Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

pixelburp · 08-06-2019 10:47pm

The Huffington Post is reporting that the detour to Doonbeg will cost the US taxpayer $3.6 million in total; a hefty bill for something that was NOT an official state visit, merely an excuse for a visit to one of his businesses. Apparently the total bill for all the golf visits is $105 million.

Not like he's the first politician to enjoy the public purse, but the brazenness with which "drain the swamp" (a term that ostensibly is not a bad concept to get behind, let's face it) has been casually discarded in favour of obvious cute-hoor'ism, is a sight. Maybe Trump is a good businessman, he can certainly find the angle. The obvious snark here is to go, well, at least he didn't wear a tan suit, or order Dijon mustard, but ... *shrug*

$3.6 million. And I'm sweating about some expected hotel expenses I'll need to invoice back.

mcmoustache · 09-06-2019 2:21am

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Seems the threat of tariffs has had the effect Trump believed it would:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1137155057667989511

Great president. Important issue and finally it seems the US has a president willing to do what it takes to solve it.

Have you ever wondered if taking Trump's statements at face value might not be a good idea. I mean, even yourself must have figured out by now that he just makes stuff up.

If I had a source that was as unreliable as Trump, I might think to myself that perhaps I shouldn't take him at his word. But that's just me. Maybe one of these days, Trump's tweets will reflect reality in regards to something substantial. But I don't think he's going to pivot anytime soon. You can keep the faith if you like but you might as well be waiting to win the slots, surrounded by old ladies in vegas.

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1137461565589008384

aloyisious · 09-06-2019 9:01am

Looking at the TV financial people last night, it seems they expect the Fed to lower its rate pretty soon, probably within the week [unless its wishful thinking]. If the Fed does, Don has to tweet on the positivity of his Admin's work.

Quin_Dub · 09-06-2019 11:51am

aloyisious wrote: »

Looking at the TV financial people last night, it seems they expect the Fed to lower its rate pretty soon, probably within the week [unless its wishful thinking]. If the Fed does, Don has to tweet on the positivity of his Admin's work.

I read an article the other day, can't find it right now, but they reckoned that this was a plan by Trump or at least this was his only way to avoid the expected recession hitting before the Election

The Fed cuts rates before the end of the summer and then he rows back on all the tariffs. The economy would get another bump as a result

Of course it's all just another increase in the credit limit on that credit card bill that will eventually have to be paid.

But if he can keep the bailiff away from the door until after November 2020, why would he care.

golfball37 · 09-06-2019 12:09pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

They really are a caracature of themselves at this stage.

Trump sons skip out on bar tab in Doonbeg

Fake news as last line confirms. Mr Tubridy previously said anytime the boys are in the tab is sent to the hotel and is settled in due course without hassle.

banie01 · 09-06-2019 12:18pm

golfball37 wrote: »

Fake news as last line confirms. Mr Tubridy previously said anytime the boys are in the tab is sent to the hotel and is settled in due course without hassle.

So the entertainment costs of people travelling as part of a presidential entourage and acting as representative of the state, are met by a private company which the Don's sons are directors of?
And of which he and Ivanka are meant to be holding at arm's length as part of the official roles.
Is Trump's org not meant to be run by a legally blind trust whilst he is in office?

On the one hand, you could say the boyo's were acting in a private capacity to foster good will solely for the Doonbeg Hotel.
As such charging the cost back to the hotel is a valid goodwill expense, but what kind of hotel handshaking exercise comes with a US president?

On the other, it projects a very definite commercial endorsement of a sitting president from a company that he owns.
Surely it should be documented as a political donation or campaign cost?

Very questionable from an ethical and compliance standpoint IMO.

TheDiceMan2020 · 09-06-2019 12:36pm

banie01 wrote: »

So the entertainment costs of people travelling as part of a presidential entourage and acting as representative of the state, are met by a private company which the Don's sons are directors of?
And of which he and Ivanka are meant to be holding at arm's length as part of the official roles.
Is Trump's org not meant to be run by a legally blind trust whilst he is in office?

On the one hand, you could say the boyo's were acting in a private capacity to foster good will and as such charging the cost back to the hotel is a valid goodwill expense.

On the other, it projects a very definite commercial endorsement of a sitting president from a company that he owns.
Surely it should be documented as a political donation or campaign cost?

Very questionable from an ethical and compliance standpoint IMO.

He's talking about the bar tab lie.

TheDiceMan2020 · 09-06-2019 12:38pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

They really are a caracature of themselves at this stage.

Trump sons skip out on bar tab in Doonbeg

A clear example of "fake news" media at work. They didn't skip out on the bar tab. They told them to send the bill to the hotel as per previous arrangements which the owners were happy to do.

