Draining the swamp.

[forkup]

How Corrupt Is Trump? Here Are the Numbers.

He’s the swampiest swamp creature ever.

www.thebulwark.com

This is an interesting article. It's a partial accounting of Trump's recent actions that are openly corrupt. The numbers are based on public reporting, and I will gladly source any of them for those who try to claim the source is unreliable.

They run the gamut from selling pardons, to insider trading, and most egregiously, using the simple expediency of settling a lawsuit against a government agency through a settlement worth $1.7 billion. That's billion with a B. In a trust controlled by Trump that, while not able to pay money directly to him, is allowed to disperse funds to entities tied to him, like for instance the Trump Organization.

That last one I will elaborate on further, just to point out how utterly corrupt this stuff is.

The judge presiding over this case has asked to be briefed on may 20th on a technical but highly appropriate issue: namely, the doctrine of dominus litis, which bars cases where one party effectively controls both sides.

See, a lawsuit requires two parties actually in adversity to one another. Here, that's murky. So all of a sudden, the timing of this proposed settlement looks even more corrupt.

In a normal administration, the IRS, when being sued, would gladly argue that the lawsuit should be dismissed, and there's little doubt they would win on a myriad of grounds, both technical, (like this one) and on the merits.

For instance, it's hard to argue that the IRS is responsible for people leaking information, or that Trump suffered $10 billion, or even $1.7 billion, in damages.

But in this brave new world, the U.S. government would rather give away $1.7 billion to be dispersed as those people desire, without any meaningful oversight.

So my question is:
Who's willing to defend $1.7 billion of taxpayer money being given away this way?

 

[postman]

How Corrupt Is Trump? Here Are the Numbers.

He’s the swampiest swamp creature ever.

www.thebulwark.com

This is an interesting article. It's a partial accounting of Trump's recent actions that are openly corrupt. The numbers are based on public reporting, and I will gladly source any of them for those who try to claim the source is unreliable.

They run the gamut from selling pardons, to insider trading, and most egregiously, using the simple expediency of settling a lawsuit against a government agency through a settlement worth $1.7 billion. That's billion with a B. In a trust controlled by Trump that, while not able to pay money directly to him, is allowed to disperse funds to entities tied to him, like for instance the Trump Organization.

That last one I will elaborate on further, just to point out how utterly corrupt this stuff is.

The judge presiding over this case has asked to be briefed on may 20th on a technical but highly appropriate issue: namely, the doctrine of dominus litis, which bars cases where one party effectively controls both sides.

See, a lawsuit requires two parties actually in adversity to one another. Here, that's murky. So all of a sudden, the timing of this proposed settlement looks even more corrupt.

In a normal administration, the IRS, when being sued, would gladly argue that the lawsuit should be dismissed, and there's little doubt they would win on a myriad of grounds, both technical, (like this one) and on the merits.

For instance, it's hard to argue that the IRS is responsible for people leaking information, or that Trump suffered $10 billion, or even $1.7 billion, in damages.

But in this brave new world, the U.S. government would rather give away $1.7 billion to be dispersed as those people desire, without any meaningful oversight.

So my question is:
Who's willing to defend $1.7 billion of taxpayer money being given away this way?

First Trump isn't entitled to $10 billion, because the statute under which the suit was brought only allows recovery of $1,000 per instance. Or actual damages, whichever is greater.
Trump's actual damages are -ZERO-
Damages such as loss of job opportunity - he became president
Damages such as loss of income - Trump made $2-$4 billion plus since then

If I were the judge, the best would be to give Trump what he is entitled to.
Grant Trump summary judgement for $1,000 and settle the case that way.

 

[airplanemechanic]

First Trump isn't entitled to $10 billion, because the statute under which the suit was brought only allows recovery of $1,000 per instance. Or actual damages, whichever is greater.
Trump's actual damages are -ZERO-
Damages such as loss of job opportunity - he became president
Damages such as loss of income - Trump made $2-$4 billion plus since then

If I were the judge, the best would be to give Trump what he is entitled to.
Grant Trump summary judgement for $1,000 and settle the case that way.

What your "article" calls "corruption" is actually normal business practice.

Making money? Normal for a businessman. He made billions BEFORE becoming president, unlike sleepy Joe.

Suing a gov't agency? Normal for a businessman.

He never sold a pardon. That's bullshit. He doesn't need the money and that's one reason the left hates him so badly. He CAN'T be bought.

He never participated in insider trading. That's also bullshit.

Not much left to that article. It's bullshit through and through.