Trump to host G7 at his own Florida resort property

[TU Curmudgeon]

This is so silly. You are basically saying if Trump does something bad then Trump will be accused of doing something bad by his political opponents.

Well, duh.

That's not quite correct.

What the members of "Claque Trump" are (in effect) saying is that

If Mr. Trump does something bad then you have to be a left-wing, liberal, socialist, pinko, commie to accuse him of doing something bad and besides, as all patriotic, hard working, patriotic, honest, patriotic, real, patriotic, true, patriotic, conservative, patriotic, Christian patriotic, White, patriotic, American, patriotic, patriots know it is impossible for Mr. Trump to do anything bad and the only people who claim that he has done something bad are those dishonest, lying, left-wing, liberal, socialist, pinko, commies who want to see Sherry Law (with its mandatory same-sex, inter-racial, marriages [where every unborn child is compulsorily murdered by Abortion Death Panels {after being fluoridated and vaccinated, of course}] and where all the cheerleaders have to wear Burke Hats) rammed down the throats of every patriotic, hard working, patriotic, honest, patriotic, real, patriotic, true, patriotic, conservative, patriotic, Christian patriotic, White, patriotic, American, patriotic, patriot.
​

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I'm saying that his offer wasn't inherently "bad" but that he surely knew his opponents would denounce is as such and overreact in so doing. Hence I condemn his politicking, or, at the very least, lack of discretion.

Antagonism for the sake of antagonism is the last thing America needs right now.

Hey, you are two/thirds of the way through an election, why wouldn't you expect candidates to be attempting to convince people that they are going to get every "last thing" that they can think of?

 

[Stealers Wheel]

This is a big nothingburger. It's the POTUS's privilege to decide on the venue. Big deal.

Actually, no. There is a process in place specifically to prevent cronyism in awarding government contracts. Trump ignored this requirement and awarded the contract to his own property. Your claim that this was Trump's call is false.

While we realize you're fine with Trump doing this, we also know that if any other president were to do the same thing, you would not approve.

 

[COTO]

Hey, you are two/thirds of the way through an election, why wouldn't you expect candidates to be attempting to convince people that they are going to get every "last thing" that they can think of?

I very much do expect them to do this. Even so, its inevitability doesn't mean it's not an overreaction, which is precisely what Pres. Trump is counting on, and why I say he deserves the political fallout.

Suppose tomorrow he says something like, "Russia is a great nation and we as Americans should seek peace with them."

Same deal. There's nothing inherently wrong with the statement, but Pres. Trump would have to know it would provoke a reaction from his politically-minded opponents that in most cases would be a gross overreaction. Since he knew this but did it anyway (without any other compelling reason to praise Russia at this cosmic moment in time), I could only assume that provoking his opponents was his intent. Members of his political base might approve of such tactics, but I certainly don't. The same is true for this G7 Doral proposal. He gets no sympathy points from me.

 

[Winston]

This is ****ing hilarious. My favorite story of the week.

Trump corruption is of the old school kind, no sleight-of-hand, just I'm gonna do this out in the open and tell my supporters it's all good. They'll defend me, just watch.

:lamo

:lamo

:lamo

 

[Nickyjo]

This is a big nothingburger. It's the POTUS's privilege to decide on the venue. Big deal.

Yes, Trump admires corrupt dictators, so he might as well imitate them. Read the Constitution. It's pretty obviously against the law, but given everything else Trump has done, simply another day at the office.

 

[ClaraD]

The problem here is at cost, doesn't mean that there will be no bill. His at cost is still charging participants and a figure for rooms that would be figured occupied at his imaginary number, plus deducting his food costs, security, etc...he isn't picking up the tab and we are still paying via our taxes....why not give the bid to a non Trump property and if Trump wants to pay the full tab, he's welcome to do so...out of his own pocket

 

[Nickyjo]

Trumps supporters are so corrupt, they aren't even trying to hide it anymore. Congrats on proving what we have said about you cons 100% correct. PoS indeed. :lamo

What about the Clintons? Has Trump solicited donations from foreign leaders to his foundation? Oh wait, he can't anymore as it was put out of business for corruption.

