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.

 

Thousands of Trump university alumni sue Trump for fraud

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
[Bernie 71? Out of those big 3 candidates, they're all too old in 4 more years to be reelected. And that was the thing I was looking forward to most here.


Bernie is 75. 70 is not considered old these days. George Soros is 86 and he's nowhere near old. Being president doesn't do much. Sign a few papers here and there. Party every weekend.




posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Edumakated




I do think his judgment lapsed with Trump U though as I know he had to know the modus operandi for those types of seminars. Maybe he did think it would be a little better, but who knows.


Trump has a long history of cheating the people he does business with. I wouldn't trust him in business and I sure don't trust him as president.

www.wsj.com...

www.washingtonpost.com... 4961c8




No sh1it! We never knew that about you, thanks for the links.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
Bernie is 75. 70 is not considered old these days. George Soros is 86 and he's nowhere near old. Being president doesn't do much. Sign a few papers here and there. Party every weekend.


It's old enough that they can pass the torch to someone who isn't a decade past retirement age.

But the main point is that 1 termers I'm fine with. I'm sick of 2 term Presidents though. No matter how much I may like the person, I want some 1 term Presidents. 8 years of any administration is too much.
edit on 30-3-2017 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Then you should know that it's a personal life choice and they should know better.

If you don't have the gift, they're a waste of money.
edit on 30-3-2017 by Wide-Eyes because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard

Wow. So blame the victim because they trusted the man y'all have trusted to run this country.

Fools are born every minute amiright?


So it seems....the thrust being that a fool and his/her money is easy parted....except in this case these were people trying to educate themselves in what was supposed to be something like a formal education in the business world you would think, and they trusted him or at least in his words, ("I know a lot of nice words, believe me")...that's not a quote from his book BTW but you get the drift, while they may not have known much more about Trump and his way of doing things, which are unsavoury to say the least.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stevenjames15
a reply to: allsee4eye

Look at all the Trump apologists blaming the victims. People that were trying to better their lives. You people are sick.


These people were already settled once. doing so again is double dipping. they originally agreed on 80 percent recoup. now they are doing a new one to get 100 percent on top of the 80 percent. Thats shady no matter who you are.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
So ... in summary, it's not Trump's fault he lied, it's the fault of the people who believed him.

Yep.


Do you mean then, that the law only compensated those people partially for a fraud that required Trump to lie in the first place, because those people were also at fault..that sort of means fraud is not fraud, just a percentage of it is.
That's not a bad law..if you are a fraudster, or pretty much anything else really.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

It looks like they just want all their money back - a total of 100%. Not an additional 100%.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Trump can be a good man and refund them 200%. He has lots of money. 50 million is nothing to him. Doing so be good for PR.
edit on 30-3-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: allsee4eye

Soooo. Let me get this straight. Our President put his name on a scam "university," and made money off of it,


Trump university only accounted for less than 1% of Trump's income. Trump didn't need Trump university in the first place.


But for the people that attended it was a massive percentage of their income and HE TOOK THEM FOR IT.

What kind of person does that?* As you point out, it's not like he needed the money...


(*a dishonest conman type of person)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

If the students didn't like the service, they should have emailed or called Trump and told Trump about it. Trump university was run by Michael Sexton that crook.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Swills

It had his name on it. I do hold Trump accountable. However, I don't think Trump intentionally scammed anyone and, as I said, it wasn't run by him. Everyone makes mistakes. Trump university was Trump's biggest mistake in his life.


So you are saying he stupidly allowed a conman to use his name?

According to folks here, that makes him a loser...cause he should have known better and deserves no sympathy.

Seriously. Is that the argument?

If it is, then you are saying he has really bad judgement? Like maybe he shouldn't make big decisions like that because he's so easily manipulated??

I doubt he didn't know what was happening. He knew what the materials were. He made a video saying how great the "university" was and he then lied and said he hand-picked the instructors.

There is too much evidence against him. He is not innocent.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

No one, especially a business man, intentional wants bad reputation. Trump can't even spell properly. He's not a smart man. I don't think he intentionally wanted Trump university run into the ground the way it did.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

I agree with you. Sadly, the only way to survive these days is somewhat cut throat. I wouldn't be comfortable taking people's money like that either but at the end of the day, if you don't take it, somebody else will.

That's the world of business, sad but true.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Mr sexton should be the one to pay back the 20 percent then still wanted then since he was running it. Trump licenses his name out alot. so his name is on places that are not even ran by him as well.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: yuppa

It looks like they just want all their money back - a total of 100%. Not an additional 100%.


Well at least one wants her day in court,( since Trump was never going to pay anyone originally) possibly because the same judge has said two things in the past, one that the settlement was fair enough, and that class settlements rarely go to court. She also wants an apology as well as a 'guilty' verdict, likely since Trump put his own finger on the University, in saying, "Hand picked people" (more nice words) at the time. Obviously flawed at this time. We'll see tomorrow how it goes.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

No I mean that some folks here are blaming the victims not the perpetrators.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: smurfy

No I mean that some folks here are blaming the victims not the perpetrators.


Right I get you and as you can guess agree wholeheartedly ..

But this is what you get these days, those who are not affected munch on other peoples misfortune, not perceived misfortune, something that can happen any day to them, and with all the mouthing, I'll bet they wouldn't be so happy if it happened to them, nobody knows everything..all of the time.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: kaylaluv

Trump is running again in 2020. He is doing as best as he can.


Hindsight is 2020. This time we won't elect Trump.



Who's "we" kemosabe?

Did you vote for him this time?

These losers can't sue him again. lol.

On what grounds do they have? The grounds that he lost the first suit?




posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: allsee4eye
Sorry I'm a little confused.

If the people already sued and won what right do they have to due again?

Did they not have to accept the award they accepted the first time?



I hven't seen the original settlement agreement but it is very possible that Trump, in an effort to disclaim guilt, was not personally a party to the agreement and would not have been protected by it. When you have mutiple tortfeasors (bad guys), a release of one doesn't necessarily release the others.




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join