Third Veteran Dumped By Trump Because Of Military Service

[HonestJohn]

Troops Prefer Trump to Clinton by Huge Margins
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/election/2016/05/09/military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton/84132402/

Meanwhile, in 2012, Romney did very poorly for a Republican across Military areas of the United States.
http://www.patchworknation.org/node/78

54% (in a non-scientific poll - given only to volunteer subscribers of the Times) is overwhelming support?

My point is that Trump's military support is weaker than normal. 

In 2000 Bush had rough 66% support over Gore.  (I'm leaving out the 2004 elections, as support was through the roof due to 9-11).

In 2008, McCain took 68%.

And even with Romney, he still took roughly 2/3rds of the military vote.

[Mesaclone]

Under normal circumstances I would agree with you.  However, the decision not to honor the terms of the acquisition was an executive decision not a managerial one.

And it almost certainly was not a Trump decision. Heck, this was so long ago, I doubt any of us know what the actual full extent of the law was regarding reserved duty at this time. Vets should always be treated with respect, but you can't blame the owner of a 30000 strong conglomerate because one "executive" made a bad decision regarding a reserve pilot's right to keep his job. There is nowhere near enough information given in that article to make a negative conclusion.

[Mesaclone]

54% (in a non-scientific poll - given only to volunteer subscribers of the Times) is overwhelming support?

My point is that Trump's military support is weaker than normal. 

In 2000 Bush had rough 66% support over Gore.  (I'm leaving out the 2004 elections, as support was through the roof due to 9-11).

In 2008, McCain took 68%.

And even with Romney, he still took roughly 2/3rds of the military vote.

Nothing in the known data indicates Trump won't exceed Romney's vote totals amongs soldiers and veterans, and while I don't put a lot of stock in any "self selecting" poll, its what we have to go on at this point. Another strong anecdotal indicator is the huge numbers of veterans turning out for Trump events and the fact that he's working closely with a number of important Veteran's charities.

[HonestJohn]

Nothing in the known data indicates Trump won't exceed Romney's vote totals amongs soldiers and veterans, and while I don't put a lot of stock in any "self selecting" poll, its what we have to go on at this point. Another strong anecdotal indicator is the huge numbers of veterans turning out for Trump events and the fact that he's working closely with a number of important Veteran's charities.

He only donated the bulk of the funds after being hounded by the press.  That does get noticed in the service's Sergeant associations.

[RoosGirl]

And it almost certainly was not a Trump decision. Heck, this was so long ago, I doubt any of us know what the actual full extent of the law was regarding reserved duty at this time. Vets should always be treated with respect, but you can't blame the owner of a 30000 strong conglomerate because one "executive" made a bad decision regarding a reserve pilot's right to keep his job. There is nowhere near enough information given in that article to make a negative conclusion.

One was so very long ago.  Two are recent.  This is a decision where they new they would settle in court and the problem would be gone.

[Mesaclone]

He only donated the bulk of the funds after being hounded by the press.  That does get noticed in the service's Sergeant associations.

Wow, you are just a little Hillary Clinton amplifier...that's exactly what she said. Only, it wasn't true. The money had not been dispersed fully pending background checks ensuring the validity of each receiving charity...though one did get a check almost right away. Are you actually arguing Trump intended to hang on to the donations? That is beyond ridiculous. He worked for and donated 5.6 millon dollars to vets...how much did your girl Hillary donate, or even Ted Cruz for that matter?

Unbelievable that you guys want to besmirch even a genuine act of charity...of if that's not what it was, please fill everyone in as to what the conspiracy was regarding the 5.6 million raised dollars.

[Mesaclone]

One was so very long ago.  Two are recent.  This is a decision where they new they would settle in court and the problem would be gone.

Again, do you have even an iota of evidence that Mr. Trump made this decision...or even knew of it?

[Mechanicos]

He only donated the bulk of the funds after being hounded by the press.  That does get noticed in the service's Sergeant associations.

Thats not a true statement. Sounds like a liberal thing to say.

[RoosGirl]

Again, do you have even an iota of evidence that Mr. Trump made this decision...or even knew of it?

Where does the buck stop?  Okay, he didn't make the decision on the guy 30 years ago.  What happened when he found out about the lawsuit?  Why not take care of it then and make it clear that it was never to happen again?  Nope, happens two more times in the last few years, and those are the ones we know about.  Were there more?  Maybe, maybe not.  Were lawsuit for person 2 and 3 brought separately or together?  Why wasn't this addressed corporately when lawsuit number 2 came?  I have no proof it was Trump's decision, but there's 30 years of history of it happening at least 3 times in completely separate corporate entities owned by him.  I'm guessing there's something to see here.

