Trump's E-Mail Scandal (1 Viewer)

[jon_mx]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

 

[Apple Jack]

Maybe, but I'm more bothered that it's legal to buy email lists.

 

[jon_mx]

Maybe, but I'm more bothered that it's legal to buy email lists.

Happens every day.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Maybe, but I'm more bothered that it's legal to buy email lists.

How do you think so many companies get around the Do Not Call list? They pay your bank/credit card/mortgage company and suddenly they are "partners" with an institution you have a business relationship with and allowed to call you even if you're on the Do Not Call registry

 

[avoiding injuries]

I can't tell if this is serious or a way to trap double standards with the Clinton Foundation.

 

[jon_mx]

I can't tell if this is serious or a way to trap double standards with the Clinton Foundation.

You think Hillarry would even dream about doing something like that?

 

[Rove!]

Let's start calling it a partisan witch hunt now....

 

[Apple Jack]

Maybe, but I'm more bothered that it's legal to buy email lists.

How do you think so many companies get around the Do Not Call list? They pay your bank/credit card/mortgage company and suddenly they are "partners" with an institution you have a business relationship with and allowed to call you even if you're on the Do Not Call registry

I realize it's common, I just don't like it.

 

[culdeus]

Hi I am calling from your credit card company, there is no problem with your account, but let me tell you how I can lower your interest rate to 1%......

 

[bigbottom]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

It does seem like this would involve navigating a conflicts of interest minefield.

 

[otello]

Or you can just float above it.

 

[pantagrapher]

Are they the Glengarry leads?

 

[otello]

You don't get those.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Are they the Glengarry leads?

Third prize is you're fired.

 

[jon_mx]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

It is not surprising at all.

 

[Michael Brown]

He got her number off an AIDS walk list?!?

 

[bigbottom]

Ah, I see what you did there. As a Director for two different non-profit organizations, conflict of interest issues must always be properly and thoroughly vetted and addressed if and when they arise. This is particularly the case when it comes to expenditures by the charity. Any sort of self-dealing can put the organization's non-profit status in jeopardy (and harm the organization in other ways as well). Avoiding conflicts of interest is part of the Directors' fiduciary duties to the organization.

 

[timschochet]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

 

[The General]

Let's start calling it a partisan witch hunt now....

Or we could wait for 2 years of Congressional investigation.

 

[bigbottom]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

What is your gut reaction to the Clinton's charitable Foundation paying $350,000 to the Clinton campaign to rent e-mail addresses?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Are they the Glengarry leads?

Third prize is you're fired.

I always wanted to see what those steak knives looked like.

 

[jon_mx]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

I am sure the a definition of corrupt to heavily parse the statement. The Clintons have used their public office for private gains more extensively than anyone.

 

[chauncey]

AMERICANS DON'T UNDERSTAND OR CARE ABOUT EMAILS!!!!

 

[timschochet]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

What is your gut reaction to the Clinton's charitable Foundation paying $350,000 to the Clinton campaign to rent e-mail addresses?

I don't have one.

 

[17seconds]

A Trump charity is buying the Trump supporters list, presumably so they can spam them for donations?

I don't see the issue

 

[bigbottom]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

What is your gut reaction to the Clinton's charitable Foundation paying $350,000 to the Clinton campaign to rent e-mail addresses?

I don't have one.

Let me ask a different question.

What is your gut reaction to a charity entering into a lucrative business transaction that personally benefits the wife and mother of two of the charity's Board members?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

What is your gut reaction to the Clinton's charitable Foundation paying $350,000 to the Clinton campaign to rent e-mail addresses?

I don't have one.

I am not aware of the about claim about the CF paying the campaign for email addresses, but if it were true that would be a major problem. Entities are supposed to be entities, not slush funds for each other.

 

[timschochet]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

What is your gut reaction to the Clinton's charitable Foundation paying $350,000 to the Clinton campaign to rent e-mail addresses?

I don't have one.

Let me ask a different question.

What is your gut reaction to a charity entering into a lucrative business transaction that personally benefits the wife and mother of two of the charity's Board members?

it would bother me, depending on the details of course

 

[urbanhack]

Maybe, but I'm more bothered that it's legal to buy email lists.

Nothing illegal as long as you give people the option to opt out.

pretty much anything goes.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Maybe, but I'm more bothered that it's legal to buy email lists.

Nothing illegal as long as you give people the option to opt out.

pretty much anything goes.

If people knew where emails lists came from and how much they sold for and to whom it would be surprising often. This stuff is sold back and forth each campaign.

 

[jon_mx]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

What is your gut reaction to the Clinton's charitable Foundation paying $350,000 to the Clinton campaign to rent e-mail addresses?

I don't have one.

Let me ask a different question.

What is your gut reaction to a charity entering into a lucrative business transaction that personally benefits the wife and mother of two of the charity's Board members?

it would bother me, depending on the details of course

And the deciding detail would be whether it involves Hillary.

 

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

It is being reported that a watchdog group is asking the IRS to investigate a payment of nearly a half-million dollars from a Trump charity organization to the Trump political campaign for the purpose of obtaining it's email list. This may be technically legal assuming it is fair-market value. It seems high, but for a million names plus, who knows.

But does it not seem slimy to collect money under the guise of charity in one hand but instead use it to promote your political campaign in the other hand?

First of all, if so, not surprised.

Secondly yeah email lists or an asset, like a commodity, sad but true. There is some seedy transacting in the grey political market for those things.

I think the bigger scandal is using a charity or non-profit as a pass through. To me Trump is cut from the same cloth as the Clintons, using public office and campaigning for private gain in a sort of money mill. I did not realize that citizens could petition the IRS to do this kind of thing though, if so good for them.

despite how many times you repeat that accusation against the Clintons, there is no evidence that they have ever used public office for corrupt private gain.

What is your gut reaction to the Clinton's charitable Foundation paying $350,000 to the Clinton campaign to rent e-mail addresses?

I don't have one.

Let me ask a different question.

What is your gut reaction to a charity entering into a lucrative business transaction that personally benefits the wife and mother of two of the charity's Board members?

it would bother me, depending on the details of course

And the deciding detail would be whether it involves Hillary.

bingo

 

[IvanKaramazov]

it would bother me, depending on the details of course

And the deciding detail would be whether it involves Hillary.

Unfortunately, I think is spot on.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Update?