I love now that he's Prez-elect, he's back to having a global business EMPIRE...

[PaceAdvantage]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

During the election cycle, all we heard about is what a failure he was business-wise...bankruptcies galore...

But now that he's President-elect, he suddenly has a worldwide EMPIRE that is going to cause lots of conflicts of interest... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Really guys?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/a-scramble-to-assess-the-dangers-of-president-elects-global-business-empire/2016/11/20/1bbdc2a2-ad18-11e6-a31b-4b6397e625d0_story.html

Make up your mind.

[JustRalph]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

During the election cycle, all we heard about is what a failure he was business-wise...bankruptcies galore...

But now that he's President-elect, he suddenly has a worldwide EMPIRE that is going to cause lots of conflicts of interest... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Really guys?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/a-scramble-to-assess-the-dangers-of-president-elects-global-business-empire/2016/11/20/1bbdc2a2-ad18-11e6-a31b-4b6397e625d0_story.html

Make up your mind.

Great point!

[PaceAdvantage]

I know duplicity is synonymous with "left-wing Democrat," but every once in a while, even they surprise me with this bullshit, so I am compelled to call them out on it...it should be obvious to even the most distracted observer.

[lamboguy]

at least Trump has billions of reasons to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. Obama was the only president in the history of our country that had us at war every day he was in office. Hillary would have been worse.

when you are at war no one wins

[NJ Stinks]

at least Trump has billions of reasons to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. Obama was the only president in the history of our country that had us at war every day he was in office. Hillary would have been worse.

when you are at war no one wins

I know cheap shots at Obama are in the OT-General Manual but even the dumbest SOB here realizes Obama did not get us into any wars. :rolleyes:

[thaskalos]

I know duplicity is synonymous with "left-wing Democrat," but every once in a while, even they surprise me with this bullshit, so I am compelled to call them out on it...it should be obvious to even the most distracted observer.

Did you really read the link that you attached to this thread? Because this "conflict-of-interest" was expressed not only by the "left-wing Democrats"...but also by some key "right-wing Republicans", as well as by Trump himself.

Do YOU see a conflict-of-interest here?

[PaceAdvantage]

Did you really read the link that you attached to this thread? Because this "conflict-of-interest" was expressed not only by the "left-wing Democrats"...but also by some key "right-wing Republicans", as well as by Trump himself.

Do YOU see a conflict-of-interest here?No...I was lead to believe all during the campaign that Trump wasn't some international business success, but a failed huckster who goes bankrupt with alarming frequency.

NOW that the campaign is over and they can spin it the other way, he is suddenly a man in control of a global EMPIRE vulnerable to an astounding number of conflicts of interest because of his vast holdings...

So which is it Gus? Is he a failed huckster or an EMPIRE MAKER?

Even you have to see my point here, no matter how much you try not to.

[EasyGoer89]

I know cheap shots at Obama are in the OT-General Manual but even the dumbest SOB here realizes Obama did not get us into any wars. :rolleyes:

What do OJ Simpson and Barack HUSSEIN Obama have in common?

They're both searching for the 'real killers' on the golf course!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ad3muFUM4r0

[elysiantraveller]

What are you talking about...?

The guy owns business... has the ability to write policy...

A conflict of interest concern is legitimate. Your attempt at pointing out hypocrisy here is pretty lousy...

Chrysler is a fairly crappy company under crappy management... had he owned Chrysler the same concerns would exist.

Your point?

[thaskalos]

No...I was lead to believe all during the campaign that Trump wasn't some international business success, but a failed huckster who goes bankrupt with alarming frequency.

NOW that the campaign is over and they can spin it the other way, he is suddenly a man in control of a global EMPIRE vulnerable to an astounding number of conflicts of interest because of his vast holdings...

So which is it Gus? Is he a failed huckster or an EMPIRE MAKER?

Even you have to see my point here, no matter how much you try not to.

No, Mike...try as I might, I DON'T see the point that you are trying to make here. You attached this link here without even READING it...thinking that it was some "left-wing expose" into Trump's world-wide business dealings. Had you bothered to read your own link, you would have discovered that this "conflict-of-interest" was pointed out by Richard Painter, chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush...Trevor Potter, a former Federal Election Commission chairman and general counsel for George H.W. Bush...Stephen K. Bannon, one of Trump's key advisers...as well as other ethics advisers and lawyers from BOTH political parties. Even Trump HIMSELF admitted in the article that a "conflict-of-interest" could be perceived with some of his foreign business dealings.

This "conflict-of-interest" story can HARDLY be blamed on the "left-wing Democrats", as you originally asserted...and you would have known this if you had bothered to read your own LINK, before you posted it.

[lamboguy]

I know cheap shots at Obama are in the OT-General Manual but even the dumbest SOB here realizes Obama did not get us into any wars. :rolleyes:i don't think Syria and Libya had action before Obama got in.

