Trump Admin Asks for $2.5 Billion to Fight Coronavirus ...

[kiwiman127]

Trump hit the panic button and finally requested some money.
What drove him to request money? The only reason that came out of the WH is,,,, the Coronavirus could cost Trump the election. This after almost a 2,000 point loss on Wall Street. Nothing about US citizens health, not one word. It’s all about numbers.
Read between the lines Little Trumpsters, he only cares about your vote, once that vote is casted, he could give a shit about you.
Yet you worship his ass. Amazing.

He hit the panic button, and finally requested money? Dang dood, you need to make up your mind. You must feel we should loose 2,000 people (instead of points) before getting prepared.

Dude, you seem to have issues with reading comprehension.
Little Trumpsters worship a man who wouldn’t walk ten feet to piss on you if you were on fire.
He doesn’t give a shit about you, he is using your ignorant ass. And you don’t get it,,,dude.

 

[Thinker101]

Trump hit the panic button and finally requested some money.
What drove him to request money? The only reason that came out of the WH is,,,, the Coronavirus could cost Trump the election. This after almost a 2,000 point loss on Wall Street. Nothing about US citizens health, not one word. It’s all about numbers.
Read between the lines Little Trumpsters, he only cares about your vote, once that vote is casted, he could give a shit about you.
Yet you worship his ass. Amazing.

He hit the panic button, and finally requested money? Dang dood, you need to make up your mind. You must feel we should loose 2,000 people (instead of points) before getting prepared.

Dude, you seem to have issues with reading comprehension.
Little Trumpsters worship a man who wouldn’t walk ten feet to piss on you if you were on fire.
He doesn’t give a shit about you, he is using your ignorant ass. And you don’t get it,,,dude.

Talk about reading comprehension, which is it he hit the panic button or he finally requested money, having both would make you an idiot liberal that doesn't understand the difference.

 

[iceberg]

There is no reason to believe Trump would use the funds to fight the virus instead of to use for bribes or a general slush fund for his personal gain. We all know how he used funds he collected for charity to buy a painting of himself to hang his tourist trap resort.

I hear he's planning to build a wall with it. Then march you onto the other side where you belong.

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

 

[kiwiman127]

Trump hit the panic button and finally requested some money.
What drove him to request money? The only reason that came out of the WH is,,,, the Coronavirus could cost Trump the election. This after almost a 2,000 point loss on Wall Street. Nothing about US citizens health, not one word. It’s all about numbers.
Read between the lines Little Trumpsters, he only cares about your vote, once that vote is casted, he could give a shit about you.
Yet you worship his ass. Amazing.

He hit the panic button, and finally requested money? Dang dood, you need to make up your mind. You must feel we should loose 2,000 people (instead of points) before getting prepared.

Dude, you seem to have issues with reading comprehension.
Little Trumpsters worship a man who wouldn’t walk ten feet to piss on you if you were on fire.
He doesn’t give a shit about you, he is using your ignorant ass. And you don’t get it,,,dude.

Talk about reading comprehension, which is it he hit the panic button or he finally requested money, having both would make you an idiot liberal that doesn't understand the difference.

Things seem to go over your head, quite easily.
But go ahead and keep displaying your utter ignorance. This is the result of you having your dead brained head so far up Trump’s gigantic posterior.

 

[Care4all]

Trump Admin Asks for $2.5 Billion to Fight Coronavirus ...​

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-admin-asks-congress...
3 hours ago · Democrats criticized Trump's request for being insufficient to tackle the outbreak and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer posted on Twitter that it was "too little too late." He claimed it showed Trump's "incompetence' and said legislators had seen "no sign" that the president has "any plan or urgency to deal with the spread of the coronavirus."

Comment:
This is not the time for Democrats to play politics and doomsday games. Obviously Chuckie and his Leftist sycophant's forget that Trump has done quite a bit stop and isolate the Covid-19 virus in the U.S. since China notified the world of the potential danger of a pandemic.
Rather than use this as a political club against Republicans and Trump, this situation should be an all hands on deck bipartisan effort. In the end Democrats are hurting the American people.

The Corona Virus problem has been declining for a month in China now according to the WHO, less than 1% of the people infected OUTSIDE Chine dies from having it, not a particularly dangerous virus.

WUWT?