Never mind. But you have to admire Trump's Boss Tweed-like openness. Tourism is down in the summer in Florida, lots of empty rooms at his resort. So why not fill them? Another week, another impeachable offense.

 

[Jay59]

I'm not complaining about anyone talking, just dumb arguments.

You only think the arguments are dumb because you don't agree. and you did raise a huge stink over nothing much. You may have judgement issues.

 

[Marine Electric]

When Mulvaney announced the deal, he did NOT even suggest that it would be at "no cost" to taxpayers It was announced that it would be for no profits...

Yeah and the used car dealer out on the highway sells his cars "under cost." I don't believe him but your average Trump-asslicker does.

And that's the difference between the dumb-and-gullible among us and normal Americans.

:2wave:

 

[itstony]

Never mind, he changed his mind. That makes it all better, right?:roll:

 

[SCrider]

The problem here is at cost, doesn't mean that there will be no bill. His at cost is still charging participants and a figure for rooms that would be figured occupied at his imaginary number, plus deducting his food costs, security, etc...he isn't picking up the tab and we are still paying via our taxes....why not give the bid to a non Trump property and if Trump wants to pay the full tab, he's welcome to do so...out of his own pocket

Exactly, Trump is soooo successful and rich why not let another American company make some money on this?

 

[Marine Electric]

The problem here is at cost, doesn't mean that there will be no bill. His at cost is still charging participants and a figure for rooms that would be figured occupied at his imaginary number, plus deducting his food costs, security, etc...he isn't picking up the tab and we are still paying via our taxes....why not give the bid to a non Trump property and if Trump wants to pay the full tab, he's welcome to do so...out of his own pocket

When a man with the known character of Donald J. Trump says he's selling you something "at cost," does anyone, with an IQ over room temperature, believe him?

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Don't be silly, of course they understand the difference between right and wrong:

• Anything that Mr. Trump does is RIGHT.
  *
• Anything that anyone but Mr. Trump does is WRONG.
  *
• Mr. Trump and his current supporters are always RIGHT.
  *
• Anyone who is neither Mr. Trump nor one of his current supporters is always WRONG.
  *
• Anyone who used to oppose Mr. Trump but who now supports him has always been RIGHT.
  *
• Anyone who used to support Mr. Trump but who now opposes him has always been WRONG.

Don't bother to thank me for clearing up that confusion for you, I'm always happy to lend a hand.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

I'm saying that his offer wasn't inherently "bad" but that he surely knew his opponents would denounce is as such and overreact in so doing. Hence I condemn his politicking, or, at the very least, lack of discretion.

Antagonism for the sake of antagonism is the last thing America needs right now.

Explain to us why you think self-dealing is okay..

Here is a primer:

Self-dealing - Wikipedia

Self-dealing is the conduct of a trustee, attorney, corporate officer, or other fiduciary that consists of taking advantage of their position in a transaction and acting in his own interests rather than in the interests of the beneficiaries of the trust, corporate shareholders, or their clients. According to the political scientist Andrew Stark, "n self-dealing, an officeholder's official role allows her to affect one or more of her own personal interests." It is a form of conflict of interest.

Self-dealing may involve misappropriation or usurpation of corporate assets or opportunities. Political scientists Ken Kernaghan and John Langford define self-dealing as "a situation where one takes an action in an official capacity which involves dealing with oneself in a private capacity and which confers a benefit on oneself."

Examples include "work[ing] for government and us[ing] your official position to secure a contract for a private consulting company you own" or "using your government position to get a summer job for your daughter."

Where a fiduciary has engaged in self-dealing, this constitutes a breach of the fiduciary relationship. The principal of that fiduciary (the person to whom duties are owed) may sue and both recover the principal's lost profits and disgorge the fiduciary's wrongful profits.

---

 

[W_Heisenberg]

That's not quite correct.