[incoming]

I know cheap shots at Obama are in the OT-General Manual but even the dumbest SOB here realizes Obama did not get us into any wars. :rolleyes:

It is hard to believe that President Obama being the poster child for "Affirmative Action," is still being defended after the Democrat Party has taking a beat down in 3 straight elections. :lol: :ThmbUp:

[PaceAdvantage]

No, Mike...try as I might, I DON'T see the point that you are trying to make here. You attached this link here without even READING it...thinking that it was some "left-wing expose" into Trump's world-wide business dealings. Had you bothered to read your own link, you would have discovered that this "conflict-of-interest" was pointed out by Richard Painter, chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush...Trevor Potter, a former Federal Election Commission chairman and general counsel for George H.W. Bush...Stephen K. Bannon, one of Trump's key advisers...as well as other ethics advisers and lawyers from BOTH political parties. Even Trump HIMSELF admitted in the article that a "conflict-of-interest" could be perceived with some of his foreign business dealings.

This "conflict-of-interest" story can HARDLY be blamed on the "left-wing Democrats", as you originally asserted...and you would have known this if you had bothered to read your own LINK, before you posted it.I don't care where the criticism comes from. Are you saying I am unaware that PLENTY of people on the right, including the NEVER TRUMP movement, is Republican based? I don't care.

The point is crystal clear, and if you chose to ignore it, then so be it.

WHAT IS TRUMP? The con-man, huckster, fraud, loser who goes bankrupt, or the guy with a GLOBAL EMPIRE (as termed by his "PALS" at the Washington Post, the same paper that made it their sole endeavor to eviscerate Trump during the campaign)?

THAT IS A NEWS ARTICLE, not an opinion piece I posted from the WaPo. The headline SCREAMS duplicity from the very same paper that had as its mission to DESTROY Trump.

THAT is my POINT.

[PaceAdvantage]

What are you talking about...?

The guy owns business... has the ability to write policy...

A conflict of interest concern is legitimate. Your attempt at pointing out hypocrisy here is pretty lousy...

Chrysler is a fairly crappy company under crappy management... had he owned Chrysler the same concerns would exist.

Your point?You're not that clueless, but apparently, like thaskalos, you'll never admit to something staring you squaw in the face.

[PaceAdvantage]

Maybe I can water it down so that even thaskalos and elysian get it....

When it suits the Washington Post and Trump critics, he's a huckster fraud con-man loser who is bankrupt. And when it suits them he magically becomes a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE.

Get the point now?

[thaskalos]

Maybe I can water it down so that even thaskalos and elysian get it....

When it suits the Washington Post and Trump critics, he's a huckster fraud con-man loser who is bankrupt. And when it suits them he magically becomes a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE.

Get the point now?

Read your own links first...and THEN try to "water things down" so others could understand you. You HAVE no "point"...and your argument here deserves no response. When Trump himself, and his own key adviser, see a "conflict-of-interest"...but you DON'T...then you can't very well expect us to listen to YOU.

[PaceAdvantage]

Read your own links first...and THEN try to "water things down" so others could understand you. You HAVE no "point"...and your argument here deserves no response. When Trump himself, and his own key adviser, see a "conflict-of-interest"...but you DON'T...then you can't very well expect us to listen to YOU.Wow, you still don't get it.

It's not about conflicts of interest. He may very well have many.

It's about the fact that his critics (and the Washington Post) are now admitting Trump does in fact have a GLOBAL EMPIRE (worthy of conflicts of interest), that he is NOT the fraud businessman, con-man, bankrupt huckster they tried to make him out to be during the campaign. You can't very well have all these potential conflicts of interest if you're a bankrupt loser.

I'll keep ramming it down your throat as long as you're willing to take it. No way I give in on this issue. Keep it coming.

[thaskalos]

Wow, you still don't get it.

It's not about conflicts of interest. He may very well have many.

It's about the fact that his critics (and the Washington Post) are now admitting Trump does in fact have a GLOBAL EMPIRE (worthy of conflicts of interest), that he is NOT the fraud businessman, con-man, bankrupt huckster they tried to make him out to be during the campaign. You can't very well have all these potential conflicts of interest if you're a bankrupt loser.

I'll keep ramming it down your throat as long as you're willing to take it until you cry for mercy. No way I give on this issue. Keep it coming.

Get your story straight, Mike. I asked you if you saw a "conflict-of-interest" here...and in your post #7, you answered "NO". And now you answer "YES".

And you think that I will continue discussing this with you? I may just as well go over to the "Religion" thread...and discuss things with Boxcar. :faint:

[wisconsin]

Mike, I get it. It's not hard at all. The guy was going to bankrupt America just like his "failed" businesses. Now, all of a sudden, he has a "Global Empire". What happened...

It's utterly amazing the way the spinning works :bang:

[PaceAdvantage]

Mike, I get it. It's not hard at all. The guy was going to bankrupt America just like his "failed" businesses. Now, all of a sudden, he has a "Global Empire". What happened...

It's utterly amazing the way the spinning works :bang:Exactly, but for some reason, guys like thaskalos and elysian think I'm talking about the conflicts of interest angle.

It's pretty clear from my initial post and THREAD TITLE exactly what I'm talking about.

[LottaKash]

When Trump himself, and his own key adviser, see a "conflict-of-interest

Now that Trump is "the" President Elect, what do suggest Trump do with his holdings to address this conflict ?...

[PaceAdvantage]

Get your story straight, Mike. I asked you if you saw a "conflict-of-interest" here...and in your post #7, you answered "NO". And now you answer "YES".