Blockbuster news from China about COVID-19

Reposted from the Fabius Maximus Blog
By Larry Kummer, Editor / 25 February 2020

EXCERPT:

First, a status report
From WHO’s February 24 situation report.

Outside China, there are 29 nations infected (1 new, 6 since Feb 3). There are 1,374 cases (261 new, 1,221 since February 3). This does not include the 695 infected and then quarantined on the Diamond Princess.

Blockbuster news from China
Here are excerpts from remarks by Tedros Adhanom, Director-General of WHO, at the February 24 media briefing. This is important news – contradicting guesses by the doomsters.

“We’re encouraged by the continued decline in cases in China.. …They found that the epidemic peaked and plateaued between the 23rd of January and the 2nd of February, and has been declining steadily since then.

LINK
==================

Spreads like a ripple in a wave, then vanish afterwards, no more new ripples to see.

Trump doesn't need to do this as it is already dissipating....

FYI It's about a 2%-3% kill rate, about 15% for those admitted to the Hospital, so that means out of the ones really sick who sought hospital help.

Influenza, the flu is considered deadly for key groups like our youngest and our oldest in age, but the overal mortality rate is only 0.1%.... the coronavirus mortality rate is 20 TIMES GREATER than the Flu, not equal to the flu.

and it will spread to every nation, unlike Ebola as an example, was concentrated in a few countries in Africa....

some simple steps our govt should be taking and could be taking is sending test kits for the virus to every single state or State's CDC office, and prepare for some quarantine facilities as a just in case, and States and Schools and Businesses should have a plan, which they might already. I truly do not know, on how to operate via the internet, with their workers, or teachers and students, staying home if necessary....

It's always better to prep, to be prepared, so in the event this does turn in to a worldwide pandemic.. which all experts say is likely... and this makes us ready for this pandemic or any others in the future imo.

 

[BULLDOG]

There is no reason to believe Trump would use the funds to fight the virus instead of to use for bribes or a general slush fund for his personal gain. We all know how he used funds he collected for charity to buy a painting of himself to hang his tourist trap resort.

I hear he's planning to build a wall with it. Then march you onto the other side where you belong.

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

 

[Thinker101]

Trump hit the panic button and finally requested some money.
What drove him to request money? The only reason that came out of the WH is,,,, the Coronavirus could cost Trump the election. This after almost a 2,000 point loss on Wall Street. Nothing about US citizens health, not one word. It’s all about numbers.
Read between the lines Little Trumpsters, he only cares about your vote, once that vote is casted, he could give a shit about you.
Yet you worship his ass. Amazing.

He hit the panic button, and finally requested money? Dang dood, you need to make up your mind. You must feel we should loose 2,000 people (instead of points) before getting prepared.

Dude, you seem to have issues with reading comprehension.
Little Trumpsters worship a man who wouldn’t walk ten feet to piss on you if you were on fire.
He doesn’t give a shit about you, he is using your ignorant ass. And you don’t get it,,,dude.

Talk about reading comprehension, which is it he hit the panic button or he finally requested money, having both would make you an idiot liberal that doesn't understand the difference.

Things seem to go over your head, quite easily.
But go ahead and keep displaying your utter ignorance. This is the result of you having your dead brained head so far up Trump’s gigantic posterior.

Yep, someone here certainly is ignorant.

 

[iceberg]

There is no reason to believe Trump would use the funds to fight the virus instead of to use for bribes or a general slush fund for his personal gain. We all know how he used funds he collected for charity to buy a painting of himself to hang his tourist trap resort.

I hear he's planning to build a wall with it. Then march you onto the other side where you belong.

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

 

[Care4all]

There is no reason to believe Trump would use the funds to fight the virus instead of to use for bribes or a general slush fund for his personal gain. We all know how he used funds he collected for charity to buy a painting of himself to hang his tourist trap resort.

I hear he's planning to build a wall with it. Then march you onto the other side where you belong.

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

here's some links

Trump Foundation: Saga of troubled charity ends in $2 million judgment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ab5d1a-37dd-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

Trump Foundation: Saga of troubled charity ends in $2 million judgment

 

[BULLDOG]

There is no reason to believe Trump would use the funds to fight the virus instead of to use for bribes or a general slush fund for his personal gain. We all know how he used funds he collected for charity to buy a painting of himself to hang his tourist trap resort.

I hear he's planning to build a wall with it. Then march you onto the other side where you belong.

