Trump family’s elaborate lifestyle is a ‘logistical nightmare’ — at taxpayer expense

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sy_Noe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Richard_White said:
This is merely due to the fact that they have to be protected by the Secret Service. The Trump family has business ties all over the world, and it has to attend to them. It is not their fault that the family members of the President all have to be protected by the Secret Service, that the agents have to follow them wherever they go, and that everything must be secured for them. Is is costly? Yes. But it’s not like the Trump children are simply jetsetting all over the world on the government dole. They are living their normal lives, and because they are so visible, the cost falls down to the taxpayer.

Yet, with Trump’s tax cuts coming soon, I really don’t care.
Click to expand...
Well it’s just started. I’m not advocating the Press going on a mission to put a stop to it. And really they haven’t made a big deal of it yet.

Frankly I’m surprised that Trump’s family would actually take their children with them on business trips. If the situation dictates heavy security why would be take their children ?

We’ll just have to see how it plays out.
 
SuperLuigi said:
For the 100th time:

Where was all this concern when Barack Obama and Joe Biden were in office and racked up 10 trillion dollars in new debt?
Click to expand...
For I’ve lost count how many times, the question is no longer about Barack Obama. Barack Obama is no longer the President. DJT is. For Trump supporters to continue falling back onto Barack Obama or the Clintons or Joe Biden only looks as if Trump supporters now believe 2 wrongs make a right. That’s why saying Barack Obama this and Barack Obama that and Hillary or Bill Clinton this or Joe Biden this or that does not work anymore.

The discussion is now Donald J Trump.

And if Trump supporters accuse Obama of lies or in this case, complained about the cost of his trips being excessive, then you must now hold Donald J Trump to the same. There is nothing any of us can do about Barack Obama or the Clintons or Joe Biden for that matter. They aren’t going to be POTUS again anyway. Well unless Chelsea someday. But DJT is the POTUS now. It is due time all Americans start focusing on him. There is also a difference between misspeaking and making a mistake vs continuing to repeat the same falsehoods about, for instance, an EC win after being corrected over and over again about the numbers. And if BO is going to be criticized by Trump supporters for his travel, the least they could do is be equally critical when their own beloved 4 wk old POTUS whom they expect to save the world, is already on pace to surpass all recent Presidents in taxpayer travel expenses including that of Barack Obama. To do otherwise, reeks of the exact same hypocrisy the left is accused of.
 
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that two wrongs make a right. What is being suggested that it is disingenuous to complain about DJT expenses and costs of security when there were no protests and no objections raised by the left as to the massive amounts of money spent to protect Obama, Biden, Clinton, et al. It was no problem before, but now that Trump is in office, it is a problem. And then you want to forget recent history and focus on DJT only because looking further doesn’t fit the narrative. That is disingenuous.

**I want to know, and I asked the question a few posts earlier: what do you expect DJT and his family to do? Do they have a right to be safe? Do they have a right to run their businesses? Do they have a right to travel? How do you think that is going to happen? **

Are we going to second guess why a parent would take a child along on a trip? Are we going to second guess the purpose of the trip? None of you combine a business trip with a side trip to visit relatives in the city you might be visiting? Are you looking to micromanage these people’s lives? Seriously. Do you even know what laws are on the books regarding these matters (security of high profile public figures)? Do you even know if the laws have been applied equally to DJT and his family as compared to previous administrations? If there has been equal application, you have no cause to complain.
 
3_Dog_Night said:
Vanny, bless you. I believe in five pages of comments, you are the only one to get it. Unfortunately, I fear my words may be prophetic – rather than simply making a point.

So if the adult kids of President Trump fly coach (Jet Blue), then they are harassed and accosted by a stranger who not only hates President Trump, but also hates his family too. What type of “man” treats a woman and small child the way she was treated? If the adult kids of the President fly privately with the protection of the Secret Service, then they are living an elaborate lifestyle on the taxpayer’s dime.

President Trump and his family can’t win, can they, no matter what they do it is wrong!

So are the adult kids of Trump supposed to give up their work, businesses, livelihoods? Is that what you all want? Are they supposed to try and be like everyone else? Does their safety and well-being matter? Are they supposed to pay for this out of their own pockets? No one could afford that – wealthy or not. Should they just let themselves be targets for kidnapping and murder (because you get to the President through his kids)?

So we have a double standard here. Obama and Biden spent millions upon millions of dollars on travel and on vacations and on all sorts of things. And no one complains. But if Trump does the same thing, then he is extravagant, creating logistical nightmares, and God only know what else. I love the smell of hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
👍👍

I agree it is pure hypocrisy at its finest.

