And They Say Hillary Is Corrupt

Old_Trapper70

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2014
Messages
2,383
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/11/11/donald-trump-companies-destroyed-emails-documents-515120.html

Over the course of decades, Donald Trump’s companies have systematically destroyed or hidden thousands of emails, digital records and paper documents demanded in official proceedings, often in defiance of court orders. These tactics—exposed by a Newsweek review of thousands of pages of court filings, judicial orders and affidavits from an array of court cases—have enraged judges, prosecutors, opposing lawyers and the many ordinary citizens entangled in litigation with Trump. In each instance, Trump and entities he controlled also erected numerous hurdles that made lawsuits drag on for years, forcing courtroom opponents to spend huge sums of money in legal fees as they struggled—sometimes in vain—to obtain records.

This behavior is of particular import given Trump’s frequent condemnations of Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent, for having deleted more than 30,000 emails from a server she used during her time as secretary of state. While Clinton and her lawyers have said all of those emails were personal, Trump has suggested repeatedly on the campaign trail that they were government documents Clinton was trying to hide and that destroying them constituted a crime. The allegation—which the FBI concluded was not supported by any evidence—is a crowd-pleaser at Trump rallies, often greeted by supporters chanting, “Lock her up!”

Trump’s use of deception and untruthful affidavits, as well as the hiding or improper destruction of documents, dates back to at least 1973, when the Republican nominee, his father and their real estate company battled the federal government over civil charges that they refused to rent apartments to African-Americans. The Trump strategy was simple: deny, impede and delay, while destroying documents the court had ordered them to hand over.

Shortly after the government filed its case in October, Trump attacked: He falsely declared to reporters that the feds had no evidence he and his father discriminated against minorities, but instead were attempting to force them to lease to welfare recipients who couldn’t pay their rent.

The family’s attempts to slow down the federal case were at times nonsensical. Trump submitted an affidavit contending that the government had engaged in some unspecified wrongdoing by releasing statements to the press on the day it brought the case without first having any “formal communications” with him; he contended that he’d learned of the complaint only while listening to his car radio that morning. But Trump’s sworn statement was a lie. Court records show that the government had filed its complaint at 10 a.m. and phoned him almost immediately afterward. The government later notified the media with a press release.

Prosecutors responded to Trump’s affidavit by showing he had fudged his claim by using the term “formal communication”—an acknowledgment, they said, that he had received what only he would characterize as an informal notification—which they described as an intentional effort to mislead the court and the public. But the allegation slowed the case; it required government lawyers to appear in court to shoot down Trump’s false charge."
 
Werbung:
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/11/11/donald-trump-companies-destroyed-emails-documents-515120.html

Over the course of decades, Donald Trump’s companies have systematically destroyed or hidden thousands of emails, digital records and paper documents demanded in official proceedings, often in defiance of court orders. These tactics—exposed by a Newsweek review of thousands of pages of court filings, judicial orders and affidavits from an array of court cases—have enraged judges, prosecutors, opposing lawyers and the many ordinary citizens entangled in litigation with Trump. In each instance, Trump and entities he controlled also erected numerous hurdles that made lawsuits drag on for years, forcing courtroom opponents to spend huge sums of money in legal fees as they struggled—sometimes in vain—to obtain records.

This behavior is of particular import given Trump’s frequent condemnations of Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent, for having deleted more than 30,000 emails from a server she used during her time as secretary of state. While Clinton and her lawyers have said all of those emails were personal, Trump has suggested repeatedly on the campaign trail that they were government documents Clinton was trying to hide and that destroying them constituted a crime. The allegation—which the FBI concluded was not supported by any evidence—is a crowd-pleaser at Trump rallies, often greeted by supporters chanting, “Lock her up!”

Trump’s use of deception and untruthful affidavits, as well as the hiding or improper destruction of documents, dates back to at least 1973, when the Republican nominee, his father and their real estate company battled the federal government over civil charges that they refused to rent apartments to African-Americans. The Trump strategy was simple: deny, impede and delay, while destroying documents the court had ordered them to hand over.