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

 

[iceberg]

I hear he's planning to build a wall with it. Then march you onto the other side where you belong.

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

mostly to illustrate how what i see being done here is the same as what was done to kavanaugh. typical "make it up and then make it true" behavior i see both sides love to do.

aka - obama said to teach kindergardners sex ed. now i'm "defending" obama to some when in truth i want to be specific and review what was said, not interpreted by hate. HOWEVER, fair point. please understand this is human nature, not "RIGHT WING" alone.

as for changing the topic, we went from cohen making accusations to a 2 mil fine. is it ok for you to change topics if you see a "connection" to review? fair is fair and i will be glad to play by a single set of rules as long as we both do.

cohen made claims about the auction which may or may not be true. has this $10k, $20k or whatever payment been verified it came from his donations or just "assumed" by people who hate him?

 

[BULLDOG]

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

mostly to illustrate how what i see being done here is the same as what was done to kavanaugh. typical "make it up and then make it true" behavior i see both sides love to do.

aka - obama said to teach kindergardners sex ed. now i'm "defending" obama to some when in truth i want to be specific and review what was said, not interpreted by hate. HOWEVER, fair point. please understand this is human nature, not "RIGHT WING" alone.

as for changing the topic, we went from cohen making accusations to a 2 mil fine. is it ok for you to change topics if you see a "connection" to review? fair is fair and i will be glad to play by a single set of rules as long as we both do.

cohen made claims about the auction which may or may not be true. has this $10k, $20k or whatever payment been verified it came from his donations or just "assumed" by people who hate him?

Mentioning the fine Trump had to pay was to substantiate the claim you questioned. You'll have to check the court record for the details. I answered your question with related information. I didn't change the subject.

 

[colfax_m]

Trump Admin Asks for $2.5 Billion to Fight Coronavirus ...​

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-admin-asks-congress...
3 hours ago · Democrats criticized Trump's request for being insufficient to tackle the outbreak and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer posted on Twitter that it was "too little too late." He claimed it showed Trump's "incompetence' and said legislators had seen "no sign" that the president has "any plan or urgency to deal with the spread of the coronavirus."

Comment:
This is not the time for Democrats to play politics and doomsday games. Obviously Chuckie and his Leftist sycophant's forget that Trump has done quite a bit stop and isolate the Covid-19 virus in the U.S. since China notified the world of the potential danger of a pandemic.
Rather than use this as a political club against Republicans and Trump, this situation should be an all hands on deck bipartisan effort. In the end Democrats are hurting the American people.

We can take it out of the money he stole from the DOD to build his wall.

 

[iceberg]

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

mostly to illustrate how what i see being done here is the same as what was done to kavanaugh. typical "make it up and then make it true" behavior i see both sides love to do.

aka - obama said to teach kindergardners sex ed. now i'm "defending" obama to some when in truth i want to be specific and review what was said, not interpreted by hate. HOWEVER, fair point. please understand this is human nature, not "RIGHT WING" alone.

as for changing the topic, we went from cohen making accusations to a 2 mil fine. is it ok for you to change topics if you see a "connection" to review? fair is fair and i will be glad to play by a single set of rules as long as we both do.

cohen made claims about the auction which may or may not be true. has this $10k, $20k or whatever payment been verified it came from his donations or just "assumed" by people who hate him?

Mentioning the fine Trump had to pay was to substantiate the claim you questioned. You'll have to check the court record for the details. I answered your question with related information. I didn't change the subject.

and i addressed your topic with related behaviors i felt also addressed the subject and you called foul.

yes. trump did have to pay a fine. from what i read earlier (and forgive me i'm slammed at work and can't do full research) this fine was NOT for the painting in question cohen said he used donations to purchase, it was something else. is that true? if so then you are also changing topics to further your "bad trump" montage.

we can either allow the use of "ancillary topics" or not. but if i do it and you call foul, please don't turn around say it's ok when you do it. this is what leads to the head butting we eventually get into.

 

[BULLDOG]

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

mostly to illustrate how what i see being done here is the same as what was done to kavanaugh. typical "make it up and then make it true" behavior i see both sides love to do.

aka - obama said to teach kindergardners sex ed. now i'm "defending" obama to some when in truth i want to be specific and review what was said, not interpreted by hate. HOWEVER, fair point. please understand this is human nature, not "RIGHT WING" alone.

as for changing the topic, we went from cohen making accusations to a 2 mil fine. is it ok for you to change topics if you see a "connection" to review? fair is fair and i will be glad to play by a single set of rules as long as we both do.

cohen made claims about the auction which may or may not be true. has this $10k, $20k or whatever payment been verified it came from his donations or just "assumed" by people who hate him?

