Trump's Charity

[homersapien 11,371]

Another character marker. (As if we really needed one.)

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-foundation-ny-ag-fine_n_5c8ef7bbe4b0db7da9f4cf3a

N.Y. Attorney General Calls For $5.6 Million Fine Against Trump’s ‘Self-Dealing’ Foundation

Charity was “little more than a checkbook” for Trump’s business and campaign, according to the AG’s office.

 

.......Barbara Underwood, who was AG at the time, said investigators had detailed a “shocking pattern of illegality,” and that the Trump Foundation had functioned as “little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests.”

According to the lawsuit, among several examples of illegal use of charity funds by Trump was a $100,000 payment to settle legal claims for an 80-foot flagpole at Mar-a-Lago. Trump reportedly spent $10,000 in charity funds on a 6-foot portrait of himself that he hung at his golf resort in Doral, Florida. The charity also paid a $25,000 contribution in 2013 to help to re-elect Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who later decided against filing a lawsuit for fraud against Trump University.

Representatives of Trump’s presidential campaign and the charity also illegally plotted to use foundation money to help Trump get elected, the lawsuit claimed, citing foundation emails and statements by charity and campaign representatives. Money raised by the charity to benefit veterans, for example, was doled out to specific organizations at specific times  “to influence” Trump’s  ‘election for president.’” Checks from the foundation were emblazoned with the Trump campaign logo........

 

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

Trump has dismissed the legal action against his foundation as politically motivated:

[homersapien 11,371]

46 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Trump has dismissed the legal action against his foundation as politically motivated:

NO COLLUSION!!!

[homersapien 11,371]

Trump, daughter Ivanka and sons Eric and Donald Jr. agreed to dissolve the controversial foundation late last year after the attorney general’s office filed suit against the charity. The Trumps also granted the AG’s office oversight of disbursement of the remaining $1.7 million in charity funds.

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/stipulation_re_dissolution_execution_version.pdf

[DKW 86 7,419]

I bet many decently rich families in the US do the same thing. Some of the illegality of these things are just widespread. We have people asleep at the wheel. 

 

[homersapien 11,371]

7 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

I bet every decently rich family in the US does the same thing. Some of the illegality of these things are just widespread. We have people asleep at the wheel. 

 

I disagree.

https://www.charitywatch.org/top-rated-charities

And truly wealthy - and moral - people don't feel a need to rob their charities.  Trump is certainly amoral - and I suspect he's not all that wealthy either.

[DKW 86 7,419]

19 hours ago, homersapien said:

I disagree.

https://www.charitywatch.org/top-rated-charities

And truly wealthy - and moral - people don't feel a need to rob their charities.  Trump is certainly amoral - and I suspect he's not all that wealthy either.

Wow, where to start. Charity Watch was brought up by Tx about 3-4 years ago and it was just a whitewash charity org where you buy your rating from them. He pointed out that CW had the Clinton Foundation as a great charity and then the tax returns came out and verified even the worst of the abuses.

CW is a joke organization that was put together to do similar work as some of Consumer Reports competitors. You see with Consumer Reports they were damaging bad actors in the domestic car industry. So Ford, GM, and Chrysler loosely banded together and formed up several similar, some even similar sounding, organizations to generate good press to give them cover for ads etc. The new orgs would then be quoted in an advertisement as tumpeting huge quality gains that simply had not happened. 

CW uses word of mouth and completely unchallenged self-reporting done by the agencies themselves.
THEY ARE CERTAINLY NOT FACT BASED. 

So if your prospectus says you X, Y, and Z, then to CW, you did all that and a bag of chips. Now whether you did in fact do any of it, CW doesnt care. 

Just for fun I now just went to Consumer Reports Charitable Ratings. I guess they do good work but even they had huge errors. They rate the Sierra Club as great. Joe Kennedy III was recently run-off from the Sierra Club by the BOD. He was essentially turning it into a personal campaign fund. I was sent all the meeting notes etc when they were attempting to vote him out. They have obviously made peace with him and others. 