What the members of "Claque Trump" are (in effect) saying is that

If Mr. Trump does something bad then you have to be a left-wing, liberal, socialist, pinko, commie to accuse him of doing something bad and besides, as all patriotic, hard working, patriotic, honest, patriotic, real, patriotic, true, patriotic, conservative, patriotic, Christian patriotic, White, patriotic, American, patriotic, patriots know it is impossible for Mr. Trump to do anything bad and the only people who claim that he has done something bad are those dishonest, lying, left-wing, liberal, socialist, pinko, commies who want to see Sherry Law (with its mandatory same-sex, inter-racial, marriages [where every unborn child is compulsorily murdered by Abortion Death Panels {after being fluoridated and vaccinated, of course}] and where all the cheerleaders have to wear Burke Hats) rammed down the throats of every patriotic, hard working, patriotic, honest, patriotic, real, patriotic, true, patriotic, conservative, patriotic, Christian patriotic, White, patriotic, American, patriotic, patriot.
​

Lol. This is hilarious!

 

[JasperL]

You only think the arguments are dumb because you don't agree. and you did raise a huge stink over nothing much. You may have judgement issues.

Or they are objectively dumb, and excusing corrupt self dealing. That's also possible!

And when Trump lemmings believe it's me with judgment issues, that is a good sign I'm on the right track. Thanks for the vote of confidence. eace

 

[Jay59]

Or they are objectively dumb, and excusing corrupt self dealing. That's also possible! And when Trump lemmings believe it's me with judgment issues, that is a good sign I'm on the right track. Thanks for the vote of confidence. eace

I agree. You are indeed on the right track, just facing the wrong direction.

Corrupt self dealing is SOP for too many Democrats. The Clintons are the worst, but even slackers like the Bidens get their bits while the media turns a blind eye.

On a scarier note, I wonder how deep Chinese hooks are into Democrats, particularly on the West Coast. Dianne Feinstein had a Chinese agent as her driver and gofer for 20 years. Of course that had nothing to do with her families many businesses that dealt with China.
Feinstein had a Chinese spy connection she didn’t know about — her driver - SFChronicle.com

 

[JasperL]

I agree. You are indeed on the right track, just facing the wrong direction.

Corrupt self dealing is SOP for too many Democrats. The Clintons are the worst, but even slackers like the Bidens get their bits while the media turns a blind eye.

And I've called Hillary and Bill out for it by name many, many times. It's why I didn't vote for her in the primary, as I pointed out at that time and many times since. It displayed an amazing arrogance, and indifference to what wasn't just the appearance but actual impropriety, to collect $millions in speaking fees from future regulated industries on Wall Street. It's influence peddling, and it's legal, but IMO it is corrupt. I have no doubt if Hillary were President, those conflicts would have been the subject of dozens of hearings.

But this is 2019 I'm facing the current President. Trump is the president, and POTUS publicly pimping his own resort for weeks, then having the WH go through a fake search and select....GOSH, SHOCKER!! Trump's OWN PROPERTY for a major international conference is corrupt self dealing.

On a scarier note....BUTWHATABOUT!!@!

If you want to discuss those things, start a thread. This one is about Trump, Doral, G-7 conference.

 

[Jay59]

And I've called Hillary and Bill out for it by name many, many times. It's why I didn't vote for her in the primary, as I pointed out at that time and many times since. It displayed an amazing arrogance, and indifference to what wasn't just the appearance but actual impropriety, to collect $millions in speaking fees from future regulated industries on Wall Street. It's influence peddling, and it's legal, but IMO it is corrupt. I have no doubt if Hillary were President, those conflicts would have been the subject of dozens of hearings.

But this is 2019 I'm facing the current President. Trump is the president, and POTUS publicly pimping his own resort for weeks, then having the WH go through a fake search and select....GOSH, SHOCKER!! Trump's OWN PROPERTY for a major international conference is corrupt self dealing. If you want to discuss those things, start a thread. This one is about Trump, Doral, G-7 conference.

This thread is about double standards, but I leave you to them.

 

[JasperL]

This thread is about double standards, but I leave you to them.

It's not actually about double standards. The thread title is on every page of comments - "Trump to host G7 at his own Florida resort property." Yes, of course like in every thread about Trump, the Trump lemmings divert the discussion to some BUTWHATABOUTism. That's because you guys cannot honestly discuss the topic, and believe that as adults, the "but he did it FIRST/TOO MOM!" excuse will work when it failed you in kindergarten and elementary school.