Mentioning the fine Trump had to pay was to substantiate the claim you questioned. You'll have to check the court record for the details. I answered your question with related information. I didn't change the subject.

and i addressed your topic with related behaviors i felt also addressed the subject and you called foul.

yes. trump did have to pay a fine. from what i read earlier (and forgive me i'm slammed at work and can't do full research) this fine was NOT for the painting in question cohen said he used donations to purchase, it was something else. is that true? if so then you are also changing topics to further your "bad trump" montage.

we can either allow the use of "ancillary topics" or not. but if i do it and you call foul, please don't turn around say it's ok when you do it. this is what leads to the head butting we eventually get into.

The fine was for the misuse of charity funds and the picture was just one of the ways, along with paying his business expenses and a host of other expenses that was proven in court. Again, it was all addressed in court records. Go there if you want details.

 

[iceberg]

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

mostly to illustrate how what i see being done here is the same as what was done to kavanaugh. typical "make it up and then make it true" behavior i see both sides love to do.

aka - obama said to teach kindergardners sex ed. now i'm "defending" obama to some when in truth i want to be specific and review what was said, not interpreted by hate. HOWEVER, fair point. please understand this is human nature, not "RIGHT WING" alone.

as for changing the topic, we went from cohen making accusations to a 2 mil fine. is it ok for you to change topics if you see a "connection" to review? fair is fair and i will be glad to play by a single set of rules as long as we both do.

cohen made claims about the auction which may or may not be true. has this $10k, $20k or whatever payment been verified it came from his donations or just "assumed" by people who hate him?

Mentioning the fine Trump had to pay was to substantiate the claim you questioned. You'll have to check the court record for the details. I answered your question with related information. I didn't change the subject.

and i addressed your topic with related behaviors i felt also addressed the subject and you called foul.

yes. trump did have to pay a fine. from what i read earlier (and forgive me i'm slammed at work and can't do full research) this fine was NOT for the painting in question cohen said he used donations to purchase, it was something else. is that true? if so then you are also changing topics to further your "bad trump" montage.

we can either allow the use of "ancillary topics" or not. but if i do it and you call foul, please don't turn around say it's ok when you do it. this is what leads to the head butting we eventually get into.

The fine was for the misuse of charity funds and the picture was just one of the ways, along with paying his business expenses and a host of other expenses that was proven in court. Again, it was all addressed in court records. Go there if you want details.

so you don't want to talk about it - you want to tell me your version and i can do put the pieces together myself and i'd better come to your conclusion or i'm wrong.

and where again do we find our eventual disconnect?

 

[martybegan]

CrusaderFrank 54 cases in the U.S. now. That's far more than Ebola had. Is it time to start shitting pants, declare a government conspiracy, and start building a bunker yet?

Are those just people brought back here for treatment who are in isolation, or actual new cases originating from the US?

Link?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I hear he's planning to build a wall with it. Then march you onto the other side where you belong.

Those could be his plan. There is no reason to believe he would use the money for what he says he wants it for.

Theres less of a reason to think he won't.

He has a history of misusing funds and running scams. I'll again mention that painting he used charity funds to buy and then hung it on one of his own properties.

i do wish you'd link to these so i can at least have a point of reference.

Trump used his charity's money to pay for portrait of himself, Cohen says

everything i've found on this is simply cohen saying it. true? maybe. but i've also seen $10k, $20k, $60k and other figured bantered about. which is it? was it ever proven or did cohen just say it?

if never proven, then we're now letting someones hearsay testimony become "truth" and i don't think any of us wants to live in a world where that is ok. but it does seem to be a pattern from the left against pretty much the right.

this.
kavanaugh a rapist. never proven, several "lies" on her part discovered, the left didn't care.
the entire impeachment process was done on hearsay talk and 2nd hand evidence bolstered by others saying they believe it to be true.

would you want who you care about or your family to be judged by what someone else has said? i get that it's easy to do when you honestly hate someone, but that doesn't make all the scuttlebutt true; this "hate".

does it?

maybe trump does this, maybe not. but to tag him off what a pissed off "ex" has said, is that our baseline of truth for all, or just who we hate?

tough question.

here's some links

Trump Foundation: Saga of troubled charity ends in $2 million judgment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ab5d1a-37dd-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

Trump Foundation: Saga of troubled charity ends in $2 million judgment

Democrats just cannot be believed. Not a single word.

