- May 29, 2012
- 41,108
- 24,128
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
If he is President, yes. Glad you are beginning to understand.And if he does, he's a crook, right?
Upvote
0
If he is President, yes. Glad you are beginning to understand.And if he does, he's a crook, right?
And when is the Republican DOJ and Congress going to do something about it?You're right. Compared to Obama, Trump is a saint when I comes to this stuff (and we all know that the usual crowd never cared about Barry being 'on the take').
Donald stays only at his own properties, so he is favoring one business over all others for personal gain.So...when any president hosts a state dinner, neither are the food and service donated. When any president goes on vacation, usually the property can trumpet that the president stayed there, which serves as promotion.
The White House has chefs and servers on staff, so hosting a function at a Donald property is an additional expense, so yes, it is less expensive and there is no markup to cover private club expenses.The fact is, everything costs money. The president, or a foreign dignitary, or whatever. It costs about the same. Security, room and board, logistics, travel. I don't believe President Trump stays in anything more luxurious than President Obama, or any other president. Most good hotels have a 'presidential suite', after all, which costs $$$. Secret Service also costs money, regardless of where the President is. And just as you would pay for an ambulance or a rescue, and just as you pay for public education, everything in government has a price tag. You think food at the White House is any less expensive than food at Mar-a-Lago?
Not his family, him. Donald Trump owns Mar-a-lago. The White House has staff on salary to host meals and functions, but Donald gets no profit from that. Most presidents didn't get a direct profit from where they stayed.I don't see anything different, other than his family owns the property.
In Bizarro World. I have never heard that President Obama was 'on the take', so would you please explain what in tarnation you're referring to specifically?You're right. Compared to Obama, Trump is a saint when I comes to this stuff (and we all know that the usual crowd never cared about Barry being 'on the take').
IS it for personal gain?Donald stays only at his own properties, so he is favoring one business over all others for personal gain.
IS it for personal gain?
And if so, why would this president then give away his government salary when he is supposedly also squeezing out all that he can from a hotel stay?
For "personal gain," as you said? Hmmmm.
The hotel goes on his expense account, not his salaryIS it for personal gain?
And if so, why would this president then give away his government salary when he is supposedly also squeezing out all that he can from a hotel stay?
For "personal gain," as you said? Hmmmm.
The hotel goes on his expense account, not his salary
It has that appearance, but, of course, it's possible that no other place in America is as suitable for the magnificence that is Donald.IS it for personal gain?
PR. He doesn't have to squeeze when he's doubled the already steep price of admission.And if so, why would this president then give away his government salary when he is supposedly also squeezing out all that he can from a hotel stay?
That's what he's all about. And vanity - about equal parts money and vanity.For "personal gain," as you said? Hmmmm.
No matter where he was on vacation, the expense would be for his team; personal expenses are his personal responsibility. However, the expense of his team translates as profit for Donald when they stay at Mar-a-lago.You do realize that Mar Lago is his home. The expense is for his team.
Because the less sophisticated follows won’t figure out he’s more than making up for it by skimming the taxpayers.IS it for personal gain?
And if so, why would this president then give away his government salary when he is supposedly also squeezing out all that he can from a hotel stay?
For "personal gain," as you said? Hmmmm.
But he can afford it--and, not surprisingly--this did not get much press coverage. Therefore, to argue that he would then chisel on a hotel room is silly.It is good for the media image. It is for the show.
These are all signs of desperation from the Left-Liberals. Trump is the last person who ran for President for "personal gain". He gives away his salary regularly, but the MSM and the Democrats have failed to commend him for his selflessness and generosity.For "personal gain," as you said? Hmmmm.
But Hillary!! Hey guys, I have an idea - let's derail the thread!These are all signs of desperation from the Left-Liberals. Trump is the last person who ran for President for "personal gain". He gives away his salary regularly, but the MSM and the Democrats have failed to commend him for his selflessness and generosity.
Hillary on the other hand garnered millions for personal gain, as well as for pay-to-play, but not a word about her evil deeds. Everyone ignored "Clinton Cash" when that should have been the focus of the gullible leftists.
Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich
It's available at Amazon for those who want to see who used their positions for personal gain.
Well, he's doesn't own the businesses the government is paying money to. He may stand to benefit in the future. OTOH, when Clinton was in office (choose which one you want to focus on), whether President or Sec of State or Senator, they owned the Clinton Foundation(s), and profitted from the sale of their favors while in office. Quite a different thing.You really don't see a difference between the government paying money to businesses for services, and the government paying that money instead to businesses owned by the head of the government?
But the thing is, he's not a business man while he's the President. So...?If he is President, yes. Glad you are beginning to understand.