[sinkspur]

Wow, you are just a little Hillary Clinton amplifier...that's exactly what she said. Only, it wasn't true. The money had not been dispersed fully pending background checks ensuring the validity of each receiving charity...though one did get a check almost right away. Are you actually arguing Trump intended to hang on to the donations? That is beyond ridiculous. He worked for and donated 5.6 millon dollars to vets...how much did your girl Hillary donate, or even Ted Cruz for that matter?

Unbelievable that you guys want to besmirch even a genuine act of charity...of if that's not what it was, please fill everyone in as to what the conspiracy was regarding the 5.6 million raised dollars.

Trump didn't donate his million until he was hounded by the press.  Then, when he designated his charity, he said it was because he had to "vet" the charity.

Apparently, AMVETS doesn't rate highly in terms of its disbursements of money.  But, Trump donated anyway because he got an award last year from them.


http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/03/trump-donation-went-to-poorly-rated-veterans-charity.html

Trump Donation Went to Poorly Rated Veterans Charity

Jun 03, 2016 | by Bryant Jordan
Dozens of veterans groups -- large and small, nationally known and not-so-well known -- are receiving more than $5 million in donations from presidential candidate Donald Trump.

AMVETS, the Disabled American Veterans Charitable Trust and the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation all received sizable checks -- with MCLEA getting $1.1 million. And spokesmen for the groups all said they are grateful for the money.

Joe Chenelly, executive director of AMVETS, said Trump's $75,000 donation, "will provide substantial support to continue our mission and proud history of assisting veterans and their families."

Edmond Boran, president of the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, told The Journal News of New York that the million-dollar donation "will really help raise our public profile."

Boran, a Marine veteran of the Vietnam War said, said it's not the first time Trump donated to MC-LEF.
"Donald Trump has been a consistent supporter for years, and that's what's important to us," he told the paper. "He's been a longtime supporter of veterans and law enforcement in general."
But one veterans' organization that picked up a $75,000 donation has a history of questionable fundraising and spending practices, with several charity watchdog groups panning it for how little it spends on veterans.

Foundation for American Veterans, based in West Bloomfield, Michigan, has just one star out of four from Great Nonprofits, which draws its ratings from the public, and has an F rating from CharityWatch, which monitors and rates charities.

CharityWatch analyst Stephanie Kalivas said FAV got the failing grade because it spent only 10 percent of its cash budget on programs. The organization also faulted FAV on its fundraising -- spending $85 for every $100 raised.

"Top-rated charities will spend $25 or less to raise $100 in funds and 75 percent or more of their cash budget on programs," Kalivas told Military.com on Friday.

Charity Navigator, another charity monitoring site, does not rate FAV because the organization is not a 501(c)(3) public charity and so does not meet the group's requirements for review.

Trump, a billionaire real estate mogul and reality TV celebrity, grudgingly released a list of veteran organizations that benefited from funds he raised in January during a May 31 press conference.
"This [money] is going to phenomenal groups," Trump said during his press conference, where he said the media "should be ashamed of themselves" for demanding he identify the groups he donated to.

"Instead of being like, 'Thank you very much, Mr. Trump,' or 'Trump did a good job,' everyone said, 'Who got it? Who got it? Who got it?' " he said. "And you make me look very bad."

Trump also defended the time he took to identify the groups, saying all had to be vetted first.

Military.com asked the Trump campaign whether those vetting the groups were campaign staff or people hired from outside, but received no reply.

According to The Associated Press, Trump issued the first $1 million donation from his personal account on May 23 after a Washington Post interview where he was questioned about the funds.

The AP also reported that "the biggest batch" of donations went out about May 24, following the Post story.

Joe Davis, national spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said that whatever amount was raised and donated "did make a difference to the groups that were the beneficiaries."

VFW was not among the groups, but Davis said the attention should be on the good done by the donations.

"Properly taking care of veterans, service members and their families belongs to no political party or ideology. It is what is required when a nation sends her men and women to war," he said.

[Mesaclone]

Where does the buck stop?  Okay, he didn't make the decision on the guy 30 years ago.  What happened when he found out about the lawsuit?  Why not take care of it then and make it clear that it was never to happen again?  Nope, happens two more times in the last few years, and those are the ones we know about.  Were there more?  Maybe, maybe not.  Were lawsuit for person 2 and 3 brought separately or together?  Why wasn't this addressed corporately when lawsuit number 2 came?  I have no proof it was Trump's decision, but there's 30 years of history of it happening at least 3 times in completely separate corporate entities owned by him.  I'm guessing there's something to see here.

Again, just provide ANY evidence that he knew of any of these court cases. I'm a huge Pro-Vet guy, but to think Mr. Trump is involved in every civil case brought in every one of his numerous corporations and businesses is ludicrous. Its like saying Obama is at fault if he doesn't personally know about every civil suit filed within the ranks of Federal employees.


