It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's Veteran's Charity Scam

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2016 @ 09:00 AM
link   

As always...I get that Trump supporters just don't care..But IMO using Veterans Charities for his BS and as a political prop...is a special kind of low.


Yeah, he only gave them 4.5 million. Not like he laughed while getting a child molester off (oh wait, that was Hillary)....




posted on May, 24 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain
a reply to: Indigo5

From reading your own YAHOO article OP, the number is actually 3.1 Million, that made it's way to charities.

If this is the best you have, you're not going to make it in the "Get Trump" business.



You seem to be missing what Veterans are upset about...

He repeatedly boasted at campaign events that he had raised 6 Million and that he contributed 1 Million himself.

He has REFUSED to show HOW MUCH WAS ACTUALLY COLLECTED...AND WHERE THAT MONEY WENT...

He could have collected 10 Million and pocketed 7 Million for all anyone knows.

There is ZERO data on collections or distributions..

There is NO EVIDENCE he contributed the 1 Million he claimed...

THAT is BS...this is not his taxes...this is a CHARITY...NOT HIS University Scam...

NOW...You can claim he is simply being humble...but for effs sake this is Trump and he bragged/pandered and exploited the veteran cause at every speech that he personally gave 1 Million to Veterans, so asking for evidence of the same is perfectly reasonable....as is asking to see how much was collected and how much he actually donated.

Cuz so far...He has said "I don't have to show you"...and 6 Million has become 4.5 Million and evidence journalists have found by calling all the Vet Charities he claimed to give to have found it lower than the new 4.5 Million number



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gazrok

As always...I get that Trump supporters just don't care..But IMO using Veterans Charities for his BS and as a political prop...is a special kind of low.


Yeah, he only gave them 4.5 million.


There is no evidence he gave 4.5 Million?

That is Lewandowsky is now saying...

The same campaign that previously claimed 6 Milion and the same campaign that refused to tell what charities they gave to or how much.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Missing from Trump’s list of charitable giving: His own personal cash
www.washingtonpost.com... 062438bb_story.html



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   
The media is creating this stupid frenzy.
As far as I know, most big fundraisers do not have all of their funds immediately, and they are not all distributed immediately.
Pledges are received over time, and recipients are vetted and then paid, but not all at once.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

You trust the MSN ?



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
As far as I know, most big fundraisers do not have all of their funds immediately, and they are not all distributed immediately.
Pledges are received over time, and recipients are vetted and then paid, but not all at once.


No..Not with dedicated fundraisers like Trump held.



“Groups that hold fundraisers for charities should distribute the funds to those charities as rapidly as possible. By not doing so it delays aid or assistance to people in need of help and increases the risk that these funds get diverted to something other than their intended use,” said Daniel Borochoff, the president of CharityWatch.

“A highly publicized event such as Trump’s fundraiser for veterans charities ought to disclose within a few months what it has done with the funds that it has raised.”

www.thedailybeast.com...

I would argue this holds more true for a man that has boasted at multiple speeches how he raised 6 Million for charity...and it has now become "about" 4.5 Million...and only a little over 2 Million has been accounted for.

And it is not just Veterans and Left Leaning Media asking where the money has gone...

It is Charity Watchdogs and..the WSJ and Weekly Standard.
edit on 24-5-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: BlueAjah
As far as I know, most big fundraisers do not have all of their funds immediately, and they are not all distributed immediately.
Pledges are received over time, and recipients are vetted and then paid, but not all at once.


No..Not with dedicated fundraisers like Trump held.



“Groups that hold fundraisers for charities should distribute the funds to those charities as rapidly as possible. By not doing so it delays aid or assistance to people in need of help and increases the risk that these funds get diverted to something other than their intended use,” said Daniel Borochoff, the president of CharityWatch.

“A highly publicized event such as Trump’s fundraiser for veterans charities ought to disclose within a few months what it has done with the funds that it has raised.”

www.thedailybeast.com...

I would argue this holds more true for a man that has boasted at multiple speeches how he raised 6 Million for charity...and it has now become "about" 4.5 Million...and only a little over 2 Million has been accounted for.

