My friend, you quoted Trump as proof that the Trump Foundation was doing real charity work. I said that I can't believe that you actually believe him. I said that because in order for you to quote Trump himself as evidence that the Trump Foundation was doing actual charity work, you had to have believed him. Why else would you use a Trump quote to support your argument. Why, in your mind, does this matter? If he used the foundations funds inappropriately or lawlessly, the dollar amount is irrelevant.
No. I quoted it to show how stupid your misleading headline was. They started to desolve before he was elected but the judge held it up. I added the numbers because you lack a moral compass to be objective.
First, this is an internet chat forum, not a court room so I don't owe anyone evidence. That said, when I am posting about something that is pasted all over the news, including FOX, I assume that everyone, like me, has the ability to do a Google search for themselves so I am not going to waste my time searching for it. Third, this is one of Pride's favorite "tricks", to ask someone to cite proof for their beliefs when he can't do the same. Lastly, I am a busy guy and I don't always have a lot of time to devote to these threads. I like to argue the merits of some topics and when I have time I will join the debate. If I am making a claim about something that is outside the mainstream news I might cite my article. If not, I'm not doing anyone's homework for them. We are all adults here. Do you have anything to contribute to this thread? Do you have disagreement with something I've posted? Then come right out and say so, join the debate and tell us what you think and I'll tell you where I agree and/or disagree and why. That's how debate works.
Because he was under investigation brother. Trump tried to shut down the foundation to hide his crimes but the judge ordered him to keep it open so that the investigation could continue unimpeded. That investigation is finished and they have now been ordered to shutter it. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/27/trump-foundation-charity-spending-investigation You added them because you thought it lent merit to your argument but it does not.
This is straight from Qanon, dude. You are a true believer aren't you? You are setting yourself up for disappointment with this Qanon crap but whatever. https://www.citizensinvestigativereport.com/2018/11/qanon-peek-inside-oig-fisa-abuse-report.html
You can assume whatever you want. You are as bad at it as you are at simple math. It was a violation. You care so much about these things I am interested in your thoughts in the violations discovered by the Clinton Foundation? Or do you not care about that? The point remains you are incapable of a rational original thought. I have maintained I only challenge you because you are a hypocrite and do not apply the same logic to your “side”. Every time to reply and refuse to be objective you prove my points.
I have never once mentioned Q. So if you know that to be true, please link me Q saying this. I don’t visit the Chan. Please provide proof of your claims.
This was your post #197 on page 20 of this thread. You are taking Donald Trump at his word that he is divesting from his foundation so as not to create financial conflicts of interest. This was my post #198 on page 20 also. I am very clear here that it's sad that you believe Trump when he says he is divesting for transparency reasons. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/27/trump-foundation-charity-spending-investigation Here is my link showing you that Trump was lying to you. He had no choice but to keep the Foundation open because the courts forced him to so he couldn't tamper with or destroy evidence. It's not an assumption pal. I have cited the evidence for you. You were so caught up on citation earlier so here you go.
and right on cue you are back to your old argument about the Clinton's. I've already told you at least a hundred times (which you will probably want me to cite) that I don't give two fucks about the Clinton's or their foundation. If they did something wrong or illegal then let them face the law for it. I don't care. Can you prove this? Cite your research please.