And Sink, still waiting to hear what pretzel twisting conspiracy was afoot with the charity money...what was his evil plan to hang onto the 5.6 million?

Man Sink, its hard to even ask that question with a straight face...can't wait to hear your answer, I'm guessing its gonna be a doozy. Don't disappoint. I mean come on, obviously they were taking their time vetting the groups receiving the donations...big freakin' deal.

[sinkspur]

Again, just provide ANY evidence that he knew of any of these court cases. I'm a huge Pro-Vet guy, but to think Mr. Trump is involved in every civil case brought in every one of his numerous corporations and businesses is ludicrous. Its like saying Obama is at fault if he doesn't personally know about every civil suit filed within the ranks of Federal employees.


And Sink, still waiting to hear what pretzel twisting conspiracy was afoot with the charity money...what was his evil plan to hang onto the 5.6 million?

Man Sink, its hard to even ask that question with a straight face...can't wait to hear your answer, I'm guessing its gonna be a doozy. Don't disappoint. I mean come on, obviously they were taking their time vetting the groups receiving the donations...big freakin' deal.

Trump only decided to account for the money when he was hounded by the press last week.  He would have NEVER given an accounting otherwise.  And Trump didn't kick in his million until Steven Farenthold of the WAPO called him on it.

[Mechanicos]

Trump didn't donate his million until he was hounded by the press.  Then, when he designated his charity, he said it was because he had to "vet" the charity.

Apparently, AMVETS doesn't rate highly in terms of its disbursements of money.  But, Trump donated anyway because he got an award last year from them.


http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/03/trump-donation-went-to-poorly-rated-veterans-charity.html

Trump Donation Went to Poorly Rated Veterans Charity

Jun 03, 2016 | by Bryant Jordan
Dozens of veterans groups -- large and small, nationally known and not-so-well known -- are receiving more than $5 million in donations from presidential candidate Donald Trump.

AMVETS, the Disabled American Veterans Charitable Trust and the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation all received sizable checks -- with MCLEA getting $1.1 million. And spokesmen for the groups all said they are grateful for the money.

Joe Chenelly, executive director of AMVETS, said Trump's $75,000 donation, "will provide substantial support to continue our mission and proud history of assisting veterans and their families."

Edmond Boran, president of the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, told The Journal News of New York that the million-dollar donation "will really help raise our public profile."

Boran, a Marine veteran of the Vietnam War said, said it's not the first time Trump donated to MC-LEF.
"Donald Trump has been a consistent supporter for years, and that's what's important to us," he told the paper. "He's been a longtime supporter of veterans and law enforcement in general."
But one veterans' organization that picked up a $75,000 donation has a history of questionable fundraising and spending practices, with several charity watchdog groups panning it for how little it spends on veterans.

Foundation for American Veterans, based in West Bloomfield, Michigan, has just one star out of four from Great Nonprofits, which draws its ratings from the public, and has an F rating from CharityWatch, which monitors and rates charities.

CharityWatch analyst Stephanie Kalivas said FAV got the failing grade because it spent only 10 percent of its cash budget on programs. The organization also faulted FAV on its fundraising -- spending $85 for every $100 raised.

"Top-rated charities will spend $25 or less to raise $100 in funds and 75 percent or more of their cash budget on programs," Kalivas told Military.com on Friday.

Charity Navigator, another charity monitoring site, does not rate FAV because the organization is not a 501(c)(3) public charity and so does not meet the group's requirements for review.

Trump, a billionaire real estate mogul and reality TV celebrity, grudgingly released a list of veteran organizations that benefited from funds he raised in January during a May 31 press conference.
"This [money] is going to phenomenal groups," Trump said during his press conference, where he said the media "should be ashamed of themselves" for demanding he identify the groups he donated to.

"Instead of being like, 'Thank you very much, Mr. Trump,' or 'Trump did a good job,' everyone said, 'Who got it? Who got it? Who got it?' " he said. "And you make me look very bad."

Trump also defended the time he took to identify the groups, saying all had to be vetted first.

Military.com asked the Trump campaign whether those vetting the groups were campaign staff or people hired from outside, but received no reply.

According to The Associated Press, Trump issued the first $1 million donation from his personal account on May 23 after a Washington Post interview where he was questioned about the funds.

The AP also reported that "the biggest batch" of donations went out about May 24, following the Post story.

Joe Davis, national spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said that whatever amount was raised and donated "did make a difference to the groups that were the beneficiaries."

VFW was not among the groups, but Davis said the attention should be on the good done by the donations.

"Properly taking care of veterans, service members and their families belongs to no political party or ideology. It is what is required when a nation sends her men and women to war," he said.

Yeah right.

More #4Hillary

[Mesaclone]

Trump only decided to account for the money when he was hounded by the press last week.  He would have NEVER given an accounting otherwise.  And Trump didn't kick in his million until Steven Farenthold of the WAPO called him on it.

