The Cult of Donald Trump

[TopHatter]

You might be right about Trump on some points of him being cultish but the "record turnover" in the U.S. government was necessary. He didn't want Obama's staff hangin' around and he is very new to politics.

The article was not referring to Obama-era appointees. They are referring solely to Trump's own people. Trump bragged that he "hires only the best people". That has turned out to be just another one of Trump's empty boasts. You can take a look at them herehttps://www.brookings.edu/research/t...dministration/ if you'd like. If not, go ahead and read this:

The top echelon of the Trump administration has become a high-speed revolving door — with turnover in 78 percent of the positions, a new study has found.

And 31 percent of those White House "A-Team" jobs have turned over more than once, the study by the Brookings Institution shows.

"It's historic, it's unprecedented, it's off the charts," the study's author, Kathryn Dunn Tenpas, told NBC News. "I've never seen this kind of turnover before."

In just 32 months, President Donald Trump's rate of change has surpassed "all of his predecessors who served four-year terms" Link

Trump of course, with his usual feeble grasp on reality, feels that this is an excellent record: "I think we have tremendous stability"

Being that his political experience didn't allow him much foresight as far as who would work best on his team and him being the typical "fire 'em" tycoon that he is I'm not surprised that he went through that many people. He knows how a good team works and thats part of his success as a businessman.

No, he actually doesn't know how a good team works. The man has been, in effect, the sole proprietor and autocrat of a relatively small mom-and-pop operation for decades. All available information, anecdotal or otherwise, points to a man that doesn't have the slightest of idea of working with a team, leading a team, and especially not "the art of the deal". This is no businessman. This is a genius self-promoter and hype man, yes. More accurately, a glorified carny barker and huckster, that created a myth that he was a successful businessman.

The way I see it is he just brought his methods with him into the white house and if you could have seen him manage his company before he was president you would have seen him doing the same thing.

Anybody who cared to actually look could see him "manage" his company before he was president. The man bankrupted three casinos. Let that sink in. A building whose sole purpose is separate a person from their money as quickly and painlessly as possible, where the odds always favor the house, and Trump bankrupted three of them. I could post link after link after link after link demonstrating how poor of a businessman Donald Trump is. But, like the effect of any cult, I'm not sure that it will have any impact upon you.

[TopHatter]

I don't know about any of that but I do know that the public doesn't have the right to know what your personal finances are no matter how rich or poor you are. They simply do not have the law behind them.

You don't know of Trump's years-long all-out effort to conceal his tax returns? Seriously? Well, it's currently in the hands of the Supreme Court of the United States. That's how far he's taken things.

The public does not have the law behind them but the United States Congress absolutely does, according to IRS Code section 6103(f). But as with all other attempts to get information from Trump, he has stymied matters at every turn...to the point of asserting that he is completely above all law. Were you aware of that?

[snapper]

If he is found guilty in cpurt then the record of the illegal transactions will be made available to the courts and the people immediately involved in the trial. As for the amounts of the illegal transactions they may or may not be disclosed to the public. Many things of this nature are kept confidential for less famous people, so no, fame doesn't chamge what your rights are.

Re Mueller the US Department of Justice has 'guidelines' such that no sitting US President can be impeached in courts proceedings; as Mueller said the only remedy is impeachment. Any request for information which it may that the public has a right to know Trumpkin has blocked no matter what it is about - his tax returns or any documents related his attempted blackmail of Ukraine.

One thing we do know about his so called 'business success' is that no US bank would touch him. Why would he need large loans anyway if he is a billionaire? He ended up going to Deutsche Bank, which quite by 'coincidence' is still facing action over laundering dirty Muscovite money. Deutsche Bank loaned your supposedly 'successful businessman' upto $2bln. Why a 'successful' billionaire needs to borrow $2bln in the first place is a puzzle. Furthermore senior managers at Deutsche Bank questioned these loans to Trump - and got fired. It is currently alleged that Trumps loans via Deutsche Bank were guaranteed by a Muscovite bank; VTB Bank (see https://forensicnews.net/2020/01/03/...ower-told-fbi/).

