The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

Honestly, is there nobody this family won't screw over?

According to johnny's namesake:

"How Donald Trump Shifted Kids-Cancer Charity Money Into His Business

The best part about all this, according to Eric Trump, is the charity's efficiency: Because he can get his family's golf course for free and have most of the other costs donated, virtually all the money contributed will go toward helping kids with cancer. "We get to use our assets 100% free of charge," Trump tells Forbes.

That's not the case. In reviewing filings from the Eric Trump Foundation and other charities, it's clear that the course wasn't free--that the Trump Organization received payments for its use, part of more than $1.2 million that has no documented recipients past the Trump Organization. Golf charity experts say the listed expenses defy any reasonable cost justification for a one-day golf tournament.

Additionally, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which has come under previous scrutiny for self-dealing and advancing the interests of its namesake rather than those of charity, apparently used the Eric Trump Foundation to funnel $100,000 in donations into revenue for the Trump Organization.

And while donors to the Eric Trump Foundation were told their money was going to help sick kids, more than $500,000 was re-donated to other charities, many of which were connected to Trump family members or interests, including at least four groups that subsequently paid to hold golf tournaments at Trump courses.

All of this seems to defy federal tax rules and state laws that ban self-dealing and misleading donors. It also raises larger questions about the Trump family dynamics and whether Eric and his brother, Don Jr., can be truly independent of their father.

Especially since the person who specifically commanded that the for-profit Trump Organization start billing hundreds of thousands of dollars to the nonprofit Eric Trump Foundation, according to two people directly involved, was none other than the current president of the United States, Donald Trump."

Read more disgusting details: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexand ... 526e706b4a

Forbes has had a vendetta against Trump going for 30 years, so you can't trust Forbes on that.

It probably goes back to Forbes' practice of constantly lowballing Trump's net worth, and Trump noting that.

In any case, Eric Trump is now learning the truth that "No good deed goes unpunished."

Eric raised SIXTEEN MILLION DOLLARS for St Jude's, one of America's great charitable endeavors.

Result? He gets media complaints.

Really Clown. You had to dig back years and really deep to find this. Yet one indecent (not even confirmed) is the best you could do.
Lets talk about the night Killery killed 4 great Americans, lets talk about 33,000 emails she deleted, lets talk about government emails on a private unsecured server, lets talk about her selling plutonium to the Russian, lets talk about the Klintoon foundation taking bribe money from dictators, Lets talk about the criminal Ojackass and how hes created massive racism, massive division, his agenda for shredding America so he could be the Global king

Clown? Hello Clown!

You are merely delusional.

Ya know, all partisanship aside, St Jude's is a worthy entity.

The fact that Eric even tried to get donations for them would be wonderful.

But the fact that he actually got them 16 million they wouldn't otherwise have had, he deserves a lot of credit.

Meanwhile, the Clinton Foundation reigns as the largest example of public corruption in US history.

And Saint Jimbo, late of law "enforcement," didn't do one single solitary thing about that.

"Yet one indecent... is the best you could do."-namandgulfdumbfuck

Another telling Freudian slip from a conservative. :lol:


But to be fair, it might not be a 'slip'. namandgulfdumbfuck is probably just that ignorant.

Ya know, all partisanship aside, St Jude's is a worthy entity.

The fact that Eric even tried to get donations for them would be wonderful.

But the fact that he actually got them 16 million they wouldn't otherwise have had, he deserves a lot of credit.

Meanwhile, the Clinton Foundation reigns as the largest example of public corruption in US history.

And Saint Jimbo, late of law "enforcement," didn't do one single solitary thing about that.

Sure johnny, what's wrong with a guy keeping a couple million for himself, just as long as the charity gets something? That makes everything quite admirable.

The 'morals' of conservatives are revolting.

You fool. Trump trying to swindle a charity out of, as your delusional sources claim, a couple million dollars isn't worth his time. But only delusional libtards suffering from acute Trump Derangement Syndrome would believe it.

Swing and a miss for AssClown Steppinfetchit.

"Swing and a miss for AssClown Steppinfetchit."-AssClownSteppingfechit Insipid

It sure is, you dancing fool. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Loser Boy AssClown Steppinfetchit Insipid is so owned. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

See? All over it in seconds like the stink from his colostomy bag. . But kick him in the guts and he pretends it isn't there.

"a couple million dollars isn't worth his time"

LMAO.....surely you jest!