Shortly after the government filed its case in October, Trump attacked: He falsely declared to reporters that the feds had no evidence he and his father discriminated against minorities, but instead were attempting to force them to lease to welfare recipients who couldn’t pay their rent.

The family’s attempts to slow down the federal case were at times nonsensical. Trump submitted an affidavit contending that the government had engaged in some unspecified wrongdoing by releasing statements to the press on the day it brought the case without first having any “formal communications” with him; he contended that he’d learned of the complaint only while listening to his car radio that morning. But Trump’s sworn statement was a lie. Court records show that the government had filed its complaint at 10 a.m. and phoned him almost immediately afterward. The government later notified the media with a press release.

Prosecutors responded to Trump’s affidavit by showing he had fudged his claim by using the term “formal communication”—an acknowledgment, they said, that he had received what only he would characterize as an informal notification—which they described as an intentional effort to mislead the court and the public. But the allegation slowed the case; it required government lawyers to appear in court to shoot down Trump’s false charge."
Hillary and her enablers have made their bed and are now lying in it.. Donald trump filed chapter eleven on me many years ago over some jet ways at Houston Intercontinental airport we reworked , I think it was around 27,000.00 dollars. I never saw a penny of it. SO, I have a pretty good idea of his business practices. I forgave him.
 
Hillary and her enablers have made their bed and are now lying in it.. Donald trump filed chapter eleven on me many years ago over some jet ways at Houston Intercontinental airport we reworked , I think it was around 27,000.00 dollars. I never saw a penny of it. SO, I have a pretty good idea of his business practices. I forgave him.

LOL, Trump screwed you over, you forgave him. Yet you cannot do the same towards Hillary, and are willing to give Trump the opportunity to do the same to the country as he did to you.

"Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, well, I am a fool"
 
LOL, Trump screwed you over, you forgave him. Yet you cannot do the same towards Hillary, and are willing to give Trump the opportunity to do the same to the country as he did to you.

"Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, well, I am a fool"
That's how I ROLE I guess...not really. Donald Trump is a lying, manipulating, protectionist big government Rino. I’ll still be voting for him, however, because Hillary Clinton is all of that and more. She will keep the welcome mat for illegal immigrants from all sorts of 3rd world countries in order to create more Democrat voters. Donald Trump at least claims that he will build a wall along the southern border and tighten immigration from places rampant with Islamic terror.

The other critical issue is the Supreme Court. Donald Trump released a list of potential Supreme Court nominees that has pleased me and many conservatives. He has stated on numerous occasions that he plans on nominating conservatives to the Supreme Court. He may not, but we know for a fact that Hillary Clinton will nominate nothing but hardcore leftists in the vein of Justice Ginsberg and Justice Sotomayor.

Together immigration, Abortion, and the Supreme Court are the three biggest issues on the ballot in November.
 
That's how I ROLE I guess...not really. Donald Trump is a lying, manipulating, protectionist big government Rino. I’ll still be voting for him, however, because Hillary Clinton is all of that and more. She will keep the welcome mat for illegal immigrants from all sorts of 3rd world countries in order to create more Democrat voters. Donald Trump at least claims that he will build a wall along the southern border and tighten immigration from places rampant with Islamic terror.

Trump has already backed off building the wall just as he has the "deportation force". As to the Syrians, you do know, although I doubt it, that it took over two years for the last batch to gain approval, right? And I have been hearing that childish rant about creating more voters for over 20 years now. Hasn't happened.

The other critical issue is the Supreme Court. Donald Trump released a list of potential Supreme Court nominees that has pleased me and many conservatives. He has stated on numerous occasions that he plans on nominating conservatives to the Supreme Court. He may not, but we know for a fact that Hillary Clinton will nominate nothing but hardcore leftists in the vein of Justice Ginsberg and Justice Sotomayor.