Clinton Foundation Abuses..
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/420131-feds-received-whistleblower-evidence-in-2017-alleging-clinton-foundation
https://psmag.com/news/whats-going-on-with-the-clinton-foundation
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4767635/clinton-foundation-misuse-donated-public-funds
half and half https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/sep/01/fact-checking-clinton-foundation-controversy/
https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/clinton-foundation-under-new-justice-department-inquiry
https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2017/11/21/the-crazies-vs-the-clinton-foundation-takeaways-from-a-conspiracy-theory-that-wont-die

 

Quote

 

And that brings me to a final takeaway from the Clinton Foundation dustup: There are, in fact, real reasons to be distrustful of elite philanthropy in an era when the far upper class routinely abuses its wealth and power for personal gain.

Many of the charges about the Clinton Foundation don’t actually sound so outlandish if you follow the shenanigans of the 0.1 percent. While most of the specific allegations about the foundation have either been false, exaggerated or downright ludicrous, there’s no denying the overall unpleasant odor of insider back-scratching, money grubbing, and political opportunism that regularly wafted from Clinton world over the years. The attack on the foundation took root in fertile soil.

It’s hard to say when the next philanthropy scandal, real or manufactured, may emerge. But it’s a safe bet that we’ll see this sector getting more of the wrong kind of attention down the line. 

 

 

 

[homersapien 11,371]

4 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Wow, where to start. Charity Watch was brought up by Tx about 3-4 years ago and it was just a whitewash charity org where you buy your rating from them. He pointed out that CW had the Clinton Foundation as a great charity and then the tax returns came out and verified even the worst of the abuses.

CW is a joke organization that was put together to do similar work as some of Consumer Reports competitors. You see with Consumer Reports they were damaging bad actors in the domestic car industry. So Ford, GM, and Chrysler loosely banded together and formed up several similar, some even similar sounding, organizations to generate good press to give them cover for ads etc. The new orgs would then be quoted in an advertisement as tumpeting huge quality gains that simply had not happened. 

CW uses word of mouth and completely unchallenged self-reporting done by the agencies themselves.
THEY ARE CERTAINLY NOT FACT BASED. 

So if your prospectus says you X, Y, and Z, then to CW, you did all that and a bag of chips. Now whether you did in fact do any of it, CW doesnt care. 

Just for fun I now just went to Consumer Reports Charitable Ratings. I guess they do good work but even they had huge errors. They rate the Sierra Club as great. Joe Kennedy III was recently run-off from the Sierra Club by the BOD. He was essentially turning it into a personal campaign fund. I was sent all the meeting notes etc when they were attempting to vote him out. They have obviously made peace with him and others. 

Clinton Foundation Abuses..
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/420131-feds-received-whistleblower-evidence-in-2017-alleging-clinton-foundation
https://psmag.com/news/whats-going-on-with-the-clinton-foundation
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4767635/clinton-foundation-misuse-donated-public-funds
half and half https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/sep/01/fact-checking-clinton-foundation-controversy/
https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/clinton-foundation-under-new-justice-department-inquiry
https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2017/11/21/the-crazies-vs-the-clinton-foundation-takeaways-from-a-conspiracy-theory-that-wont-die

 

 

Look DKW.  Let's not get lost in the weeds.

If you want to believe that all charitable trusts are willfully corrupt you are free to do so.  It fits well with your political nihilism.

It's a crazy position, but you are free to hold it.

[DKW 86 7,419]

10 hours ago, homersapien said:

 

 

 

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Look DKW.  Let's not get lost in the weeds.

If you want to believe that all charitable trusts are willfully corrupt you are free to do so.  It fits well with your political nihilism.

It's a crazy position, but you are free to hold it.

Who the hell said that?

Went back corrected my post, I did mis-speak in it. I should have said many, anot implied all. There is no "All" in anything in politics.