And you think that I will continue discussing this with you? I may just as well go over to the "Religion" thread...and discuss things with Boxcar. :faint:My story was straight from my first post and thread title. It's you who chose to spin it into another direction.

I've already said I don't care whether there are conflicts of interest or not. Maybe there are, maybe there aren't. It doesn't matter for the purposes of this thread, so why do you keep harping on it?

Try to address the point of the thread, or bow out gracefully with a simple "You know, you're right."

[thaskalos]

Exactly, but for some reason, guys like thaskalos and elysian think I'm talking about the conflicts of interest angle.

It's pretty clear from my initial post and THREAD TITLE exactly what I'm talking about.

Maybe your point would be better understood if you could supply us with a Washington Post link where it was asserted that Donald Trump was a financial FAILURE...who was going to "bankrupt" America, as he had done to his other "businesses". But READ that next link...before you post it.

[thaskalos]

Now that Trump is "the" President Elect, what do suggest Trump do with his holdings to address this conflict ?...

If you read the link that Mike provided for us here...you will see that Trump is working on such a solution, as we speak. This article isn't the "left-wing smear job" that Mike tries to paint it as.

[AndyC]

Maybe your point would be better understood if you could supply us with a Washington Post link where it was asserted that Donald Trump was a financial FAILURE...who was going to "bankrupt" America, as he had done to his other "businesses". But READ that next link...before you post it.

Do you really need a link? If you watched the debates it was a front and center talking point of Hillary Clinton.

[thaskalos]

Do you really need a link? If you watched the debates it was a front and center talking point of Hillary Clinton.

Did Hillary speak for the Washington Post?

[thaskalos]

My story was straight from my first post and thread title. It's you who chose to spin it into another direction.

I've already said I don't care whether there are conflicts of interest or not. Maybe there are, maybe there aren't. It doesn't matter for the purposes of this thread, so why do you keep harping on it?

Try to address the point of the thread, or bow out gracefully with a simple "You know, you're right."

"DUPLICITY!"...you cried out in your post #3.

SHOW ME this "duplicity", Mike! The Washington Post refers to a Trump "Global business empire" in this article. Can you show us where they have also said that Trump DOESN'T have notable business interests in other countries? Has the Washington Post really painted Trump as the "conman, huckster, fraud, loser" that you say they've done?

Maybe they have...and I haven't seen it. Could you SHOW me?

[PaceAdvantage]

Maybe your point would be better understood if you could supply us with a Washington Post link where it was asserted that Donald Trump was a financial FAILURE...who was going to "bankrupt" America, as he had done to his other "businesses". But READ that next link...before you post it.Here's one right off the top of a simple search:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/donald-trumps-most-enduring--and-unbefitting--trait/2016/07/15/f5684848-488b-11e6-acbc-4d4870a079da_story.html

"He ended up presiding over six — count ’em, six — bankruptcies because he kept making business decisions with his gut rather than with his brain.

Trump’s less-than-stellar business history has been well documented by The Washington Post and other newspapers, magazines and online publications, as has his lack of self-control in his personal life."

"Because I specialize in writing about financial excesses and am used to dealing with people who engage in fantasy finance, I realized fairly early in the game that Trump’s real estate and casino empire was doomed."

BTW, the above link is NOT an op-ed, which should really make you think. It comes from the very same BUSINESS section of the WaPo as the piece that inspired the creation of this thread.

Name me one person with a "less than stellar business history" that at the same time presides over a "GLOBAL BUSINESS EMPIRE" :rolleyes:

[thaskalos]

Here's one right off the top of a simple search:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/donald-trumps-most-enduring--and-unbefitting--trait/2016/07/15/f5684848-488b-11e6-acbc-4d4870a079da_story.html

"He ended up presiding over six — count ’em, six — bankruptcies because he kept making business decisions with his gut rather than with his brain.

Trump’s less-than-stellar business history has been well documented by The Washington Post and other newspapers, magazines and online publications, as has his lack of self-control in his personal life."

"Because I specialize in writing about financial excesses and am used to dealing with people who engage in fantasy finance, I realized fairly early in the game that Trump’s real estate and casino empire was doomed."

BTW, the above link is NOT an op-ed, which should really make you think.

And this constitutes "Duplicity"...when it's compared with the article heading this thread?

You are acting as if the Washington Post has just NOW discovered that the Trump business empire spreads out in other countries, Mike. EVERYBODY knew that the man is a multi-billionaire, with global business interests. And NO ONE ever called him a "failed loser". Even the BILLIONAIRES are criticized for their business practices and their "failures"...especially when they decide to run for public office. A person can be called both, a successful billionaire, AND a controversial businessman...and there needn't be any "duplicity" involved.

[PaceAdvantage]

And this constitutes "Duplicity"...when it's compared with the article heading this thread?

You are acting as if the Washington Post has just NOW discovered that the Trump business empire spreads out in other countries, Mike. EVERYBODY knew that the man is a multi-billionaire, with global business interests. And NO ONE ever called him a "failed loser". Even the BILLIONAIRES are criticized for their failures...especially when they decide to run for public office. A person can be both, a successful billionaire, AND a controversial businessman...and there needn't be any "duplicity" involved.No one ever called him a failed loser? OK then. I guess you're right. We have nothing further to discuss on this point. We are living on two different planets when it comes to this.