This is the thing about little turds like AssClown Steppinfetchit Insipid: if you respond to a post, it's proof you're owned, and if you DON'T respond to a post, it's proof you're owned. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
This actually makes sense to the conservative Trump-supporting mind.

But I have the ACTUAL proof about who owns whom.
When I'm not here, AssClown Steppinfetchit Insipid has no purpose to his existence. He compulsively dwells upon my puzzling (to him) absence. He sniffs around frantically searching for his master.
Eventually he is compelled to start mewling, groveling threads begging to be publicly humiliated again. When he gets no response, he spends all day returning to his threads and making whimpering comments, desperately looking for any evidence that I have returned to give him the anxiety-releasing attention he craves from me. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

OK, good dog, Loser Boy AssClown Steppinfechit. I'm here to command you to humiliate yourself again.
Dance for me, you high-strung little ankle biter. That's an order! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Then we have assclown throwing around his desperation as his party sinks to new lows ROFLMAO

If St Jude's ended up with 16 million it wouldn't have otherwise had, that's great.

I like low-cost funds, but if my return is high enough a fund with a high expense is fine.

The bottom line is the bottom line, and St Jude's got 16 million via Eric which it wouldn't otherwise have had.

Of course y'all know this already, but I just wanted to see you see it in print.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/politics/ ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting source. Jus' sayin'......

Forbes has had this long, odd vendetta against Trump.

That aside, I'd like to see the golf course used free if possible.

If not, I'd like to see a nominal fee paid.

But, setting all that aside, St Jude's is a really good charity to which I contribute myself.

If they got an extra 16 million from Eric's efforts, I applaud him.

There are many good charitable endeavors, of course, but anybody could do a whole lot worse than write a little check to that charity.

Who cares about the cost of the golf course, johnny? I think $50,000 for the course is probably reasonable.

The problem comes when the guy running the charity tells all the donors that they aren't paying for the course; that all the money goes to kids.

As soon as you tell donors that, the money belongs to the kids. If you then take money for the course, you are really taking it from the kids. You're lying and stealing.

What part of that don't conservatives understand?
They're always preaching the importance of the Ten Commandments, but then bend themselves into pretzels looking for loopholes for the Trumps.
You think it's great that the Trumps raised $16 million for St. Jude's, and that would be great if that was what happened. But what they really did was raise $17.2 million for St. Jude's and decided to only give them $16 million of it.

johnforbes would make the same vile excuse if Eric had given St. Jude's $10 million but decided to keep $7 million for his father. After all, $10 million is still better than nothing. But you're lying to generous people about where their money is going, and that's fraud.

Fucking hypocrites.

"If they got an extra 16 million from Eric's efforts, I applaud him."

That extra $2M would have been nice for St Judes too. But......who's counting, right?

FlamingFag says that the tRumpfs don't care about a paltry million$ or two. So.....what's your take on that?

You stupid drunk pedophile fuck, I'm saying Trump may have a price, we all do, but it isn't 2 mil.

No upside to a chump change swindle like that.

Hoe-lee fuck, you public school teachers are St000pid.

And yet......he DID funnel that much $$$ into the tRumpf coffers. You contradict yourself. Again.

If there's an extra 2 million that could have gone to a good charity, it woulda been nice had that happened.

Even for the Trump haters, though, it is not reasonable to suppose that a guy worth at least 5 billion could be bought or influenced for a few million.

Pause and think how much a billion is.

It seems unlikely that Trump-hating FORBES has gotten to the truth of this whole thing too, and so doubtless more info will emerge.

As to Eric, he raised 16 million for a good charity while the Clintons raised 200 million for their corrupt "charity."

So, Hillary skimming some is a crime, but Eric skimming some is heroic.

Do you not see your problem, JJ??

My preference would be that a good charity get 100 percent.

In the real world, that rarely happens.

Eric has gotten St Jude's 16 million bucks more than it would have, and he deserves a lot of credit for that because he could have been sitting in a hot tub doing nothing.

Will Democrats give him any credit?

Of course not, and they will ignore the Clinton Foundation getting 200 million bucks and giving very little to charity.

Do I want to know more about a golf course getting more than the bare minimum profit?

Yep, let's see where this goes.

You can't depend on FORBES, which has a vendetta against Trump, for neutral coverage any more than you can depend on CNN or NBC or the NY Times for neutral reporting.