nice to Russia - not tough, like he portrays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, moleculo said:

But Ukraine received military aide (including javelins)  in 2016, 2018, 2018. 

Also, one could argue that withholding aide to Ukraine in 2019 was because Trump ❤️ Russia, not as part of an extortion scheme.

One could argue that, but it's not consistent with the information coming out from testimonies from multiple folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone clarify this statement for me from Justice Saliann Scarpulla'

NPR link

Quote

According to the judgment, that money "was used for Mr. Trump's political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump's campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation," which is unlawful. However, Justice Saliann Scarpulla says the funds did eventually reach charity organizations supporting veterans.

Factcheck link

Quote

“A review of the record … establishes that Mr. Trump breached his fiduciary duty to the Foundation and that waste occurred to the Foundation,” she wrote. “Mr. Trump’s fiduciary duty breaches included allowing his campaign to orchestrate the Fundraiser, allowing his campaign, instead of the Foundation, to direct distribution of the Funds, and using the Fundraiser and distribution of the Funds to further Mr. Trump’s political campaign.”

Scarpulla said that she found that the $2.8 million raised at the Iowa 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 several laws. However, she ordered Trump to pay $2 million in waste damages — not the full $2.8 million sought by the attorney general — because “the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans,” she wrote.

Was the violation that the campaign staff, and not the actual foundation, distributed the funds? But the funds did actually go to the intended charities?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

Is Trump behind bullet-proof glass?

It looks odd - and seems more likely to keep him from hearing protesters....

Those plates of glass travel almost everywhere he goes....especially overseas where they have to secure his accommodations.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, jamny said:

Could someone clarify this statement for me from Justice Saliann Scarpulla'

NPR link

Factcheck link

Was the violation that the campaign staff, and not the actual foundation, distributed the funds? But the funds did actually go to the intended charities?

No - its that this was a campaign act disguised as a charity event.

 

Per NYT:

Among Mr. Trump’s admissions in court papers: The charity gave his campaign complete control over disbursing the $2.8 million that the foundation had raised at a fund-raiser for veterans in Iowa in January 2016, only days before the state’s presidential nominating caucuses. The fund-raiser, he acknowledged, was in fact a campaign event.

 

The president also admitted to using the foundation to settle the legal obligations of companies he owned, including Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Florida, and the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester County, N.Y. And he acknowledged that the foundation purchased the $10,000 portrait of Mr. Trump, which was ultimately displayed at one of his Florida hotels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sinn Fein said:

No - its that this was a campaign act disguised as a charity event.

 

Per NYT:

Among Mr. Trump’s admissions in court papers: The charity gave his campaign complete control over disbursing the $2.8 million that the foundation had raised at a fund-raiser for veterans in Iowa in January 2016, only days before the state’s presidential nominating caucuses. The fund-raiser, he acknowledged, was in fact a campaign event.

 

The president also admitted to using the foundation to settle the legal obligations of companies he owned, including Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Florida, and the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester County, N.Y. And he acknowledged that the foundation purchased the $10,000 portrait of Mr. Trump, which was ultimately displayed at one of his Florida hotels.

I knew I shouldn't have asked those questions and just kept it to asking a clarification on the Justice's statement. 

Why did she say: "the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

The president also admitted to using the foundation to settle the legal obligations of companies he owned, including Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Florida, and the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester County, N.Y. And he acknowledged that the foundation purchased the $10,000 portrait of Mr. Trump, which was ultimately displayed at one of his Florida hotels.

I do appreciate the answer Sinn and since you mentioned it, were the funds used here taken from the Iowa event or just the foundation in general? Not that it excuses using them, just want to know the details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jamny said:

I knew I shouldn't have asked those questions and just kept it to asking a clarification on the Justice's statement. 

Why did she say: "the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans"

I am assuming that the funds from the Iowa campaign event did eventually go to Veterans charities.  

So, I think that aspect was only an issue in that it was an impermissible use of the foundation as a campaign event.

Obviously buying the painting and using the Foundation to pay legal obligations owed by Trump are garden variety foundation fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems like ages ago, so forgive me if I have the details wrong, but I THOUGHT the funds only got to the vets after it was shown that the foundation had yet to give the funds to vets after many months, if not a year's time....is that incorrect?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Commish said:

This seems like ages ago, so forgive me if I have the details wrong, but I THOUGHT the funds only got to the vets after it was shown that the foundation had yet to give the funds to vets after many months, if not a year's time....is that incorrect?

I think that is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Commish said:

This seems like ages ago, so forgive me if I have the details wrong, but I THOUGHT the funds only got to the vets after it was shown that the foundation had yet to give the funds to vets after many months, if not a year's time....is that incorrect?

Yeah, I was wondering if that was it but couldn't find a timeline and the Justice's comment confused me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jamny said:

Yeah, I was wondering if that was it but couldn't find a timeline and the Justice's comment confused me.