VTB Bank was for a long time run by Andrey Kostin, who previously had worked as 'diplomat' for the SVR (formerly the First Directorate of the KGB). VTB was also referred to 'Bank 1' in a 2013 case against an SVR group working in New York (Igor Sporyshev, Viktor Podobny and Evgeny Buryakov), one of who was working under cover at the UN while the other two were 'employees of Bank 1'; VTB. How do we know this? Well because these guys were approached by Carter Page who they dismissed as an idiot - the FBI were recording them and later warned Carter Page not to get involved with such dubious Muscovite Gentlemen again. Carter Page though thought he'd become an international James Bond and while working for the Trump campaign visited Moscow to give a speech and meet the deputy of Igor Sechin, who runs Rosneft and is widely viewed a 'siloviki no 1'. 'Siloviki' meaning roughly old KGB Putin allies. The 2013 case and Carter Page's history in it was presumably one of the reasons why the FISA warrants were granted on him.

So yea, right nice friends your 'successful businessman' has though of course he "hardly knew" the 'tea boy' Carter Page as he now does not know Lev Parnas, who was being payed by Firtash and Moscow and who payed Guiliani $500,000.

But nothing to see here right? Just 'coincidences' and Trump is just a very successful businessman who doesn't want his tax returns made public... Dream on.

[Wonderful Plans]

One thing we do know about his so called 'business success' is that no US bank would touch him. Why would he need large loans anyway if he is a billionaire? He ended up going to Deutsche Bank, which quite by 'coincidence' is still facing action over laundering dirty Muscovite money. Deutsche Bank loaned your supposedly 'successful businessman' upto $2bln. Why a 'successful' billionaire needs to borrow $2bln in the first place is a puzzle. Furthermore senior managers at Deutsche Bank questioned these loans to Trump - and got fired. It is currently alleged that Trumps loans via Deutsche Bank were guaranteed by a Muscovite bank; VTB Bank (see https://forensicnews.net/2020/01/03/...ower-told-fbi/).

There's a difference between personal loans and business loans. A billionaire could have a $1b personal fortune and a $1b valued Corporation in his possession. Say, the Corporation loses $2b goes bankrupt and now owes $1b. The owner files for bankruptcy and doesn't have to use his personal fortune to save his company. Likewise with Trump, his personal fortune is safe no matter how much he loses on his corporation. He will still be a billionaire while they're taking his name off the towers and putting them up for auction.

[snapper]

There's a difference between personal loans and business loans.

Yea, like the difference between a charitable foundation and a person - which the Trump family failed to observe.

A billionaire could have a $1b personal fortune and a $1b valued Corporation in his possession. Say, the Corporation loses $2b goes bankrupt and now owes $1b. The owner files for bankruptcy and doesn't have to use his personal fortune to save his company. Likewise with Trump, his personal fortune is safe no matter how much he loses on his corporation. He will still be a billionaire while they're taking his name off the towers and putting them up for auction.

Fine but you say he was a 'successful businessman' despite all the evidence. If your business is so 'successful' (apart from all the ones that went bankrupt or got sued - like 'Trump University') why won't local banks back you? Why do need $2bln of loans from Deutsche Bank, allegedly guaranteed by VTB Bank? Why will you not comply with IRS law when asked to do so by the US Congress? The most we can say about his wealth (or lack of) is that it is unproven and he is very reluctant to disclose it to the point of being willing to challenge Congress' legal right to know about it.

[Officer of Engineers]

Why will you not comply with IRS law when asked to do so by the US Congress? The most we can say about his wealth (or lack of) is that it is unproven and he is very reluctant to disclose it to the point of being willing to challenge Congress' legal right to know about it.

Oh I don't know. Maybe it's because Trump has rights? And Congrss is forbidden by law to go on fishing trips?

Trump is using his rights to force Congress to prove that they are not abusing their powers to go on fishing trips looking for a crime.

That is the way it should be.

[TopHatter]

Oh I don't know. Maybe it's because Trump has rights? And Congrss is forbidden by law to go on fishing trips?

Trump is using his rights to force Congress to prove that they are not abusing their powers to go on fishing trips looking for a crime.

That is the way it should be.

Sir,
We have been over this before, repeatedly. This is not a fishing expedition.

This is a known tax cheat, with known ties to Russian oligarchs, that has consistently refused, lying the whole time, to turn over anything of substance regarding his taxes.

No, the IRS would not have automatically detected tax fraud on the part of Trump. They didn't in the case of Nixon's tax fraud and the IRS is now a gutted shell compared to those days.

There is also an IRS whistleblower who has reported a cover up at the IRS on behalf of Trump.

Multiple courts have repeatedly ruled that Trump's tax firms must turn over his records to Congress, and Trump's defense is that he above all law, up to and including prosecution for cold-blooded murder.

