Grifter in Chief, raking in 15.1 million as President.

Sherdog would have more medals than Phelps if mental gymnastics was a sport.
 
LMAO these same right wingers who celebrate paying more taxes in the interest of Trump making more money had a conniption because the Clinton's made money out of office. Very interesting
 
Trotsky said:
https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Fdanalexander%2Ffiles%2F2016%2F11%2FBill-and-Hillary-Clinton-Earnings-graphic.jpg



https://www.forbes.com/sites/danale...on-how-much-earnings-rich-white/#3cba45fe7a16

Notice how none of that even occurred while they were in the White House, let alone pursuant to their official duties or their direction of public funds.
Click to expand...

I hear the Clinton's wanted to take half the shit from the White House...and yet you believe they didn’t gain anything while in office....you have some weird loyalties
 
I expected more from tyrant Trump.
 
AlexDB9 said:
I hear the Clinton's wanted to take half the shit from the White House...and yet you believe they didn’t gain anything while in office....you have some weird loyalties
Click to expand...

Yeah, I tend to form my conclusions based on knowledge of facts, not selective anecdotes, or in this case rumors about things that are outright false.
 
Trotsky said:
Yeah, I tend to form my conclusions based on knowledge of facts, not selective anecdotes, or in this case rumors about things that are outright false.
Click to expand...

So they actually did take the items but returned them after scrutiny and paid 86K for what is or isn’t 200K worth of “gifts”. Doesn’t sound like a false rumor at all
 
AlexDB9 said:
So they actually did take the items but returned them after scrutiny and paid 86K for what is or isn’t 200K worth of “gifts”. Doesn’t sound like a false rumor at all
Click to expand...

As usual, I'm going to have to chew this up and feed this to you like a mommy bird.

According to top ethics lawyers, it’s at least debatable -- and at worst hyperbolic -- to say the Clintons "stole" the items. A congressional investigation found poor tracking of ownership and final disposition of gifts, which makes it hard to speak definitively of wrongdoing. In fact, two items the Clintons returned were ultimately sent back to them. Finally, it’s worth making clear that the "force" they responded to was political pressure, not legal jeopardy.

Accusations of stealing are serious and require a high threshold of evidence, unmet by the charges in this over-the-top graphic. We rate the claim Mostly False.

But this is irrelevant since, as we've established, there is no evidence of conflicted earnings by the Clintons during Bill's presidency, and there is conflicted earnings by Trump during his. Point blank. Own it.
 
Trotsky said:
As usual, I'm going to have to chew this up and feed this to you like a mommy bird.

According to top ethics lawyers, it’s at least debatable -- and at worst hyperbolic -- to say the Clintons "stole" the items. A congressional investigation found poor tracking of ownership and final disposition of gifts, which makes it hard to speak definitively of wrongdoing. In fact, two items the Clintons returned were ultimately sent back to them. Finally, it’s worth making clear that the "force" they responded to was political pressure, not legal jeopardy.

Accusations of stealing are serious and require a high threshold of evidence, unmet by the charges in this over-the-top graphic. We rate the claim Mostly False.

But this is irrelevant since, as we've established, there is no evidence of conflicted earnings by the Clintons during Bill's presidency, and there is conflicted earnings by Trump during his. Point blank. Own it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I read that too.....are you a lawyer or what? Words like “make it hard to speak definitely of wrongdoing” is not exactly a clear case of exoneration, it’s word salad or what id call meaningless. There’s more to your own article than that little snippet of course. It is irrelevant, I’m just calling out your argument since it would be illogical to assume Trump has been the only president to have “conflicted earnings” in fact we have no evidence of it for any president, but I’d be willing to bet that people who pay back and return “gifts” they straight up took (cause they were being criticized) would have no problem earning some “conflicted money” as long they didn’t get caught
 
Seano said:
Past presidents didn't have the interests Trump had prior to taking the job either. His businesses don't just fold because he becomes president.
Click to expand...

Look into the history of modern presidential divestment and get back to us. :rolleyes:
 
Higus said:
Most presidents divested their interests to avoid conflicts of interest. If they had fortunes before holding the office, they would (in theory) not be able to directly enrich themselves thru policy enactment. There isn't a good comparison for Trump because Trump is the first to avoid the pretense of caring about conflicts of interest.
Jimmy Carter famously left a farm and warehouse his family owned in a blind trust while he was in office, only to find it seriously in debt due to mismanagement when the assets were returned to him as a private citizen.
Click to expand...

Jimmy Carter was famously idiotic. Yes, and?
 
AlexDB9 said:
Yeah I read that too.....are you a lawyer or what? Words like “make it hard to speak definitely of wrongdoing” is not exactly a clear case of exoneration, it’s word salad or what id call meaningless. There’s more to your own article than that little snippet of course. It is irrelevant, I’m just calling out your argument since it would be illogical to assume Trump has been the only president to have “conflicted earnings” in fact we have no evidence of it for any president, but I’d be willing to bet that people who pay back and return “gifts” they straight up took (cause they were being criticized) would have no problem earning some “conflicted money” as long they didn’t get caught
Click to expand...

lol wtf, shit for brains?

<36>

Your argument: “it’s okay if Daddy did it because others before him might’ve done it —or they would’ve done it if they were as smart as Daddy.”

You’re better than this.
 
King in the North said:
lol wtf, shit for brains?

<36>

Your argument: “it’s okay if Daddy did it because others before him might’ve done it —or they would’ve done it if they were as smart as Daddy.”

You’re better than this.
Click to expand...

You're looking mighty yellow.
And I wouldn't take an advice of an assistant public defender in misdemeanor court very seriously. No offense.
 
grizzard2bid said:
You're looking mighty yellow.
Click to expand...

lol good to see you again.

How are your dainty little hands? Still silky smooth, or have they become calloused from accidentally revealing yourself as incel in the Mayberry?

Edit: lol @ you getting dubbed right after you posted this. Are we even now? I’ll skip the OT threads.
 
Last edited:
WarDosAnjos said:
LMAO these same right wingers who celebrate paying more taxes in the interest of Trump making more money had a conniption because the Clinton's made money out of office. Very interesting
Click to expand...
Not me. Like that he doesn't take a salary, but outside of that he costs more.
Also don't like deficit spending .
 
Wait, so have we crossed the line where it's actually encouraged for the president to peddle wares while in office?

I thought it was just one of the dozens of problematic things with this administration that get swept under the rug because of more pressing matters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

44nutman
Crime Florida trying to pass a bill to help with Trump's legal fees using tax payers taxes.
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
2K
KOPPE
KOPPE

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,431
Messages
55,490,597
Members
174,789
Latest member
Jahmaltheknight

Share this page

Back
Top