Your question is what made me think about it.  I think that's correct and most likely what the comments were alluding to.  When I read the comments I read them as "well, the funds did eventually get back to where they were supposed to but it took some intervention to get there".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snopes

 

Quote

The money raised during Trump’s special event to benefit veterans initially went to the Donald J. Trump Foundation, but it’s inaccurate to say that the money ended up in the candidate’s personal account or will be used to fund his presidential campaign.

In response to queries over the matter, on 31 May 2016 Donald Trump held a press conference to announce that he eventually gave “close to six million dollars” to veterans’ groups and that the press “should be ashamed of themselves” for asking questions about the money he donated.

“I have never received such bad publicity for doing such a good job,” Trump said in a press conference at Trump Tower in Manhattann. He issued a list of the veterans groups who received the money, saying that “As of this moment, [the total amount donated] is $5.6 million. All of the money has been spent.”

Trump said he didn’t release the names of the veterans organizations sooner because he wanted to respect their privacy and asserted that the money for a number of these groups had already been delivered some time earlier.

Trump’s list of checks already issued read as follows:

22Kill: $200,000.

Achilles International : $200,000

American Hero Adventures: $100,000

Americas for equal living: $100,000

America’s vet dogs: the veteran canine corp Inc: $75,000

AmVets: $75,000

Armed Services YMCA: $75,000

Bob Woodruff Family Foundation Inc: $75,000

Central Iowa Shelter and Services: $100,000

Connected Warriors Inc: $75,000

Disabled American Veterans Charity: $115,000

Fisher House Foundation: $115,000

Folds of Honor Foundation: $200,000

Foundation for American Veterans: $75,000

Freedom Alliance : $75,000

Green Beret Foundation: $350,000

Higher Heroes USA: $75,000

Homes for our Troops: $100,000

Honoring America’s Warriors: $100,000

Hope for the Warriors: $65,000

Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund: $175,000

Canines for Warriors: $50,000

Liberty House: $100,00

Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation: $1.1m (including $1m from Trump himself, he says)

Navy Seal Foundation: $465,000

Navy Marine Corps Relief Society: $75,000

New England Wounded Vets Inc: $75,000

Operation Home Front: $65,000

Project for Patriots: $100,000 (this “check is check is ready to go” but Trump is still vetting the group, he says, awaiting an “IRS determination letter”. “They have to give us that final document”.

Puppy Jake Foundation: $100,000

Racing for Heroes, Inc: $200,000

Support Siouxland Soldiers: $100,000

Task Force Dagger Foundation: $50,000

The Mission Continues: $75,000

National Military Families Inc: $75,000

Veterans Airlift Command: $100,000

Veterans Count: $25,000

Veterans in Command Inc: $150,000

Vietnam Veterans Workshop Inc: $75,000

Warriors for Freedom Foundation: $50,000

“And I believe we’re going to have some more coming in.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it seems like, while there are other issues with the foundation, the only one related to the Iowa fundraiser is that the money was distributed by the campaign and not the foundation itself and that the funds intended to go to Veterans groups did make it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jamny said:

So it seems like, while there are other issues with the foundation, the only one related to the Iowa fundraiser is that the money was distributed by the campaign and not the foundation itself and that the funds intended to go to Veterans groups did make it there.

The heart of the allegations stems from a Jan. 28, 2016, nationally televised fundraiser Trump held in Des Moines four days before Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses.

Feuding at the time with Fox News host Megyn Kelly — who had previously challenged Trump on his treatment of women — the candidate decided to boycott the Fox News debate with his GOP rivals and stage his own event nearby at Drake University.

That event to raise money for veterans drew millions from wealthy friends and small-dollar donors, which went to the Trump Foundation.

But Underwood asserted in the lawsuit that the funds were raised “in a manner designed to influence the 2016 presidential election at the direction and under the control of senior leadership of the Trump presidential campaign.”

She cited emails in which Corey Lewandowski, Trump’s campaign manager at the time, directed which veterans’ charities should receive money.

At one point, Lewandowski emailed a foundation official to see if money could be ready to distribute during Trump’s last campaign events before the caucuses: “Is there any way we can make some disbursements this week while in Iowa? Specifically on Saturday,” Lewandowski wrote, in an email cited by Underwood.

Among the grant recipients were Central Iowa Shelter and Services, Puppy Jake Foundation and Support Siouxland Soldiers. Each received checks for $100,000.

Underwood said Tuesday her investigation found “a shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation including unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign, repeated and willful self-dealing, and much more.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, but the headlines I'm seeing is that Trump kept money raised for veterans charities at the Iowa event for himself and his campaign. That millions of dollars that were supposed to go to these charities, didn't go there. That, at least, appears not to be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Commish said:

When Trump isn't Trumpy enough don't you have to pause and wonder WTF is going on?  :oldunsure: 

Nationalism is a beast that must be constantly fed lest it devour the rider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jamny said:

OK, but the headlines I'm seeing is that Trump kept money raised for veterans charities at the Iowa event for himself and his campaign. That millions of dollars that were supposed to go to these charities, didn't go there. That, at least, appears not to be true.