But I think President Trump has a word for it - hatred. The amount of hatred against him by the media which know that they speak for many likewise minds.
 
Reuben_J said:
👍👍

I agree it is pure hypocrisy at its finest.

But I think President Trump has a word for it - hatred. The amount of hatred against him by the media which know that they speak for many likewise minds.
Click to expand...
Seems it’s been that way for 30 years or more. We all got to hear how his businesses and marriages failed among other things. But he got a lot of free air time to counter and build a base for his support.
 
3_Dog_Night said:
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that two wrongs make a right. What is being suggested that it is disingenuous to complain about DJT expenses and costs of security when there were no protests and no objections raised by the left as to the massive amounts of money spent to protect Obama, Biden, Clinton, et al. It was no problem before, but now that Trump is in office, it is a problem. And then you want to forget recent history and focus on DJT only because looking further doesn’t fit the narrative. That is disingenuous.

**I want to know, and I asked the question a few posts earlier: what do you expect DJT and his family to do? Do they have a right to be safe? Do they have a right to run their businesses? Do they have a right to travel? How do you think that is going to happen? **

Are we going to second guess why a parent would take a child along on a trip? Are we going to second guess the purpose of the trip? None of you combine a business trip with a side trip to visit relatives in the city you might be visiting? Are you looking to micromanage these people’s lives? Seriously. Do you even know what laws are on the books regarding these matters (security of high profile public figures)? Do you even know if the laws have been applied equally to DJT and his family as compared to previous administrations? If there has been equal application, you have no cause to complain.
Click to expand...
To answer the part you bolded, no, Trump does not have the right to run his businesses as president.

He has not provided proof that he is not involved in the management of his business interests.

The list of possible conflicts of interest is staggering.
google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/508382/?client=ms-android-verizon

I think it’s just a matter of time before he gets nailed and it won’t be the Democrats in Congress to do it, but Republicans in Congress.

He has placed himself above moral and ethical standards and it’s not going to fly. If he is called to testify before Congress, and I have no doubt he will be, he’s done.

I’d be surprised if he makes it until the 4th of July.
 
3_Dog_Night said:
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that two wrongs make a right. What is being suggested that it is disingenuous to complain about DJT expenses and costs of security when there were no protests and no objections raised by the left as to the massive amounts of money spent to protect Obama, Biden, Clinton, et al. It was no problem before, but now that Trump is in office, it is a problem. And then you want to forget recent history and focus on DJT only because looking further doesn’t fit the narrative. That is disingenuous.
Click to expand...
Apparently not since in one case Trump supporters cry foul about something being wrong but do not on DJT for the same or worse. I don’t think anyone is saying BHO didn’t make mistakes either. He himself even said he is not perfect. But on this topic, Obama related travel expenses amounted to 97M over 8 yrs. And what I’m suggesting is BHO is no longer POTUS and will never be again. We can’t do anything about BO and the past now. We can about DJT though and still can hold DJT to the fire. And it is no less disingenuous for Trump supporters to have complained about BHO but now raise no objections when their guy’s pace is to exceed BO’s. But for some reason they do not see the same hypocrisy of the “right” that they blame the left for. There may be enough hypocrisy to go around. But now the focus should be on DJT. I’m not going to keep going back and forth on it though tonight.
 
Saints_Alive said:
To answer the part you bolded, no, Trump does not have the right to run his businesses as president.

He has not provided proof that he is not involved in the management of his business interests.

The list of possible conflicts of interest is staggering.
google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/508382/?client=ms-android-verizon

I think it’s just a matter of time before he gets nailed and it won’t be the Democrats in Congress to do it, but Republicans in Congress.

He has placed himself above moral and ethical standards and it’s not going to fly. If he is called to testify before Congress, and I have no doubt he will be, he’s done.

I’d be surprised if he makes it until the 4th of July.
Click to expand...
It might yet take more Trump voters like yourself before the GOP no longer worry about their seats back home but in time you’re point is well taken.
 
Saints_Alive said:
To answer the part you bolded, no, Trump does not have the right to run his businesses as president.

He has not provided proof that he is not involved in the management of his business interests.

The list of possible conflicts of interest is staggering.
google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/508382/?client=ms-android-verizon

I think it’s just a matter of time before he gets nailed and it won’t be the Democrats in Congress to do it, but Republicans in Congress.

He has placed himself above moral and ethical standards and it’s not going to fly. If he is called to testify before Congress, and I have no doubt he will be, he’s done.