But pretending the sons did a runner and left the bars unpaid is simply an out and out lie.

Billy Mays · 09-06-2019 12:43pm

The Rupert Murdoch owned pro Trump/GOP New York Post fake news media

banie01 · 09-06-2019 12:51pm

TheDiceMan2020 wrote: »

He's talking about the bar tab lie.

I know, those are precisely the questions I asked?
What are you driving at?

That because the costs are being picked up by a privately owned company that the boys are directors of that it's ok?

It is very ethically dubious, to use funds from a company a public figure owns that is supposedly held in a blind trust whilst in office to promote, advertise, boost, raise or whichever other term you would care to use the Office Holder.

If the 2 boyo's had gone down to Doonbeg, while the Don was back in Washington.
Would they have been flashed across world media telling all and sundry that Drinks are on Trump?

I'm not doubting the bill will be paid.
I do however have serious doubts about the actual legality of the manner the payment will be both proffered and actually recorded as.

It is a campaign cost.
Will it be logged as such? A political donation from a company owned by the Candidate.
An advertising/sponsorship on behalf of the hotel?
Ownership or directorship of a company does not bestow a right to spend that company's assets without oversight or approval.

09-06-2019 12:54pm

banie01 wrote: »

I know, those are precisely the questions I asked?
What are you driving at?

That because the costs are being picked up by a privately owned company that the boys are directors of that it's ok?

It is very ethically dubious, to use funds from a company a public figure owns that is supposedly held in a blind trust whilst in office to promote, advertise, boost, raise or whichever other term you would care to use the Office Holder.

If the 2 boyo's had gone down to Doonbeg, while the Don was back in Washington.
Would they have been flashed across world media telling all and sundry that Drinks are on Trump?

I'm not doubting the bill will be paid.
I do however have serious doubts about the actual legality of the manner the payment will be both proffered and actually recorded as.

It is a campaign cost.
Will it be logged as such? A political donation from a company owned by the Candidate.
An advertising/sponsorship on behalf of the hotel?
Ownership or directorship of a company does not bestow a right to spend that company's assets without oversight or approval.

As has been amply demonstrated over the past few years, ethics don't matter to Trump or his fans.

Stallingrad · 09-06-2019 12:55pm

Bull**** headlines like that really are a pain. I'm no fan of the family but I didn't believe it for a second.

We don't need made up lies about this President and his cronies, there are plenty of legitimate stories.

banie01 · 09-06-2019 12:58pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

As has been amply demonstrated over the past few years, ethics don't matter to Trump or his fans.

100% agreed. The current POTUS makes our own Haughey and Lowry et al look positively amateurish when it comes to graft.
Still he does come from the city that gave the US Tammany Hall, and Trump really does seem to be going all out to become a new Boss Tweed

Wonder if he will ever have a similar fall from grace.

Stop moaning ffs · 09-06-2019 1:00pm

No fan of the trump family but it’s true to say people at that level of wealth never carry money on them or even credit cards. They have their people sort it out and often after the fact.

This bar tab story is a nothing

pixelburp · 09-06-2019 1:11pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

No fan of the trump family but it’s true to say people at that level of wealth never carry money on them or even credit cards. They have their people sort it out and often after the fact.

This bar tab story is a nothing

Ah but, as already demonstrated it's leapt on as a j'accuse and confirmation bias that the mainstream media (or rather, the usually pro Trump New York Post but we'll move on from that truth) are peddling lies about the president. So despite the man himself at the 10,000 count for demonstrable untruths, the one or two slip ups by the media will be pounced on as proof of some agenda. The high road is impossible when the yardsticks are this hypocritical.

Bar tab or not, the American tax payer shelled out for that business trip, and it was just that, let no one say otherwise. The hastily prepared meeting by the vending machines of Shannon airport was a thin facade for a questionable stretch of the Emolument Clause. but I suppose if you're only perspective is that a bunch of rich Americans threw a few sheckles around the village for a failing business, then that's the lede.

It's not that dissimilar to the "he fixed the road" mentality of local politics here.

duploelabs · 09-06-2019 1:17pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

As has been amply demonstrated over the past few years, ethics don't matter to Trump or his fans.

Nor does a past history on non-payment of bills for contractors

Stop moaning ffs · 09-06-2019 1:24pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah but, as already demonstrated it's leapt on as a j'accuse and confirmation bias that the mainstream media (or rather, the usually pro Trump New York Post but we'll move on from that truth) are peddling lies about the president. So despite the man himself at the 10,000 count for demonstrable untruths, the one or two slip ups by the media will be pounced on as proof of some agenda. The high road is impossible when the yardsticks are this hypocritical.