[elysiantraveller]

Here's one right off the top of a simple search:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/donald-trumps-most-enduring--and-unbefitting--trait/2016/07/15/f5684848-488b-11e6-acbc-4d4870a079da_story.html

"He ended up presiding over six — count ’em, six — bankruptcies because he kept making business decisions with his gut rather than with his brain.

Trump’s less-than-stellar business history has been well documented by The Washington Post and other newspapers, magazines and online publications, as has his lack of self-control in his personal life."

"Because I specialize in writing about financial excesses and am used to dealing with people who engage in fantasy finance, I realized fairly early in the game that Trump’s real estate and casino empire was doomed."

BTW, the above link is NOT an op-ed, which should really make you think. It comes from the very same BUSINESS section of the WaPo as the piece that inspired the creation of this thread.

Name me one person with a "less than stellar business history" that at the same time presides over a "GLOBAL BUSINESS EMPIRE" :rolleyes:

So there isn't or is a conflict of interest?

6 Bankruptcies could be considered "less than stellar."

The fact that you have extensive international real estate holdings could be considered a "global business empire."

And I thought liberals were the only ones waiting to be offended... ;) :faint:

[thaskalos]

No one ever called him a failed loser? OK then. I guess you're right. We have nothing further to discuss on this point. We are living on two different planets when it comes to this.

Did the WASHINGTON POST call him a "failed loser"? Who are these "left-wing Democrats" who are being "duplicitous" in this link that you posted?

[PaceAdvantage]

Did the WASHINGTON POST call him a "failed loser"? Who are these "left-wing Democrats" who are being "duplicitous" in this link that you posted?Where in my initial post did I limit the discussion to the Washington Post? I used the headline as an example.

Maybe you're right. Maybe the Washington Post was promoting Trump all along as a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE, which might make him a decent choice to tackle the few remaining economic problems the country and world faces these days.

My apologies to you. You are totally right. Nobody ever tried to make Trump out to be nothing but a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

This is sad thaskalos...really sad...you're sitting here actually trying to defend the position that Trump wasn't portrayed as something more akin to a business failure rather than a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE (not my words, Washington Post's words) during the campaign when it suited them. And now, when it suits them and the election is over, they portray him as a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE and thus plenty of potential CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

I know you get the point...I know you do...and you've never been beholden to any one political party that much that you would ignore the very simple point being made...who knew you were as stubborn as mostpost?

[Zydeco]

I get the Washington Post. When I saw that headline I busted out laughing. It was right above the fold, so it couldn't be missed.

[reckless]

Did Hillary speak for the Washington Post?

No she doesn't speak for The Washington Post, but The Washington Post did speak for Hillary, in case you never noticed.

(And Gus, considering all the Hillary emails produced through WikiLeaks, it is very safe to assume that Hillary did in fact speak for media empires such as WPO, CNN, and the other now-discredited and ridiculed mainstream media outlets.)

[thaskalos]

Where in my initial post did I limit the discussion to the Washington Post? I used the headline as an example.

Maybe you're right. Maybe the Washington Post was promoting Trump all along as a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE, which might make him a decent choice to tackle the few remaining economic problems the country and world faces these days.

My apologies to you. You are totally right. Nobody ever tried to make Trump out to be nothing but a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

This is sad thaskalos...really sad...you're sitting here actually trying to defend the position that Trump wasn't portrayed as something more akin to a business failure rather than a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE (not my words, Washington Post's words) during the campaign when it suited them. And now, when it suits them and the election is over, they portray him as a man with a GLOBAL EMPIRE and thus plenty of potential CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

I know you get the point...I know you do...and you've never been beholden to any one political party that much that you would ignore the very simple point being made...who knew you were as stubborn as mostpost?

Mike...I don't come to the off-topics often, and when I do, I don't try to intentionally annoy people. No...I DON'T think that Trump was widely portrayed as a "business failure". He was criticized as a PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, and it was pointed out that there is no "bankruptcy protection" when you are leading a COUNTRY, as there is when leading a BUSINESS...but I honestly never saw a "responsible" news source calling Trump a "failed huckster", or a "loser".

You presented this Washington Post article...but this article isn't the "left-wing hit piece" that you originally characterized it as. And the concerns that this article focuses on are LEGITIMATE...and have been voiced by BOTH political parties. And you glossed over these legitimate concerns, so you could focus on some "duplicity"...which I don't think is visible here. Whom are you blaming for this article that you've linked...and WHO is being duplicitous here?

I agree with you on one point, though. It IS sad...REALLY sad...that interacting here is the best that I can do on a quiet Monday afternoon. Clearly...I should find better things to do with my time.

[PaceAdvantage]

You presented this Washington Post article...but this article isn't the "left-wing hit piece" that you originally characterized it as.Sigh. I never characterized it as a left-wing hit piece.

I found it hilarious that Trump was being referred to as having a GLOBAL EMPIRE now that it suits them to do so, so that they can go after him for conflicts of interest.