And it is not just Veterans and Left Leaning Media asking where the money has gone...

It is Charity Watchdogs and..the WSJ and Weekly Standard.


The only thing that seems to be consistent in all the different sources is that Trump raised millions for vets - a great thing to do, whether it's 3,4 , 5 or 6 million. Bravo Donald Trump.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: BlueAjah
As far as I know, most big fundraisers do not have all of their funds immediately, and they are not all distributed immediately.
Pledges are received over time, and recipients are vetted and then paid, but not all at once.


No..Not with dedicated fundraisers like Trump held.



“Groups that hold fundraisers for charities should distribute the funds to those charities as rapidly as possible. By not doing so it delays aid or assistance to people in need of help and increases the risk that these funds get diverted to something other than their intended use,” said Daniel Borochoff, the president of CharityWatch.

“A highly publicized event such as Trump’s fundraiser for veterans charities ought to disclose within a few months what it has done with the funds that it has raised.”

www.thedailybeast.com...

I would argue this holds more true for a man that has boasted at multiple speeches how he raised 6 Million for charity...and it has now become "about" 4.5 Million...and only a little over 2 Million has been accounted for.

And it is not just Veterans and Left Leaning Media asking where the money has gone...

It is Charity Watchdogs and..the WSJ and Weekly Standard.


The only thing that seems to be consistent in all the different sources is that Trump raised millions for vets - a great thing to do, whether it's 3,4 , 5 or 6 million. Bravo Donald Trump.


And the vets have seen none of it , you seem to be forgetting that point yourself

Are you really this obtuse or just trolling, because really this has been stated through out the thread, on top of being the thread topic



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: BlueAjah
As far as I know, most big fundraisers do not have all of their funds immediately, and they are not all distributed immediately.
Pledges are received over time, and recipients are vetted and then paid, but not all at once.


No..Not with dedicated fundraisers like Trump held.



“Groups that hold fundraisers for charities should distribute the funds to those charities as rapidly as possible. By not doing so it delays aid or assistance to people in need of help and increases the risk that these funds get diverted to something other than their intended use,” said Daniel Borochoff, the president of CharityWatch.

“A highly publicized event such as Trump’s fundraiser for veterans charities ought to disclose within a few months what it has done with the funds that it has raised.”

www.thedailybeast.com...

I would argue this holds more true for a man that has boasted at multiple speeches how he raised 6 Million for charity...and it has now become "about" 4.5 Million...and only a little over 2 Million has been accounted for.

And it is not just Veterans and Left Leaning Media asking where the money has gone...

It is Charity Watchdogs and..the WSJ and Weekly Standard.


The only thing that seems to be consistent in all the different sources is that Trump raised millions for vets - a great thing to do, whether it's 3,4 , 5 or 6 million. Bravo Donald Trump.


And the vets have seen none of it , you seem to be forgetting that point yourself

Are you really this obtuse or just trolling, because really this has been stated through out the thread, on top of being the thread topic



Seen none of it? Sounds like it's you that is trolling if that is your claim. The figures range from $2m to $3.1m depending on the source (some of which are old) so far distributed to charities.
At the start of April, some 7 weeks ago, Fox contacted all 22 charities listed. 19 had received money and confirmed how much they had received - a total of $2.4m, an average of over $126,000 each. 1 also received money but declined to confirm the amount. 1 other was still completing paperwork, and the last of the 22 declined to comment. Note that not a single one of the 22 listed said they were not getting donations.

Amazing achievement already with more to come.


No one who has actually taken the time to do any digging - even the MSM - is claiming that the charities have not received millions. They have just decided to attack because the total is not $6m. It seems we already know why it is not $6m... some of those that pledged did not follow through with the cheque.
edit on 24/5/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Do you have the sources this?



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: UKTruth

Do you have the sources this?



The sources are 7 weeks old.


The Wall Street Journal, citing a survey of the 22 groups listed by Trump's campaign as prospective recipients for the money, reported that 19 organizations had obtained a total of $2.4 million from Trump's foundation or associates. Of the three other charities, one declined to disclose how much it had received, another said it needed to submit more paperwork before receiving any money, and the third didn't respond to questions by the Journal.