This is not fishing expedition. This is enormous plumes of oily smoke billowing up from behind hills that Trump refuses to allow the fire department to investigate.

[Officer of Engineers]

Sir,
We have been over this before, repeatedly. This is not a fishing expedition.

You've missed the point. Trump is forcing Congress to jump through hoops to PROVE it is not a fishing trip. Trump has the right to say show me this is not a fishing trip.

[TopHatter]

You've missed the point. Trump is forcing Congress to jump through hoops to PROVE it is not a fishing trip. Trump has the right to say show me this is not a fishing trip.

No sir, this is not what Trump is arguing at all. I said exactly what he is arguing here:

Trump's defense is that he above all law, up to and including prosecution for cold-blooded murder.

From 23 October 2019

"A lawyer for U.S. President Donald Trump told a federal appeals court Wednesday the president does not have to hand over his tax returns to New York state prosecutors because he is immune from criminal investigation.

“We view the entire subpoena as an inappropriate fishing expedition not made in good faith,” Consovoy, a lawyer for Trump, told the three-judge panel on Wednesday.

Circuit Judge Denny Chin asked Convoy if authorities would be powerless to do anything if Trump shot someone.

“That’s correct,” Consovoy replied."

Interestingly, I've asked several of Trump's defenders on this board what they think about that claim of complete immunity from prosecution. Unsurprisingly, they have been either unable to respond or unwilling to respond.

[snapper]

Sir, the US Congress has a duty of oversight and in that capacity, as far as the US case law goes on the subject, has the right to subpoena anyone's tax returns be he or she President or anybody else. If Trump was laundering dirty Muscovite money as alleged - and is pretty evident - then 'oversight' must include viewing his tax returns. I am not saying they should necessarily be made public - particularly not if there anything to question of course. But his reluctance to reveal his finances itself speaks volumes itself. Then recall his first excuse; that his accounts were being audited. Is the audit still ongoing? I have been asked questions about my tax returns before - a problem for my Pater (a retired accountant) but over in weeks. This would be the longest audit in history. But he gave up that excuse and now says he is absolute everything - immunity and knows everything about everything (apart from Lev Parnas) so what is he scared of if there is nothing to see?

[Officer of Engineers]

No sir, this is not what Trump is arguing at all. I said exactly what he is arguing here:

The point is the same. Trump is well within his rights to throw up as many legal obstacles as he could, including legal confusion. It is up to Congress to answer his legal challenges.

[Officer of Engineers]

Sir, the US Congress has a duty of oversight and in that capacity, as far as the US case law goes on the subject, has the right to subpoena anyone's tax returns be he or she President or anybody else. If Trump was laundering dirty Muscovite money as alleged - and is pretty evident - then 'oversight' must include viewing his tax returns. I am not saying they should necessarily be made public - particularly not if there anything to question of course. But his reluctance to reveal his finances itself speaks volumes itself. Then recall his first excuse; that his accounts were being audited. Is the audit still ongoing? I have been asked questions about my tax returns before - a problem for my Pater (a retired accountant) but over in weeks. This would be the longest audit in history. But he gave up that excuse and now says he is absolute everything - immunity and knows everything about everything (apart from Lev Parnas) so what is he scared of if there is nothing to see?

Oh he looks guilty, he must be guilty. Let's find evidence.

That is fishing.

[snapper]

I think there is more than reasonable cause for the Congress to request his tax returns. Sure Trump has rights but so does the Congress.

[Officer of Engineers]

I think there is more than reasonable cause for the Congress to request his tax returns. Sure Trump has rights but so does the Congress.

Let's be clear about this. Trump does NOT have the only copy of his tax return. The IRS does also. If Congress does not need Trump's OK, then they would have it already. Apparently, there is enough of a legal road block that Congress does not automatically get Trump's returns without jumping through hoops.

That's the way it should be.

[TopHatter]

Let's be clear about this. Trump does NOT have the only copy of his tax return. The IRS does also. If Congress does not need Trump's OK, then they would have it already. Apparently, there is enough of a legal road block that Congress does not automatically get Trump's returns without jumping through hoops.

That's the way it should be.

Sir, They do not need Trump's ok. The only "road block" is Trump's pervasive flouting of the law.
As I already mentioned above, Federal Law states that Congress shall receive tax returns of anyone they choose. Congress, furthermore, has oversight over the Executive Branch, full stop.

IRS Code section 6103(f)

“Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request, except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure.”