All and all, the Washington Post estimated that Trump and his family have made $7.7 million so far in the campaign by spending on Trump-owned services from event space to air travel.But he's not paying market value: That's the lesson we learn from this eye-opening post, which reveals yet another scandal that would end the chances of any Democratic politician.
Campaigns are required to pay market value on items it purchases, and there is nothing per se illegal about using Trump-owned vendors.
In short and in sum: The Trump campaign rents office space in Trump Tower. Not illegal. However, Trump (despite his claims) is not the sole funder of this campaign: Donations have come in from the website. Once that source of funding kicked in, Trump Tower immediately started to charge FIVE TIMES THE RENT.
During this same time period, the number of staffers went down. Obviously, if he has fewer staffers, he probably is not using more space -- certainly not five times as much space.
The fact that Donald Trump is scraping after this kind of spare change tells me that he cannot possibly be worth what he claims. If he were truly a billionaire, why isn't the guy in the picture to the right sitting in an office with a marble entranceway, with original paintings by Frederick Remington and Albert Bierstadt hanging on the walls?
The campaign is clearly just another scuzzy, Trumpy money-making scheme. Trump is using other people's donations to profit from the sales of his own swag.
But that doesn't mean that I think Trump has given up on victory. I heard on a recent political radio show (was it Sam Seder? Thom Hartmann?) that lower-level campaign staffers report, off-the-record, that the higher-ups all seem to be hiding some great and important secret.
I think that a very dirty covert political op is in the works. Very dirty. Perhaps even something on the scale of 9/11.
When that particular piece of shit hits the fan, Alex Jones will insure that every paranoid on the internet interprets the event as an operation directed against Trump, rather than an operation perpetrated to help Trump.
Trump is pinning his hopes on something big, an unprecedented exercise in political spectacle. A game changer. He doesn't care about traditional campaigning except insofar as he can use the campaign to fatten his wallet.
TPM don't get it. They even call Trump's "digital" campaign "comically bad".
ReplyDelete"All and all, the Washington Post estimated that Trump and his family have made $7.7 million so far in the campaign by spending on Trump-owned services from event space to air travel."
Big deal!
As for that office space...Trump is a landlord.
"If he were truly a billionaire, why isn't the guy in the picture to the right sitting in an office with a marble entranceway, with original paintings by Frederick Remington and Albert Bierstadt hanging on the walls?"
Because nobody makes it by giving it away?
*rolls eyes*
ReplyDeleteOnce again:
(1) With a trivial handful of exceptions, the only people who will believe any "October Surprise" are the people who would never have voted for Clinton, anyway.
(2) Except for a few renegades such as Flynn, the vast majority of the members of the national security establishment have lined up behind Clinton. They. Do. Not. Want. Trump. They have means of making sure they do not get Trump, although I doubt they will actually need to use them.
Let me add a new one:
(3) 2016 is not 2000. The demographics of the electorate have shifted significantly. Specifically, DAWPs (Dumb Ass White People) are a smaller portion of the electorate. Who does Trump have, besides DAWPs and a handful of actually rich people (unlike Trump the fake tycoon) who wish to continue dominating the country by manipulating the DAWPs (the basic GOP strategy since 1968, if not earlier)?
"ensure", not "insure".
ReplyDeleteThe fatal flaw of spell-checking: the right spelling of the wrong word.
Ivory Bill, I hope you are right, except it very much looks like 2000, from the news media. Don't forget also that Roger Stone actually accused Hillary of being able to steal the election (and then used Republicans stealing Wisconsin as an example!) which, as we know, is broadcasting what the Republican can and would do!
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, the media, just like 2000, will give cover to the theft. So long as the national NARRATIVE matches the theft, the nation will go along with it.
Last night, while waiting on a food order, I had the misfortune to have several tv screens blaring at me. CNN's headline, which remained in place for 20 solid minutes, blared "Breaking News: Donald Trump delays speech." A delayed speech is breaking news??!!
Only if, just like in 2000, the entire election is covered from one candidate's POV.
They finally took down that Important Headline, only to replace it with this Breaking News: some wonder if Hillary Clinton is ill.
So baseless speculation is breaking news?
Meanwhile, on Fox News, they took a break from speculating on Hillary's emails to rolling all the accusations Hillary has faced over the years. Just one big scrolling list.
We need to do more than vote. We need to disrupt the media drumbeats. Good luck with that. I organized two busloads of protesters down to DC for Dumbya's inauguration. It would not be difficult, especially in NYC, to disrupt news stations but people don't get it. Even activists, even protesters. The closest anyone's come is Code Pink. You would think Anonymous could do it, but most people just don't think conceptually. They can't view something like "The News" or "TV" as a villain, or even as a war front. Or even as ground we need to capture. Twitter is not going to save the world, and in fact is itself a medium that encourages bullying and poor information.
Barney Frank, who has done his share of good work already this political season, once told me you can't fight (I forget how he put it) the general perception, the media drumbeat. The most you get is one sound byte.
I'm with you prowlerzee; that's why I fight every dumbass Facebook meme that comes my way. It may be a losing effort but I'm not trying to move the hardcore tRumpians to my side-- the goal is to prevent the media from moving anyone from undecided to the GOP. We can do it. I have hope that Clinton will have the guts in her first two years to attack the causes of this regression in what was once a great nation-- the media. Since the Fairness Doctrine repeal, lying became not only legal but without consequence of any kind. At least, before the repeal, station licenses could be challenged more often and without entire squadrons of lawyers. I know, I know. Cable. It doesn't matter anymore whether the "news" comes over the air, through a fiber, or from a diarac from inner space, if it is labelled "news" in any way, shape, or form, it must be subject to truth. And if the truth is not told, either through distortion or omission, punishment must ensue.
ReplyDelete