I defy you to point out any time DURING the campaign that the Washington Post, or any other mainstream newspaper, referred to Trump having a GLOBAL EMPIRE.

They didn't. Because it would paint Trump in a somewhat positive light.

Now that they have no reason to try and assassinate Trump's business accomplishments, but instead turn those accomplishments against him because of potential conflicts, they now refer to him as having a GLOBAL EMPIRE.

THIS is the definition of DUPLICITY: the practice of pretending to do or think one thing while really doing or thinking something different. Either they pretended he was some poor business man when it suited them, or are now pretending he has some sort of GLOBAL EMPIRE when it now suits them, thus my statement at the end of the first post in this thread: "MAKE UP YOUR MIND."

HE CAN'T BE BOTH

I'm stunned we're still trying to get at the actual point of my thread.

But you win...I DO give up trying, which I said I wasn't going to do...

[davew]

shocking the press never ragged on the Clinton Foundation world corruption empire -

[Tom]

All that chest pounding by some here about his failings.......looks like not only is he a huge success of a business man, he is a huge success as a politician. Why. he destroyed the DNC - they aren't even a national party any more. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I am eating so much more popcorn these days....... :kiss:

[fast4522]

I am eating so much more popcorn these days....... :kiss:

High sugar impact food, previously my snack of choice. :bang:

[dartman51]

WaPo's FAVORITE topic. DONALD TRUMP BANKRUPTCIES.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/donald-trumps-most-enduring--and-unbefitting--trait/2016/07/15/f5684848-488b-11e6-acbc-4d4870a079da_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trumps-tax-mystery-points-toward-the-dealings-around-his-rst-bankruptcies/2016/10/03/6e217ba4-8975-11e6-bff0-d53f592f176e_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/what-trump-didnt-say-about-his-four-big-business-bankruptcies/2015/08/07/bc054e64-3d12-11e5-9c2d-ed991d848c48_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-files-for-moral-bankruptcy/2016/10/10/d6b83b10-8f17-11e6-9c85-ac42097b8cc0_story.html?utm_term=.884259a1e15d

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/trumps-bad-bet-how-too-much-debt-drove-his-biggest-casino-aground/2016/01/18/f67cedc2-9ac8-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

[fast4522]

WaPo's FAVORITE topic. DONALD TRUMP BANKRUPTCIES.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/donald-trumps-most-enduring--and-unbefitting--trait/2016/07/15/f5684848-488b-11e6-acbc-4d4870a079da_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trumps-tax-mystery-points-toward-the-dealings-around-his-rst-bankruptcies/2016/10/03/6e217ba4-8975-11e6-bff0-d53f592f176e_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/what-trump-didnt-say-about-his-four-big-business-bankruptcies/2015/08/07/bc054e64-3d12-11e5-9c2d-ed991d848c48_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-files-for-moral-bankruptcy/2016/10/10/d6b83b10-8f17-11e6-9c85-ac42097b8cc0_story.html?utm_term=.884259a1e15d

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/trumps-bad-bet-how-too-much-debt-drove-his-biggest-casino-aground/2016/01/18/f67cedc2-9ac8-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

The real question is. . . . . . . Who gives a shit? :lol:

[Parkview_Pirate]

... No...I DON'T think that Trump was widely portrayed as a "business failure".

I would disagree with this. Many Dems, including the one that came knocking on my door to vote for Hillary ( :D ), portrayed Trump as a cheating and shady crook - Hillary called him out in the debates for "stiffing" some of his sub-contractors.

Personally, I never understood that argument. The guy built a business empire, which is successful, and simply used the rules of business to declare bankruptcy when needed. Compared to Hillary's incredibly abysmal track record of failure of 30+ years of hanging on Bill's coattails and playing the woman card, it couldn't have made for a more stark contrast.

[EasyGoer89]

Mike...I don't come to the off-topics often, and when I do, I don't try to intentionally annoy people. No...I DON'T think that Trump was widely portrayed as a "business failure". He was criticized as a PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, and it was pointed out that there is no "bankruptcy protection" when you are leading a COUNTRY, as there is when leading a BUSINESS...but I honestly never saw a "responsible" news source calling Trump a "failed huckster", or a "loser".

You presented this Washington Post article...but this article isn't the "left-wing hit piece" that you originally characterized it as. And the concerns that this article focuses on are LEGITIMATE...and have been voiced by BOTH political parties. And you glossed over these legitimate concerns, so you could focus on some "duplicity"...which I don't think is visible here. Whom are you blaming for this article that you've linked...and WHO is being duplicitous here?

I agree with you on one point, though. It IS sad...REALLY sad...that interacting here is the best that I can do on a quiet Monday afternoon. Clearly...I should find better things to do with my time.

The narrative was that Trump was the biggest con man, loser, buffoon in America. They kept talking about his bankruptcies and portraying him as an ass clown who has no talent and only got rich because he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. This is why we have people in America who bought into these lies freaking out at his win. Every news source called him these things and it was on a daily basis, they didn't come up for air once.

[pandy]

Good point Mike. It's not just the media, I have friends who insisted that Trump was a failed real estate man turned reality tv star and they constantly mentioned his 5 individual business bankruptcies, totally ignoring the fact that he is actually one of the most successful men in the world.