 

[BULLDOG]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

mostly to illustrate how what i see being done here is the same as what was done to kavanaugh. typical "make it up and then make it true" behavior i see both sides love to do.

aka - obama said to teach kindergardners sex ed. now i'm "defending" obama to some when in truth i want to be specific and review what was said, not interpreted by hate. HOWEVER, fair point. please understand this is human nature, not "RIGHT WING" alone.

as for changing the topic, we went from cohen making accusations to a 2 mil fine. is it ok for you to change topics if you see a "connection" to review? fair is fair and i will be glad to play by a single set of rules as long as we both do.

cohen made claims about the auction which may or may not be true. has this $10k, $20k or whatever payment been verified it came from his donations or just "assumed" by people who hate him?

Mentioning the fine Trump had to pay was to substantiate the claim you questioned. You'll have to check the court record for the details. I answered your question with related information. I didn't change the subject.

and i addressed your topic with related behaviors i felt also addressed the subject and you called foul.

yes. trump did have to pay a fine. from what i read earlier (and forgive me i'm slammed at work and can't do full research) this fine was NOT for the painting in question cohen said he used donations to purchase, it was something else. is that true? if so then you are also changing topics to further your "bad trump" montage.

we can either allow the use of "ancillary topics" or not. but if i do it and you call foul, please don't turn around say it's ok when you do it. this is what leads to the head butting we eventually get into.

The fine was for the misuse of charity funds and the picture was just one of the ways, along with paying his business expenses and a host of other expenses that was proven in court. Again, it was all addressed in court records. Go there if you want details.

so you don't want to talk about it - you want to tell me your version and i can do put the pieces together myself and i'd better come to your conclusion or i'm wrong.

and where again do we find our eventual disconnect?

I already gave you a link to the story. If you want further detail, look up the court record for yourself. It's easy enough to find. Quit playing silly games.

 

[BULLDOG]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

We are discussing Trump's misuse of funds intended for other things. He was ordered to pay 2 million for his unethical actions. Why are you tying to change the subject to Kavenaugh? That's another pet peeve I have about the right. Hannity, Alex Jones, et. al. jump from one subject to the next as if they are all somehow related, and right wingers think that is the proper way to have a rational discussion. it is not.

mostly to illustrate how what i see being done here is the same as what was done to kavanaugh. typical "make it up and then make it true" behavior i see both sides love to do.

aka - obama said to teach kindergardners sex ed. now i'm "defending" obama to some when in truth i want to be specific and review what was said, not interpreted by hate. HOWEVER, fair point. please understand this is human nature, not "RIGHT WING" alone.

as for changing the topic, we went from cohen making accusations to a 2 mil fine. is it ok for you to change topics if you see a "connection" to review? fair is fair and i will be glad to play by a single set of rules as long as we both do.

cohen made claims about the auction which may or may not be true. has this $10k, $20k or whatever payment been verified it came from his donations or just "assumed" by people who hate him?

Mentioning the fine Trump had to pay was to substantiate the claim you questioned. You'll have to check the court record for the details. I answered your question with related information. I didn't change the subject.

and i addressed your topic with related behaviors i felt also addressed the subject and you called foul.

yes. trump did have to pay a fine. from what i read earlier (and forgive me i'm slammed at work and can't do full research) this fine was NOT for the painting in question cohen said he used donations to purchase, it was something else. is that true? if so then you are also changing topics to further your "bad trump" montage.

we can either allow the use of "ancillary topics" or not. but if i do it and you call foul, please don't turn around say it's ok when you do it. this is what leads to the head butting we eventually get into.

The fine was for the misuse of charity funds and the picture was just one of the ways, along with paying his business expenses and a host of other expenses that was proven in court. Again, it was all addressed in court records. Go there if you want details.

so you don't want to talk about it - you want to tell me your version and i can do put the pieces together myself and i'd better come to your conclusion or i'm wrong.

and where again do we find our eventual disconnect?

I don't care what you do. I thought you wanted a rational conversation about facts, but you just want to play games. Fine. Fuck you.