Bar tab or not, the American tax payer shelled out for that business trip, and it was just that, let no one say otherwise. The hastily prepared meeting by the vending machines of Shannon airport was a thin facade for a questionable stretch of the Emolument Clause. but I suppose if you're only perspective is that a bunch of rich Americans threw a few sheckles around the village for a failing business, then that's the lede.

It's not that dissimilar to the "he fixed the road" mentality of local politics here.

Well said. And it’s known that a massive stream of dirty Russian money was and may still be flowing through Doonbeg.
As we wondered earlier. Who else was he meeting there in private during his stay

Leroy42 · 09-06-2019 2:08pm

Hold on. If we use the same levels to the media that people are willing to give Trump then what is fake about the headline?

It is true that they didn't pay on the night, so left without paying. Nothing fake about it.

Surely Trump supporters are not trying to argue that Trump should be given even benefit of context and nuance but media has some higher levels?

jochenstacker · 09-06-2019 5:06pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

Hold on. If we use the same levels to the media that people are willing to give Trump then what is fake about the headline?

It is true that they didn't pay on the night, so left without paying. Nothing fake about it.

Surely Trump supporters are not trying to argue that Trump should be given even benefit of context and nuance but media has some higher levels?

It's always the same argument.
Had Obama done it, Fox would have had an aneurysm screaming about it.
So we will at least mention it.

RIGOLO · 09-06-2019 5:35pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Well said. And it’s known that a massive stream of dirty Russian money was and may still be flowing through Doonbeg.
As we wondered earlier. Who else was he meeting there in private during his stay

I still think the left need to come up with some policies and a candidate to win the 2020 election.

I dont think a conspiracy theory that Russian money is flowing through a golf course in Clare and implying Donald Trump met some Russians there during his visit is going to win anything.

Eric Cartman · 09-06-2019 5:37pm

RIGOLO wrote: »

I still think the left need to come up with some policies and a candidate to win the 2020 election.

I dont think a conspiracy theory that Russian money is flowing through a golf course in Clare and implying Donald Trump met some Russians there during his visit is going to win anything.

nah, theyll continue down that path and then blame the russians or somebody else again when he gets a second term.

RIGOLO · 09-06-2019 5:43pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I read an article the other day, can't find it right now, but they reckoned that this was a plan by Trump or at least this was his only way to avoid the expected recession hitting before the Election

The Fed cuts rates before the end of the summer and then he rows back on all the tariffs. The economy would get another bump as a result

Of course it's all just another increase in the credit limit on that credit card bill that will eventually have to be paid.

But if he can keep the bailiff away from the door until after November 2020, why would he care.

Yep the TRump Administration are matsers of long term planning and being able to adopt their plan on the fly to meet the socio economic changes that are constantly in play around the world.

The Fed made 6 cuts in Obamas first year 2008 ,
And the Fed kept the rate at zero for the next 7 years between 2008-2015 , despite the recession officially ending in 2009.

Trump looks for 1 cut, Obama had 8 and Fed kept the rate at zero for his next 8 years of office, only an ardent anti-TRumper could think Trumps demands are somehow unreasonable.

RIGOLO · 09-06-2019 5:47pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

nah, theyll continue down that path and then blame the russians or somebody else again when he gets a second term.

I agree theres alot of questions to be answered..
Who will the left blame when Trump II rolls into town ?
Who are CNN going to trot out between 2020 and 2024 to continue their 24x7 attack on the TRump administration ?
What form will the DNC take as its identity politics stance comes home to roost and they have their own identity crisis ?
Who will write the NY Times bestsellers in 2021 on TRump and his admin, will Michael Wollf and Bob Woodward have another tome ?

Its certainly interesting times ahead ..

RIGOLO · 09-06-2019 5:52pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah but, as already demonstrated it's leapt on as a j'accuse and confirmation bias that the mainstream media (or rather, the usually pro Trump New York Post but we'll move on from that truth) are peddling lies about the president. So despite the man himself at the 10,000 count for demonstrable untruths, the one or two slip ups by the media will be pounced on as proof of some agenda. The high road is impossible when the yardsticks are this hypocritical.

Bar tab or not, the American tax payer shelled out for that business trip, and it was just that, let no one say otherwise. The hastily prepared meeting by the vending machines of Shannon airport was a thin facade for a questionable stretch of the Emolument Clause. but I suppose if you're only perspective is that a bunch of rich Americans threw a few sheckles around the village for a failing business, then that's the lede.

It's not that dissimilar to the "he fixed the road" mentality of local politics here.

Some people (like maybe the 200+ employed directly in Doonbeg GC) call those few sheckles your referring too as mortgage re-payments, bank loan repayments, food and clothing bills payments.

