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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Trump leaving his business behind to focus on his new job...POTUS

page: 7
27
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

It is not illegal to not show Tax Returns either.




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: hellobruce

It is not illegal to not show Tax Returns either.


It certainly goes against being "open, honest and transparent".

No?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
It is not illegal to not show Tax Returns either.


Who said it was? But it does show he is not honest when he promised to show them....

It does show he is not open or transparent....

Just more of Trumps lies, backed up by his trumpets.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

No, he filed what you are supposed to as a candidate. He filed a Personal Financial Disclosure.

www.opensecrets.org...

How is showing ALL of you assets, not just one year of returns, not transparent? No lies and no trumpets...
edit on 11pm30pmf0000002016-11-30T15:02:51-06:000351 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Yes. “CLONES”. Pretty accurate....

Just like all the dynastic great families of the world. The Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Windsors, Onassis's, Kennedys, Du Ponts, Niarcho's, Fords, Vanderbilts, and many others in all industries. Each groomed (cloned) to succeed up the ladder one after the other. Donny Jr., Ivanka, Eric, "Baron"(note the inference of the name?), "Tiffany"(another co-incidental elite name of an elegance)...are no different.
The Rothschilds

The Kennedys

And as far as Mr. President Elect distancing himself from his business and businesses...in his companies, in his building and buildings and boardrooms around the world? After all the "art of the deal(s)" and connections he's made and promise made....? C'mon America! Wake up!

Not saying not to support our incoming Prez...but, I'll never believe he won't nod his head, or take a call, or acknowledge "old friends" and the one's he promised Im sure...to take "care of always"...what do you think? Of course he will.

Legally distancing himself away from them and bounce 'em over to the robo-kids created in his image? Of course he will. But that means nothing on the inside. Zero. Just outwardly to the people to satisfy that question.

The name stays, and so do the relationships Trump spent his life building...now going into the line of kids...to "run".

edit on 30-11-2016 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs


How is showing ALL of you assets, not just one year of returns, not transparent? No lies and no trumpets...


Lots of shell companies showing less than $201/ year income. Lots of liabilities to Deutsche Bank.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: matafuchs

Bout time! It only took weeks of the press nagging him about it.


He made it clear before he was even nominated.

From 4/20/2015:




Billionaire Donald Trump says his three adult children – Ivanka, Eric and Donald Jr. – are prepared to take over his business empire if he decides to run for president.

'I have three children now who are grown and could run it,' he told Daily Mail Online in an exclusive interview at a New Hampshire forum for Republicans seriously considering bids for the presidency.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...

edit on 30-11-2016 by Deny Arrogance because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

What is your point? Is that illegal too?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: burdman30ott6



Sorry, but that is a ridiculous standard that is entirely in opposition to the way things work in this country.


I believe it is reasonable to hold Trump to such a standard. His entire campaign was built on the premise that he was going to be different. He was going to change the tone of DC and set the example of how to properly represent the people. Is it unreasonable to hold him to the criteria he has set for himself?



I think there's been a misunderstanding... I support the idea of President Trump fully distancing HIMSELF from his corporate interests, even doing so for the long haul. He went into this eyes open and understanding the expectations. That said, America elected Donald J Trump to the highest office, not his adult children. We don't apply the sins of the father onto offspring in this nation, and while being POTUS is certainly not a sin, I think the concept applies here. I wouldn't demand a POTUS financially neuter his children from their current legal ventures any more than I would support a POTUS financially benefiting his children as a result of the office.

In other words, the country has every right to expect President Trump do what he's said he's doing with his companies because he is in this on his own volition... we have no right to expect his children step aside from these positions because they did not run for the office nor were any of them elected to office.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: DJW001

What is your point? Is that illegal too?


All those non-producing corporate entities might be used for hiding things. Remember Enron and its Star Wars themed holdings? It is definitely a red flag, as is turning to foreign banks.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Might be. Could be. Maybe. No proof. Enron? They backed Bush it was not his company. I could say Solyndra as a recent comparison also. Neither POTUS owned the companies.

He is a global builder in dozens of countries. It is quite common for foreign funding or backing of projects.

He is removing himself even though he does not have to.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs


Might be. Could be. Maybe. No proof. Enron? They backed Bush it was not his company. I could say Solyndra as a recent comparison also. Neither POTUS owned the companies.


Trump does own the companies.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

And...again....there is nothing to see.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Here is something I watched yesterday about this subject.

Judge Nap: 'President' Trump's Business Dealings Political, Not Legal Problem



During the campaign season and after Donald Trump was elected the 45th president of the United States, questions have arisen as to how the New York mogul should handle his worldwide business empire. The president-elect owns numerous hotels, golf courses and other properties that could pose potential conflicts of interest, critics have said.

Judge Andrew Napolitano said Trump's businesses pose a political problem for him, rather than a legal one. "None of the rules that govern everyone else govern him," Napolitano said, explaining that the president and vice president are exempt from relevant laws that our governors and legislators are subject to.

While Trump cannot accept payments in a quid pro quo manner as president, he can manage his properties in a way that "may appear unlawful" without breaking ethics laws.


insider.foxnews.com...


So, it seems like he's ok from a legal standpoint, no matter what he does with his biz.

lol, people be cryin' tho.




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Trump is about as transparent as a brick, filling his cabinet with cronies and Washington insiders, and somehow people are supposed to feel good about this. This will be a long four years, am guessing he will get bored and turn it over to Pence, who is a nightmare.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: hellobruce

No, he filed what you are supposed to as a candidate.


He did not file what he promised he would, but the trumpets ignore that fact as they hate it when their God Emperor's obvious lies are pointed out!



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Arnie123

Uh... Trump lost the popular vote. That means that the "larger population of the united states" is skeptical of him.

Wow. I didn't know you were a mind reader. Show me the numbers that track every single American's feelings on Trump. From what I recall, only around 50% of the population actually voted. Care to back up your hyperbole?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

What is he supposed to fill it with Burger King Managers and bag boys?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

I guess he is still under an audit...but does it really matter at this point?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy


So, it seems like he's ok from a legal standpoint, no matter what he does with his biz.


Wrong. If he does anything illegal with his businesses, there will be major repercussions. Hint: it is traditional in some countries to bribe officials to obtain building permits. This is specifically forbidden by United States federal law. If a muck-raking Indian journalist finds proof that Trump's agents bribed Indian officials, it could lead to an investigation that brings the Executive and Judiciary branches grinding to a halt.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join