That being said, he will have to separate himself from his businesses because of conflict of interests, but Pace is right.

Trump's video message last night was smart, go right to the people. Thousands of people posted comments on Facebook and said things like "great idea, bypass the dishonest media". The biased media no longer has the clout it once did.

[JustRalph]

I read somewhere that Trumps holdings include 550 businesses in 14 countries. Five filed bankruptcy. Some were considered strategic for tax purposes.

Pretty good average?

[barahona44]

I read somewhere that Trumps holdings include 550 businesses in 14 countries. Five filed bankruptcy. Some were considered strategic for tax purposes.

Pretty good average?
Could you name other prominent wealthy people/business entities with 5 bankruptcies?.If it's such a great strategy, why isn't it used all the time by the wealthy?

As much as some of you think that Trump craps gold, where every negative is a virtue, sometimes crap is just crap.

[Tom]

High sugar impact food, previously my snack of choice. :bang:

Don't forget a pound of melted butter and a sack of salt on top of it!
MMM MMMM MMMM :kiss:

[barahona44]

Could you name other prominent wealthy people/business entities with 5 bankruptcies?.If it's such a great strategy, why isn't it used all the time by the wealthy?

As much as some of you think that Trump craps gold, where every negative is a virtue, sometimes crap is just crap.
Never let it be said I refused to do research for my PA brethren.

https://www.affordableattorneysgroup.com/famous-bankruptcy-filers

Interesting list, some I knew, most I didn't.
No information on the numbers though.

Also, now we know why Gary Busey was on The Apprentice :)

[barahona44]

Don't forget a pound of melted butter and a sack of salt on top of it!
MMM MMMM MMMM :kiss:
Hope you have 911 on speed dial. :)

[pandy]

Never let it be said I refused to do research for my PA brethren.

https://www.affordableattorneysgroup.com/famous-bankruptcy-filers

Interesting list, some I knew, most I didn't.
No information on the numbers though.

Also, now we know why Gary Busey was on The Apprentice :)

Excellent post.

[Tom]

Abraham Lincoln - 16th president of the Unites States- twice filed bankruptcy

Wow, can you imagine what might have happened if HE had been elected president?

Oh, wait.
He was.

If filing for bankruptcy disqualified a man from serving as president, we might still own slaves today.

[Greyfox]

Wow, can you imagine what might have happened if HE had been elected president?


Maybe someone would have shot him?

[JustRalph]

Could you name other prominent wealthy people/business entities with 5 bankruptcies?.If it's such a great strategy, why isn't it used all the time by the wealthy?

As much as some of you think that Trump craps gold, where every negative is a virtue, sometimes crap is just crap.

Just a quick Google search

https://www.fastupfront.com/blog/business/21-famous-corporate-bankruptcies-from-2001-2009/

More germane
http://www.levittslafkes.com/Articles/Famous-People-Who-Have-Filed-Bankruptcy.shtml

I walked away and came back......my list might be redundant

[barahona44]

5 times?
That is what concerns me, the number.Did he keep making the same mistakes over and over?
Not listen to advice?Let his ego get in the way?

One bankruptcy could be a good learning experience; five shows an unwillingness to learn from that experience.

[AndyC]

5 times?
That is what concerns me, the number.Did he keep making the same mistakes over and over?
Not listen to advice?Let his ego get in the way?

One bankruptcy could be a good learning experience; five shows an unwillingness to learn from that experience.

All bankruptcies are not created equal. Hence the various chapters in the bankruptcy code. A company can actually be profitable and need bankruptcy protection.

[Greyfox]

One bankruptcy could be a good learning experience; five shows an unwillingness to learn from that experience.

Nonsense.
Trump has assets in 25 countries in hundreds of businesses.
Five times is miniscule in that situation.
The Trump name is a franchise.
Most franchises have outlets that fail in some locations.
By your comments, it's evident that you have no or only limited experience in business.
What you are saying might apply to some Mom and Pop store owners, who fail and start up again.
But in a massive holding situation such as Trump is engaged in, one would be moronic to expect all of his businesses to succeed.
Trump knows that, but you don't seem to.

[barahona44]

Nonsense.
Trump has assets in 25 countries in hundreds of businesses.
Five times is miniscule in that situation.
The Trump name is a franchise.
Most franchises have outlets that fail in some locations.
By your comments, it's evident that you have no or only limited experience in business.
What you are saying might apply to some Mom and Pop store owners, who fail and start up again.
But in a massive holding situation such as Trump is engaged in, one would be moronic to expect all of his businesses to succeed.
Trump knows that, but you don't seem to.
My, my such anger.
Do you need a safe space?
Complete with "Art of the Deal" coloring books? :D

Have a blessed day.

[Greyfox]

My, my such anger.
Do you need a safe space?
Complete with "Art of the Deal" coloring books? :D

Have a blessed day.

Anger? Shirley you jest. :lol:
Just pointing out what is obvious to anyone who knows anything about large business enterprises.