I’d be surprised if he makes it until the 4th of July.
Click to expand...
I see. President Trump needs to sell and completely divest himself of every single hotel, business, and enterprise he currently owns otherwise it is a conflict of interest. And it is not enough to sign over day to day management and responsibility. Sell it all. Is that the idea? And if a Japanese tourist stays at a Trump hotel and pays the going rate for the room, it is obvious that he is bribing Trump as an American President for some nefarious purpose – not that the Japanese tourist received lodging and services for funds paid. That is truly ingenious as a legal theory goes. You do realize that that was never the intended purpose for the law, don’t you. But hey, Soros is paying the lawyers so the funds are unlimited. I understand now. And all this from some anonymous ethics experts too.

What I don’t think you understand is the law of unintended consequences. If this is the standard that DJT is going to be held to, then we need to look at every single business ownership and arrangement for 435 Senators and Congress Critters, 9 Supreme Court Justices and a whole lot more folks in the Federal Government. Add all the justices across the country too. How far do you think that review is going to get? Not to worry, there will be no “conflict of interest” investigation and no Senate hearings because I can almost guarantee you that all these other folks in government office have their own (real or perceived) “conflict of interest” that they never want to see the light of day. So, let me get this straight, if Trump had set it up as Bill and Hillary did with the Clinton Foundation (as she jettisoned around the world as Secretary of State and multiple foreign governments made generous donations to the Foundation), there would be no problem at all?

By July 4th … it is more likely that we will be well into American Spring (color revolution) and Civil War 2.0 and/or an assassination attempt on DJT (God forbid) than a Senate hearing on Trump’s supposed conflict of interests and supposed ethics violations.
 
We can go back and forth on this issue, but the real questions are:

What are the rules and guidelines related to providing security to governmental officials and their families – including the President of the United States?

Have those rules and guidelines been followed for this current administration as well as for past administrations? (equally and consistently followed?)

If the rules and guidelines have been evenly followed for all government officials, then the rest of the discussion about Obama, Clinton, Trump (or whomever) is irrelevant.

After the above has been addressed, then we can discuss:

Are these rules and guidelines appropriate? Do they serve their purpose?

Should the rules and guidelines be changed and/or modified? If so, how and why?

End of discussion. Everything else is theater and stirring the pot.
 
Sy_Noe said:
It might yet take more Trump voters like yourself before the GOP no longer worry about their seats back home but in time you’re point is well taken.
Click to expand...
Well we’ll see.

I’d wager if the truth were known, an overwhelming majority of republicans in Congress would rather have Pence as POTUS.
 
Sy_Noe said:
Isn’t that the truth. The opener in Cleveland last yr was cancelled due to flurries and a wind chill of 18 degrees. But they were playing in warm weather in Nov! Who was that vs again? 😛 Anyway the previous time their opener was postponed they also went to the postseason. Maybe we should pray for an April blizzard spreading from Lakes Michigan to Erie. 😃
Click to expand...
👍👍
 
3_Dog_Night said:
I see. President Trump needs to sell and completely divest himself of every single hotel, business, and enterprise he currently owns…
Click to expand...
I didn’t read any further than that because there’s no need to. I didn’t propose any such thing and don’t see how anything I wrote implies that.

Putting his business interests in verifiable blind trusts instead of trying to circumvent the matter as his attorneys look for loopholes would be in his interest in my opinion.

Maybe I’m wrong and he’ll be successful but I doubt it. 🤷
 
Saints_Alive said:
I didn’t read any further than that because there’s no need to. I didn’t propose any such thing and don’t see how anything I wrote implies that.

Putting his business interests in verifiable blind trusts instead of trying to circumvent the matter as his attorneys look for loopholes would be in his interest in my opinion.

Maybe I’m wrong and he’ll be successful but I doubt it. 🤷
Click to expand...
Did you not read the article you cited in your earlier statement? Apparently not.

You wrote what you wrote, but you cited a source which also has references that you could not have followed up on OR you would not have made the statement that you did. I might not have arrived at my conclusions by what you wrote, but rather by what you cited as part of what you wrote (along with the additional references therein).

I can’t blame Trumps attorneys for investigating other options than that of a blind trust. Do you know the advantages, disadvantages, risks, liabilities and problems inherent in such an arrangement? This is the only way that is considered ethically/ morally acceptable? I seriously doubt that. It is the option that is least desirable and most cumbersome.

Finally, are you going to insist that all 435 Senators and Congress Critters, 9 Supreme Court Justices, heads of government agencies, etc. – all of them – must set up the same sort of blind trust arrangements for their businesses and ownership interests? I mean, if it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander, right? Or does this only apply to DJT?
 