You call it a few sheckles ... they call it a LIVELIHODD.

pixelburp · 09-06-2019 6:14pm

RIGOLO wrote: »

Some people (like maybe the 200+ employed directly in Doonbeg GC) call those few sheckles your referring too as mortgage re-payments, bank loan repayments, food and clothing bills payments.

You call it a few sheckles ... they call it a LIVELIHODD.

You obviously read my post, and took the time to highlight the section you take umbrage with via some emotive snark: how about actually casting some thoughts on the tax payer paying for a sitting President to visit his personal business? Do you feel this has any issue re. the Emoluments Clause? $3.6 million isn't chump change to enable the President to play golf & this wasn't even a state visit. If it doesn't bother you, at least be honest and admit it instead of wishy washy statements.

Though to be honest, at the risk of invoking a card, I think you're intellectually disingenuous. I respect the likes of Eric Cartman and Manic Moran who present thoughtful, reasoned viewpoints further away from the resting criticism (whinging?

) on this thread, even though I agree little with their remarks, but you patently refuse to engage in the substance on political theatre. Taking this kind of sanctimonious attitude of "how dare you, this is peoples' livelihood" as a response to questionable use of taxpayers money by the President is frankly, dishonest. You're my first Ignored User, well done. There's little debate to be had with you.

And yes, from the Doonbeg residents point of view, I doubt very much they care that millions of Americans' money is being spent to fly Trump to a golf course. I wasn't even being that critical, but you love to jump on an opening, again, burying the lede.

RIGOLO · 09-06-2019 6:23pm

pixelburp wrote: »

You obviously read my post, and took the time to highlight the section you take umbrage with via some emotive snark: how about actually casting some thoughts on the tax payer paying for a sitting President to visit his personal business? Do you feel this has any issue re. the Emoluments Clause? $3.6 million isn't chump change to enable the President to play golf & this wasn't even a state visit. If it doesn't bother you, at least be honest and admit it instead of wishy washy statements.

Though to be honest, at the risk of invoking a card, I think you're intellectually disingenuous. I respect the likes of Eric Cartman and Manic Moran who present thoughtful, reasoned viewpoints further away from the resting criticism (whinging? ) on this thread, even though I agree little with their remarks, but you patently refuse to engage in the substance on political theatre. Taking this kind of sanctimonious attitude of "how dare you, this is peoples' livelihood" as a response to questionable use of taxpayers money by the President is frankly, dishonest.

And yes, from the Doonbeg residents point of view, I doubt very much they care that Americans' money is being spent to fly Trump to a golf course. I wasn't even being that critical, but you love to jump on an opening, again, burying the lede.

we differ ..

your upset the American taxpayer got a bill for $3.6 million
Im happy a few Irish taxpayers were on the recieving end of , I dont know lets say $3.6 million too (factoring in the revenue last week and future revenue based on the free publicity)

you call it sheckles , I call it a livelihood.

everlast75 · 09-06-2019 6:26pm

RIGOLO wrote: »

we differ ..

your upset the American taxpayer got a bill for $3.6 million
Im happy a few Irish taxpayers were on the recieving end of , I dont know lets say $3.6 million too (factoring in the revenue last week and future revenue based on the free publicity)

you call it sheckles , I call it a livelihood.

It can be good for the locals and a grifter move by DJT at the same time.

listermint · 09-06-2019 6:29pm

RIGOLO wrote: »

I still think the left need to come up with some policies and a candidate to win the 2020 election.

I dont think a conspiracy theory that Russian money is flowing through a golf course in Clare and implying Donald Trump met some Russians there during his visit is going to win anything.

Sorry, I'm still trying to come down off you yesterday for giving out to another poster about disrespecting Americans involved in the war. Which was hilarious by the way considering your daily dumps of propaganda for the president most famous for ****ting on families of dead or living soldiers.

And now you come here with more grade A stand up.

So let's see. A golf course which has been opened since 2006, yes that's 2006 13 years and has yet to turn a profit. A profitable return for its owners is fully legit. As in you expect people to believe that is a legitimate business.

Top drawer. I'd suggest touring with Tommy Tiernan

listermint · 09-06-2019 6:37pm

I'd actually love to go through the books on that place to see what they're writing off as expenses. No doubt it has the most expensive of absolutely everything.

It's something you would do of course with a failing hotel and golf course in the back arse of Ireland.

banie01 · 09-06-2019 6:41pm

listermint wrote: »

I'd actually love to go through the books on that place to see what they're writing off as expenses. No doubt it has the most expensive of absolutely everything.

It's something you would do of course with a failing hotel and golf course in the back arse of Ireland.

100%
I'd love to review the books, if only to see how an expert does it

I wonder how Don would have swung the US taxpayer paying for his golf trip had Leo and Co decided not to play ball and stayed away from Shannon.

Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Comments