As others have mentioned, it took more than a year to send the money where it was going. So for a year, the headlines were correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, msommer said:

As others have mentioned, it took more than a year to send the money where it was going. So for a year, the headlines were correct

You mean as others incorrectly recalled. The list I posted above from Snopes was from 4 months after the event. And the headlines and outrage I've been seeing on social media was from days ago after the ruling. 

 

 

Like this, which was posted in another thread here.

Edited by jamny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jamny said:

You mean as others incorrectly recalled. The list I posted above from Snopes was from 4 months after the event. And the headlines and outrage I've been seeing on social media was from days ago after the ruling. 

 

 

Like this, which was posted in another thread here.

Jamny, I appreciate your effort here in bribing nuance and detail to the discussion. 
 

For those reasons, shouldn’t we hold a bit more skepticism toward the Trump family in general considering their multiple issues in the past, including the fact that the Trumps have been deemed not worthy/trustworthy enough to run a charity in the state of NY due to past misdealings and malfeasance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Koya said:

Jamny, I appreciate your effort here in bribing nuance and detail to the discussion. 
 

For those reasons, shouldn’t we hold a bit more skepticism toward the Trump family in general considering their multiple issues in the past, including the fact that the Trumps have been deemed not worthy/trustworthy enough to run a charity in the state of NY due to past misdealings and malfeasance?

Sure, and I won't likely dispute most of it. I'm just trying to clarify what the court's decision was regarding the use of the donations obtained during the Iowa event. There have been so many claims that Trump used the money from the event for himself and stiffed the Veterans groups and it seems that, in this instance, it isn't true.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

So many things to love about the Trump Jr book tour

1.  It is called Triggered and he then runs off the stage when heckled

2.  From what I have seen he mostly just sits there when he gets any criticism and let's his wife handle everything

Remember all of this when conservatives try to tell you how "snowflakes" are a liberal thing

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hammerva said:

So many things to love about the Trump Jr book tour

1.  It is called Triggered and he then runs off the stage when heckled

2.  From what I have seen he mostly just sits there when he gets any criticism and let's his wife handle everything

Remember all of this when conservatives try to tell you how "snowflakes" are a liberal thing

 

That's not his wife, right?  Why is she even there????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, hammerva said:

So many things to love about the Trump Jr book tour

1.  It is called Triggered and he then runs off the stage when heckled

2.  From what I have seen he mostly just sits there when he gets any criticism and let's his wife handle everything

Remember all of this when conservatives try to tell you how "snowflakes" are a liberal thing

:lol:  You can't make this stuff up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hammerva said:

Because she has bigger balls.  Anyone that seen that mess of a show called the Five in the last 4 years can see that

Also in the "in other news water is wet" category

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/11/12/stephen-millers-affinity-white-nationalism-revealed-leaked-emails

 

Stephen Miller emailed Breitbart 900+ times from 2015-2016 to lay out his anti-immigrant policies.

His source material included:

-White nationalist websites

-A “white genocide”-themed novel

-Eugenics-era laws that Adolf Hitler lauded in “Mein Kampf.”

 

Is that bad? That seems bad. 

The fack his stuff isn't out on the White House lawn right now is pretty daminng of the whole administration. 

  • Like 3
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sheriff Bart said:

He also declared today that the deficit is a big problem.  :mellow:

He also said he wants negative interest rates and "give me some of that money".  It's always amusing how he begs for money. Buffet, Gates, Bezos, Branson, you know, actual billionaires, never act so desperate all the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamny said:

Sure, and I won't likely dispute most of it. I'm just trying to clarify what the court's decision was regarding the use of the donations obtained during the Iowa event. There have been so many claims that Trump used the money from the event for himself and stiffed the Veterans groups and it seems that, in this instance, it isn't true.

It isn't true because David Fahrenthold, a reporter for the Washington Post, hounded the campaign for months and shamed them into it. That they gave anything at all was exceptional for a Trump-related charity, as Fahrenthold documented in a series of articles that won him the Pulitzer: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/david-fahrenthold

Just like everything else about the man, Trump's generosity was fake, too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, bananafish said:

It isn't true because David Fahrenthold, a reporter for the Washington Post, hounded the campaign for months and shamed them into it. That they gave anything at all was exceptional for a Trump-related charity, as Fahrenthold documented in a series of articles that won him the Pulitzer: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/david-fahrenthold

Just like everything else about the man, Trump's generosity was fake, too.

 My point is that people on social media and even here on this board are claiming the money never got to the vets when it appears that it did. Whether it was because of prodding by other people or not, there is no reason to be claiming that now based on the Justice's comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member