[elysiantraveller]

Nonsense.
Trump has assets in 25 countries in hundreds of businesses.
Five times is miniscule in that situation.
The Trump name is a franchise.
Most franchises have outlets that fail in some locations.
By your comments, it's evident that you have no or only limited experience in business.
What you are saying might apply to some Mom and Pop store owners, who fail and start up again.
But in a massive holding situation such as Trump is engaged in, one would be moronic to expect all of his businesses to succeed.
Trump knows that, but you don't seem to.

You are also mitigating the scope of those 5 times...

You don't get to have that both ways with your 515 companies and only 5 times...

Those were catastrophic failures that were predicted by many at the time to be doomed but Trump chugged right along.

Trump has built a lot of "YUGE" things and I'll give him that but most of those resulted in "YUGE" bankruptcy protection as well.

[PaceAdvantage]

So are you saying the Washington Post is lying again about Trump with its "Global Empire" headline?

So he's both a fraud con-man huckster and a man with a Global Empire at the same time?

Interesting...I thought the two were mutually exclusive, but apparently, they can co-exist inside the same host.

[elysiantraveller]

So are you saying the Washington Post is lying again about Trump with its "Global Empire" headline?

So he's both a fraud con-man huckster and a man with a Global Empire at the same time?

Interesting...I thought the two were mutually exclusive, but apparently, they can co-exist inside the same host.

This directed at me?

I'm just saying he only declared 5x out of 515 companies is EXTREMELY misleading. Those were his largest business ventures to date and he ended up having to forfeit ownership percentages in most of those through bankruptcy protection.

I never said "con man" but I also never said he was some sort of business dynamo... which he clearly isn't.

[PaceAdvantage]

This directed at me?

I'm just saying he only declared 5x out of 515 companies is EXTREMELY misleading. Those were his largest business ventures to date and he ended up having to forfeit ownership percentages in most of those through bankruptcy protection.

I never said "con man" but I also never said he was some sort of business dynamo... which he clearly isn't.Yes, directed at you...although I know the reply jumped to the next page.

Anyway, you yourself in your last reply typed "most of those [huge things Trump built] resulted in "YUGE" bankruptcy protection as well"

This is patently false. But goes with the narrative I wrote above about Trump being nothing more than a con man and a fraud/huckster. You chose more words with which to describe, but you essentially said the same thing, did you not?

Which means the Washington Post is lying again (or was lying before), to fit the new post-election agenda, which was kind of the point of this thread to begin with.

[classhandicapper]

Anyone that engages in active business is going to have some bankruptcies. It's built into their projections. In other words, if you start 10 companies, 4 go bankrupt, 4 have mild success, and 2 are a grand slam, your return on all the invested capital will be "X%". If "X%" is good enough, it makes sense to suffer some bankruptcies to get the grand slams. If x% is very good, you are brilliant despite 4 bankruptcies.

[elysiantraveller]

Yes, directed at you...although I know the reply jumped to the next page.

Anyway, you yourself in your last reply typed "most of those [huge things Trump built] resulted in "YUGE" bankruptcy protection as well"

This is patently false. But goes with the narrative I wrote above about Trump being nothing more than a con man and a fraud/huckster. You chose more words with which to describe, but you essentially said the same thing, did you not?

Which means the Washington Post is lying again (or was lying before), to fit the new post-election agenda, which was kind of the point of this thread to begin with.

I think you're trying to parse here...

Most of Trump's largest venture's have resulted in him seeking bankruptcy protection. This is a well known fact. I don't think it means the man is incompetent or a "con artist"... I've never said those things... though Trump U certainly is suspect.

I've been in sales for a long time and I've seen some incredible salesmen at work. I'm very envious of some of them and Trump might possibly be one of the greatest of all time. Doesn't mean they are necessarily business savvy though... like I said I don't think the man is inept in the world of business but I also don't think he is some sort of dynamo.

I feel his track record backs up that claim quite well.

A simple comparison between two well-knowns...

Sales:
Trump > Romney (Its not even close)

Business Savvy:
Romney > Trump (Its not even close)

[LottaKash]

Anyone that engages in active business is going to have some bankruptcies. It's built into their projections. In other words, if you start 10 companies, 4 go bankrupt, 4 have mild success, and 2 are a grand slam, your return on all the invested capital will be "X%". If "X%" is good enough, it makes sense to suffer some bankruptcies to get the grand slams. If x% is very good, you are brilliant despite 4 bankruptcies.

Sounds a bit like wagering on horses, I'd say... :cool:

[elysiantraveller]

Anyone that engages in active business is going to have some bankruptcies. It's built into their projections. In other words, if you start 10 companies, 4 go bankrupt, 4 have mild success, and 2 are a grand slam, your return on all the invested capital will be "X%". If "X%" is good enough, it makes sense to suffer some bankruptcies to get the grand slams. If x% is very good, you are brilliant despite 4 bankruptcies.

Trump's return hasn't been that stellar though... that's also a well documented fact.

[Tom]

The best home run hitters have the most strike outs.
You swing and either hit glory or miss.

LIke you are doing...tripling down and striking out each time. :lol:

Life goes on.

[classhandicapper]

Trump's return hasn't been that stellar though... that's also a well documented fact.

I have no idea.

Does anyone know what he's worth? :lol:

[fast4522]

Trump's return hasn't been that stellar though... that's also a well documented fact.