Fox News Article from April

Since then more would almost certainly have been received and distributed. Trumps spokesperson is standing by the claim that all money received has now been distributed. Given that well over $2m had already been sent 7 weeks ago, that seems plausible.
edit on 24/5/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gazrok

As always...I get that Trump supporters just don't care..But IMO using Veterans Charities for his BS and as a political prop...is a special kind of low.


Yeah, he only gave them 4.5 million. Not like he laughed while getting a child molester off (oh wait, that was Hillary)....

nope, bunked weeks ago.
do keep up.



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 03:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: stinkelbaum

originally posted by: Gazrok

As always...I get that Trump supporters just don't care..But IMO using Veterans Charities for his BS and as a political prop...is a special kind of low.


Yeah, he only gave them 4.5 million. Not like he laughed while getting a child molester off (oh wait, that was Hillary)....

nope, bunked weeks ago.
do keep up.


No, not entirely the case. The story has been exaggerated for sure, but she did think her client was guilty and used a mistake in the handling of evidence to get a greatly reduced sentence for a child rapist. Whilst she did not laugh at the victim, she was clearly delighted at her own success and paid no mind to the victim. The link you provided does not debunk the story it calls it as 'mixed'.



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 05:06 AM
link   
So, now it appears the 15-20 veteran 'protesters' were organised by the Clinton campaign, following a plan hatched over conference call on Saturday when the Washington Post ran a story that not all $6m had been received and passed on.

Can't say I am surprised. Yet another fail by the Clinton campaign and their MSM bed fellows.
edit on 25/5/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Yep, that explains why the truth was distorted to the point it was. Clinton was behind it!

Turns Out the Clinton Campaign Was Behind Veterans Against Trump Protest


The Clinton campaign swiftly organized a conference call for Saturday, led by the Clinton campaign’s veterans and military families outreach director, Jonathan Murray. According to one of the people on that call, participants were told that the Clinton campaign should not be seen viewed as behind the organizer of the protest.

At Monday’s protest, Marine veteran and Clinton supporter Alexander McCoy served as a spokesman for the demonstrators—and went to great lengths to hide the Clinton campaign’s involvement with organizing the demonstration.

Apparently, Clinton’s campaign had also “discouraged the participation of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) or other major veterans groups to prevent them from claiming the limelight.”

The Daily Beast concludes the result was an “astroturfed political stunt” rather than a real grassroots expression.



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 05:55 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Is there a better source for it being organized by Clinton than the Daily Beast.

The daily beast isn't known for truth. They didn't have anyone on record making the claim.



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 07:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: BlueAjah

Is there a better source for it being organized by Clinton than the Daily Beast.

The daily beast isn't known for truth. They didn't have anyone on record making the claim.


They named their source.



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

They claimed "According to one of the people".


That isn't a source that is a description. It is an empty claim made by a disreputable news source.

A source would be a named person that went on record.



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: UKTruth

They claimed "According to one of the people".


That isn't a source that is a description. It is an empty claim made by a disreputable news source.

A source would be a named person that went on record.



At Monday’s protest, Marine veteran and Clinton supporter Alexander McCoy served as a spokesman for the demonstrators—and went to great lengths to hide the Clinton campaign’s involvement with organizing the demonstration. “We’re not affiliated with any campaign, we’re not affiliated with any organization,” McCoy told reporters, saying the protesters used “grassroots organizing techniques, we came together over social media.”

McCoy later told The Daily Beast he reached out to the Clinton campaign to obtain press contacts but denied that Clinton staffers had been involved in organizing the event.

Then, reached by phone after the event, McCoy acknowledged that the Clinton campaign organized the conference call bringing together possible attendees to the protest.


Named source with actual quotes, showing the initial lie to hide the Clinton campaign involvement and then the admission. Mr McCoy is also a democrat who has started other hash tags to bash Trump relating to issues separate to the fund raising - notably his claim of Islamaphobia. It's turning out to be a massive fail by the Clinton campaign - almost as much as the NYT article.
edit on 25/5/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join