And if you want to accuse me of a double standard, common courtesy would suggest that you point out those double standards. You lied about me having a double standard with Hillary, or just made it up not caring if it was true. Do you have another example of me supporting corrupt self dealing by POTUS, something you can back up and don't pull from your back side?

 

[Marine Electric]

This thread is about double standards, but I leave you to them.

It's always doubled-standard when Trump-cucks mention double-standards.

:2wave:

 

[COTO]

Explain to us why you think self-dealing is okay..

Here is a primer:

... Where a fiduciary has engaged in self-dealing, this constitutes a breach of the fiduciary relationship. The principal of that fiduciary (the person to whom duties are owed) may sue and both recover the principal's lost profits and disgorge the fiduciary's wrongful profits.

You'll note where the definition implicitly requires the fiduciary to have profited from the deal. The defense rests on the offer being pro bono with no profits being incurred.

Indeed if the resort had hosted the G7 at no cost to the taxpayer, it would have been quite the gift to the American people.

 

[vesper]

If the offer came "all expenses paid" such that the only benefit he'd personally reap is the publicity for his resort, I wouldn't reject it outright.

Having said this, Pres. Trump knows his detractors and enemies are legion, and that anything involving a summit and one of his businesses would stir up outrage and claims of malfeasance. Dangling it in front of them to watch them explode isn't a political tactic I endorse. If he gets burned by the public perception that he wanted to no-bid the G7 for resort revenue, that's his own fault.

At the very least, he should have opened the venue to bidding. The resort could have entered a bid of $0.01, and if (when) it won, this would not only demonstrate that it was selected fairly but also that the bid was a charitable donation (i.e. the publicity wasn't worth the cost to all other bidders). If this is what he was actually proposing, disregard the criticism.

Look our president who didn't make his money as a politician happens to own a piece of property that checks all the boxes to host the G-7 and he was trying to do it in a way that the taxpayers would not have to pick up the tab for it which in the past costs the taxpayers in the range of 40 million.

Because of the outrage from the media and the Democratic party in general, Doral has been nixed.

They are even considering Camp David as a place to have the G-7. Camp David is a government run complex built in the 1930's. Before world leaders will be allowed to embark on the facility everything will have to be pristine. That equates to more taxpayer spending.

When Obama chose Chicago for his G-8 meeting he ran into problems and it ended up at Camp David but at a major cost to the taxpayers to prepare the facility for such an event. No difference in this case. If Camp David is the choice it will undergo a huge makeover which means more cost to the taxpayers. And even though there is no venue at Camp David that allows for a formal setting that is often included in all other countries hosting this event. Unless of course you see all the world leaders gathering around a campfire roasting weiners and making S'Mores as a gala affair.

But I could see them moving everyone to the Blair House which is another government run facility that like Camp David at the taxpayers expense will be gone over with a fine tooth comb to welcome leaders from around the world making sure everything is pristine . From there the WH another government run facility can roll out the red carpet for a gala affair.

And in between all of this since there are several members of the G-7 love golf, Trump happens to own the only golf course which is private to that encompasses D.C., Virginia and Maryland on the Potomac. In 2012 Obama gifted all leaders at his summit with leather jackets with patches commemorating the summit . Trump could gift the other leaders that loves golf with a day on the greens at a golf course he owns as a gift to them and a patch commemorating the occasion.

So what I am getting at is this g-7 Summit can be done at government run places which should shut his critics up but it will come with a high price tag for the taxpayers. But when it comes to Trump's personal gift to the other foreign leaders which is custom, he could do so with an outing at a professional course he owns that is the only golf course in the area as his personal parting gift to the other leaders.

 

[Oborosen]

Then do tell us why Trump backed down from his plan to funnel govt money to his private business.

Explain it well please, we're a little slow.

Thank you for admitting to being slow. I wont hold it against you.

But on your assumption as to what Trump was doing, it really doesn't matter. As whatever was thought of being done, isn't going to happen at all. Though I do think that it would've actually saved them money in the long run and there is nothing actually wrong with the suggestion of using what is already, established space for the summit.