Your facts are as useful as hcap's, you should take a hint that not only is the horse dead but has been removed from the track.

[AndyC]

Trump's return hasn't been that stellar though... that's also a well documented fact.

Point me to the documents so that I can see what his return has been.

[AndyC]

You are also mitigating the scope of those 5 times...

You don't get to have that both ways with your 515 companies and only 5 times...

Those were catastrophic failures that were predicted by many at the time to be doomed but Trump chugged right along.

Trump has built a lot of "YUGE" things and I'll give him that but most of those resulted in "YUGE" bankruptcy protection as well.

If Trump's businesses were "catastrophic failures" don't you think that would have resulted in a Chapter 7 filing? If he were a poor businessman that would certainly have been the case. Instead he found a way to keep the businesses afloat and operational.

[reckless]

I have no idea.

Does anyone know what he's worth? :lol:

Trump claims billions. His enemies in the media say he's a loser, a failure, and most certainly not as rich as he claims.

I say, who really cares what Trump's worth is.

But I do ask this: why does the media get bent out of shape about Trump's net worth when they never, ever question ...

(1) That the Clintons left the White House in 2000, dead broke, yet are worth hundreds of millions today, 15 years later. How did that happen? And, ...

(2), Barack Obama never held a real private sector job. His career has always been in government of some sort, and every one of his jobs had a government-mandated and limited pay scale. So, then, how did the Obamas become millionaires while also owning homes in an exclusive area of Washington DC and in the toniest, ritziest neighborhood of Chicago?

Come on media, citizens need to know all this, which is far more serious and important than knowing what President Donald Trump's net worth is.

Since the media is deliberately ignorant, I'll ask our liberal leaning friends on PA about all this... what gives?

[EasyGoer89]

Trump claims billions. His enemies in the media say he's a loser, a failure, and most certainly not as rich as he claims.

I say, who really cares what Trump's worth is.

But I do ask this: why does the media get bent out of shape about Trump's net worth when they never, ever question ...

(1) That the Clintons left the White House in 2000, dead broke, yet are worth hundreds of millions today, 15 years later. How did that happen? And, ...

(2), Barack Obama never held a real private sector job. His career has always been in government of some sort, and every one of his jobs had a government-mandated and limited pay scale. So, then, how did the Obamas become millionaires while also owning homes in an exclusive area of Washington DC and in the toniest, ritziest neighborhood of Chicago?

Come on media, citizens need to know all this, which is far more serious and important than knowing what President Donald Trump's net worth is.

Since the media is deliberately ignorant, I'll ask our liberal leaning friends on PA about all this... what gives?

Certainly a double standard there's 50 things the clintons have done and said that never get mentioned in the media but if trump did them there would be international incidents. We have an international situation because trump was 'Unpresidential' by tweeting Hamilton stuff but Hillary is not and was not held to anything close to the same standard. People are questioning trumps Wealth and taxes but not a peep about these mysterious tens of millions that have showed up in Clinton bank accounts. Anyone who believes the clintons net worth is in the 200 mil range and doesn't think they have possibly billions hiding in other countries is really naive. She and Bill might have stolen a BILLION and who is to say that the money Obama sent on the airplane might have some of that sneak back into his 'offshore' accounts at some point down the line.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Trump claims billions. His enemies in the media say he's a loser, a failure, and most certainly not as rich as he claims.

I say, who really cares what Trump's worth is.

But I do ask this: why does the media get bent out of shape about Trump's net worth when they never, ever question ...

(1) That the Clintons left the White House in 2000, dead broke, yet are worth hundreds of millions today, 15 years later. How did that happen? And, ...

(2), Barack Obama never held a real private sector job. His career has always been in government of some sort, and every one of his jobs had a government-mandated and limited pay scale. So, then, how did the Obamas become millionaires while also owning homes in an exclusive area of Washington DC and in the toniest, ritziest neighborhood of Chicago?

Come on media, citizens need to know all this, which is far more serious and important than knowing what President Donald Trump's net worth is.

Since the media is deliberately ignorant, I'll ask our liberal leaning friends on PA about all this... what gives?
The answer to this question has been public record for quite a while. Why? Obama releases all his tax returns.

Unfortunately, the answers are pretty boring. Most of the money he earned was from book sales. His books grossed almost $6 million in their highest sales year. That money was invested in mutual funds - pretty standard stuff. Ultimately, it may really irritate you to find out most of his current wealth (the high end estimate is about $10 million) is in Treasury Notes. Yes, Obama invested in America. It may also be irritating to learn he contributed his entire Nobel Prize award to charity. (yes, yes, we know he didn't deserve it).

So, he didn't get rich through the presidency, secret deals and the like. You could argue he got rich BECAUSE of the presidency. No publisher would have given him big book advances if he wasn't who he was, and he wouldn't have sold all those books if he wasn't who he was.

Sometimes people don't want to know the truth because it ruins the narrative they've developed. But really, this one has been plastered all over the internet for a decade.

[Tom]

It may also be irritating to learn he contributed his entire Nobel Prize award to charity. (yes, yes, we know he didn't deserve it).

Obviously, he didn't. That award was a joke, a farce.
He should have given away the money.