3 Dog Night:
Or does this only apply to DJT?
Click to expand...
The emoluments clause in the Constitution of the United States pertains to the president of the United States. So yes.

The other theoretical examples you mentioned may or may not have laws pertaining to whatever branch of government and the judicial system in question. Nevertheless they don’t pertain to conflicts of interest regarding the most powerful individual elected official in the United States.

As far as the link listing the conflicts of interest, that is all I mentioned. A list of conflicts of interest.

Anyhow thank you for clarifying. But again I was just presenting a list. I didn’t read the text of the article nor am I interested in the opinions or conclusions presented in the article itself.

Perhaps I should have just copied and pasted the list itself. Mea culpa
 
Saints_Alive said:
Well we’ll see.

I’d wager if the truth were known, an overwhelming majority of republicans in Congress would rather have Pence as POTUS.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard rumblings through the DC grapevine that some Republicans are tossing the idea around of impeaching both in 2018 so that Paul Ryan can then serve half of Trump’s term and then two full terms. Feel free to take that with a bucketful of salt because it seems a bit far-fetched even to me.
 
Sy_Noe said:
For I’ve lost count how many times, the question is no longer about Barack Obama. Barack Obama is no longer the President. DJT is. For Trump supporters to continue falling back onto Barack Obama or the Clintons or Joe Biden only looks as if Trump supporters now believe 2 wrongs make a right. That’s why saying Barack Obama this and Barack Obama that and Hillary or Bill Clinton this or Joe Biden this or that does not work anymore.

The discussion is now Donald J Trump.

And if Trump supporters accuse Obama of lies or in this case, complained about the cost of his trips being excessive, then you must now hold Donald J Trump to the same. There is nothing any of us can do about Barack Obama or the Clintons or Joe Biden for that matter. They aren’t going to be POTUS again anyway. Well unless Chelsea someday. But DJT is the POTUS now. It is due time all Americans start focusing on him. There is also a difference between misspeaking and making a mistake vs continuing to repeat the same falsehoods about, for instance, an EC win after being corrected over and over again about the numbers. And if BO is going to be criticized by Trump supporters for his travel, the least they could do is be equally critical when their own beloved 4 wk old POTUS whom they expect to save the world, is already on pace to surpass all recent Presidents in taxpayer travel expenses including that of Barack Obama. To do otherwise, reeks of the exact same hypocrisy the left is accused of.
Click to expand...
Obama’s fault.
 
Saints_Alive said:
The emoluments clause in the Constitution of the United States pertains to the president of the United States. So yes.

The other theoretical examples you mentioned may or may not have laws pertaining to whatever branch of government and the judicial system in question. Nevertheless they don’t pertain to conflicts of interest regarding the most powerful individual elected official in the United States.

As far as the link listing the conflicts of interest, that is all I mentioned. A list of conflicts of interest.

Anyhow thank you for clarifying. But again I was just presenting a list. I didn’t read the text of the article nor am I interested in the opinions or conclusions presented in the article itself.

Perhaps I should have just copied and pasted the list itself. Mea culpa
Click to expand...
Saints Alive,
I was being sarcastic when I asked whether conflicts of interest laws and ethics apply only to DJT. ** Thank you for being honest that you didn’t read the text of the article and that you had no interest in the opinion or conclusions presented in the article. The article you cited, however, did its job and served your purpose of smearing the President.**

If you had done even the most cursory research, you would have happened upon a wealth of information about conflict of interest in governmental offices. So to single out DJT is truly disingenuous. The link below is from the Committee on Ethics from the US House of Representatives – a wealth of info re: travel, gifts, financial disclosure, divestiture, etc.

ethics.house.gov/financial-dislosure/policies-underlying-disclosure

You want to hold the President to a standard that no one else in governmental office is held to and you want to insist upon one single approach (a blind trust) to what DJT supposedly “must” do to resolve potential conflicts of interest in order to satisfy ethical guidelines/ constraints. Nothing else will do except a blind trust! Seriously.

The hatred for DJT is blind and unreasoning and mad. Your approach is dishonest and it demonstrates an entire ocean of apathy and ignorance. I get that you hate him. I get that you want him out of office. I did not vote for the man, and how you (and others from the liberal left) are coming across is shrill and vindictive and unthinking.

Surely you have heard of the boy who cried wolf? At some point, what is happening here will backfire in grand style. Measured, reasoned, thinking, fair-minded people are going to totally turn off and tune out anything the Trump haters and the never-Trumpers have to say. Then if there really is a legitimate issue, we won’t be there to listen. I am almost there.
 
MODERATOR NOTE

Please charitably discuss the issues, not each other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top