The ONLY way you know that they are "hardcore leftists" is from some right wing rag. I would bet you have never read one of their rulings, or dissents..

Together immigration, Abortion, and the Supreme Court are the three biggest issues on the ballot in November.


Not according to the people:

https://www.bustle.com/articles/707...-gallup-poll-reveals-the-nations-top-concerns

http://www.people-press.org/2016/07/07/4-top-voting-issues-in-2016-election/
 
Trump has already backed off building the wall just as he has the "deportation force". As to the Syrians, you do know, although I doubt it, that it took over two years for the last batch to gain approval, right? And I have been hearing that childish rant about creating more voters for over 20 years now. Hasn't happened.



The ONLY way you know that they are "hardcore leftists" is from some right wing rag. I would bet you have never read one of their rulings, or dissents..




Not according to the people:

https://www.bustle.com/articles/707...-gallup-poll-reveals-the-nations-top-concerns

http://www.people-press.org/2016/07/07/4-top-voting-issues-in-2016-election/
You would bet wrong , I READ THEM ALL.. you do realize, I have my own top issues, so I posted them.. i'm done with your self issues. read my post and stop putting words in my mouth
 
You would bet wrong , I READ THEM ALL.. you do realize, I have my own top issues, so I posted them.. i'm done with your self issues. read my post and stop putting words in my mouth


Then you should have posted them as YOUR OPINION not by saying "Together immigration, Abortion, and the Supreme Court are the three biggest issues on the ballot in November." which is ********* since none of them are on the ballot, nor are they even in the top ten concerns of the people.
 
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/11/11/donald-trump-companies-destroyed-emails-documents-515120.html

Over the course of decades, Donald Trump’s companies have systematically destroyed or hidden thousands of emails, digital records and paper documents demanded in official proceedings, often in defiance of court orders. These tactics—exposed by a Newsweek review of thousands of pages of court filings, judicial orders and affidavits from an array of court cases—have enraged judges, prosecutors, opposing lawyers and the many ordinary citizens entangled in litigation with Trump. In each instance, Trump and entities he controlled also erected numerous hurdles that made lawsuits drag on for years, forcing courtroom opponents to spend huge sums of money in legal fees as they struggled—sometimes in vain—to obtain records.

This behavior is of particular import given Trump’s frequent condemnations of Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent, for having deleted more than 30,000 emails from a server she used during her time as secretary of state. While Clinton and her lawyers have said all of those emails were personal, Trump has suggested repeatedly on the campaign trail that they were government documents Clinton was trying to hide and that destroying them constituted a crime. The allegation—which the FBI concluded was not supported by any evidence—is a crowd-pleaser at Trump rallies, often greeted by supporters chanting, “Lock her up!”

Trump’s use of deception and untruthful affidavits, as well as the hiding or improper destruction of documents, dates back to at least 1973, when the Republican nominee, his father and their real estate company battled the federal government over civil charges that they refused to rent apartments to African-Americans. The Trump strategy was simple: deny, impede and delay, while destroying documents the court had ordered them to hand over.

Shortly after the government filed its case in October, Trump attacked: He falsely declared to reporters that the feds had no evidence he and his father discriminated against minorities, but instead were attempting to force them to lease to welfare recipients who couldn’t pay their rent.

The family’s attempts to slow down the federal case were at times nonsensical. Trump submitted an affidavit contending that the government had engaged in some unspecified wrongdoing by releasing statements to the press on the day it brought the case without first having any “formal communications” with him; he contended that he’d learned of the complaint only while listening to his car radio that morning. But Trump’s sworn statement was a lie. Court records show that the government had filed its complaint at 10 a.m. and phoned him almost immediately afterward. The government later notified the media with a press release.

Prosecutors responded to Trump’s affidavit by showing he had fudged his claim by using the term “formal communication”—an acknowledgment, they said, that he had received what only he would characterize as an informal notification—which they described as an intentional effort to mislead the court and the public. But the allegation slowed the case; it required government lawyers to appear in court to shoot down Trump’s false charge."

Yea but even if that is all true, there is no FBI investigation like with Crooked Hillary is there?
 
Yea but even if that is all true, there is no FBI investigation like with Crooked Hillary is there?


There are two FBI investigations. One over his connection with Russia, and one over TrumpU.

But hey, you are not worried about character, or morals. Go vote for him, and when his cowardly ass starts yet another war, how many like you will have the balls to go fight in it?

https://mic.com/articles/158324/is-...we-know-about-the-government-probe#.1d3FNTBom
 
There are two FBI investigations. One over his connection with Russia, and one over TrumpU.

But hey, you are not worried about character, or morals. Go vote for him, and when his cowardly ass starts yet another war, how many like you will have the balls to go fight in it?

https://mic.com/articles/158324/is-...we-know-about-the-government-probe#.1d3FNTBom
You need to stop assuming your so special, as far as I'm concerned your just angry and arrogant. I have tried my best to be polite. Over and over I've stated how awful Trump is, but as far as arrogant's goes your right there with him. But I digress, I forgot for just a moment that you and only you know the issues, and only your finger is on the pulse of America.
 
You need to stop assuming your so special, as far as I'm concerned your just angry and arrogant. I have tried my best to be polite. Over and over I've stated how awful Trump is, but as far as arrogant's goes your right there with him. But I digress, I forgot for just a moment that you and only you know the issues, and only your finger is on the pulse of America.


LOL, you hate it when you are shown just how little you know, and every time you go into the same rant. But it matters not what you say about Trump, you still voted for him.
 
LOL, you hate it when you are shown just how little you know, and every time you go into the same rant. But it matters not what you say about Trump, you still voted for him.
Your not all that.. your only argument boils down to “you/ I /anyone must violate their conscience and morals to vote for Trump” that will always fail to persuade me or any thinking person and can only harden my resolve against it. It’s my conscience; no one gets to determine its contents but me.

Hillary is so bad, Trump is simply the ends justifying the means. If there is moral laziness in all this it is that.

During this election cycle I took Keynes implied advice. “When the facts change I change my mind, what do you do, Sir ? other than rant !

If a moral stance is a line that can be crossed based on circumstances then it is no moral stance at all. Circumstances always change.
 
Your not all that.. your only argument boils down to “you/ I /anyone must violate their conscience and morals to vote for Trump” that will always fail to persuade me or any thinking person and can only harden my resolve against it. It’s my conscience; no one gets to determine its contents but me.

Again, using your own words: "Over and over I've stated how awful Trump is,", and yet you turned your back on doing the moral thing, and voted for what you call " awful". Must not have been that "awful" in your world.

Hillary is so bad, Trump is simply the ends justifying the means. If there is moral laziness in all this it is that.

I would not call it "laziness", I would call it a lack of.

During this election cycle I took Keynes implied advice. “When the facts change I change my mind, what do you do, Sir ? other than rant !

Depends on the facts. So far I have seen no facts that makes Trump, or Hillary, acceptable to my values. So, I voted for one that did. Then too, you might want to read this:

http://www.businessinsider.com/keynes-didnt-say-when-the-facts-change-i-change-my-mind-2011-9

If a moral stance is a line that can be crossed based on circumstances then it is no moral stance at all. Circumstances always change.

Circumstances yes, morality no.
 
Last edited:
Bottom line for me, the best case for Trump has never rested on the claim that he is a good candidate for president. Rather, it rests on the claim that he is the worst possible candidate, except for Hilary.
 
Werbung:
Bottom line for me, the best case for Trump has never rested on the claim that he is a good candidate for president. Rather, it rests on the claim that he is the worst possible candidate, except for Hilary.

Bottom line is you sold out your principles, and integrity, and voted for what you presumed to be the lesser of two evils, and ignored better qualified candidates who's views better represented those you say you believe in. In fact, that is what the greater majority of the people have done, and that is why the country is where it is.
 
Back
Top