You must be smarter than that. You think a billionaire running for the presidency in which his every action is scrutinized with a fine tooth comb, is going to abscond with a few million dollars from a Veteran's fund raising event he initiated and raised money for. You have to be kidding...please...tell me you don't actually think this.

[Neverdul]

Trump may not have been the one to have personally made the decision not extend an offer of employment to Col. Charles Beattie but as the owner/CEO of Trump Shuttle, he would have most certainly been involved with and aware of many of the details of the acquisition.  It was a high profile purchase although not a large one in terms of hard and soft assets – number of planes, other equipment and the pilots - former United Shuttle employees. 

In a merger or acquisition it is SOP for the HR and legal folks of the purchasing company to be up on all the relevant laws and certainly should have been well aware of the Veteran's Reemployment Rights Act ("VRRA") which was in place at the time.  It would also be SOP and part of due diligence to be aware of any of the predecessor’s company’s employees out on any type of approved leave or any outstanding litigation or potential litigation issues surrounding employment and inform those higher up the chain of those issues.  I know as I’ve been on such teams representing HR and or Payroll Management during several mergers and acquisitions.

I would think that prior to this case going to court, Trump Shuttle, Inc. would have had the opportunity to adjudicate and make things right as to Col. Beattie but instead attempted fight his claim, allow it to go to court and further to make the claim that Beattie’s 9-month enrollment at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces was “voluntary” among other objections to his claim that the court ultimate ruled were invalid under VRRA.

While he may not have made the initial decision or knew who Beattie was at the time he was denied employment because he was still serving his military obligation, I cannot for one-minute think that Donald Trump was at least not made aware of this prior to it going to court.  If he wasn’t, that would indicate that he doesn’t have much at all to do with the companies that he owns or much control over how they operate.

If he was and then made an executive decision to fight it in court as IMO would be his call as the owner/CEO, that would indicate that either he takes bad legal and HR advice from an incompetent staff or gets good advice from a competent staff and chooses to ignore it.

Even though Trump owns or is in a partnership with many, many separately incorporated companies, I would think that some things such as HR policies, procedures and oversight would be centralized. It would be very unusual and extremely inefficient not to do so.   

And I know some folks hate us HR and payroll type folks, sometimes I will admit for good reasons, but a good HR / payroll management team is there to protect the interests of the company but also to protect the legal rights of employees - if only as to protect the company from losing litigations and facing fines and penalties for violations of employment laws.

We’ve been told numerous times by Trump himself and by his supporters that Trump hires only “the very best” people and is a CEO of unparalleled success and qualifications, and that he would do the same as POTUS.

But we now have a 3rd “known” case of Trump having to settle a court case over the hiring or termination of veterans and reservists.  Yet Trump tells us how important it is to “take care of our veterans”.

We are also told that he “delegates” but there is much evidence that Trump is also a micro-manager.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/14/donald-trump-former-employee-interviews-ego-diversity

As to the claim that he has 30,000 employees – there is some questions as to the number he actually employs on his payroll.  He has claimed to “employ” people for properties he does not own or operate but only with whom has only has a licensing agreement.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-claims-he-employs-many-people-at-honolulu-hotel/


And as to Trump Shuttle – it was wasn’t such a great deal and was plagued by bad decision after bad decision, many made by Trump himself.  He didn’t understand the business or take the advice of the airline experts he had initially hired, nor did he understand the needs of the shuttle’s customers. For instance:

“He spent more than $1 million on each jet, going well beyond the normal cabin upgrades to add thick maroon carpeting, maple-veneer paneling, beige leather seats, and even faux marble sinks and gold-colored fixtures in the lavatories.” 

“The bathroom was a work of art,” joked Nick Santangelo, who ran maintenance and engineering at the shuttle.

“They used ideas from the hotel business, which wasn’t bad, but they didn’t always work.” Older jets in particular guzzle fuel and airline executives are obsessed with saving even a few ounces of weight. Not so Trump: “At first they wanted to put in a ceramic sink, that was too heavy,” said Santangelo. “Then one of his henchman decided they were going to put brass handles on the doors you use to get out in an emergency. Normal handles weigh a few ounces, and these things probably weighed five pounds each... you’d kill to save one pound, and they wanted to add 20 to 30 pounds to each plane.” 

“We spent a lot on service,” recalls Harteveldt. “Bagels and coffee in the morning; boxed dinners with sliced chateaubriand and salad; the flight attendants hustled to serve everyone meals and then pour two or even three rounds of drinks” in the 45 minutes the plane was in the air.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/04/the-crash-of-trump-air.html

[Chosen Daughter]

Is the in-flight meal Trump Steaks?  Or was the Trump-Kee-Bob at the Giants Stadium concessions?

WOW!!!!!  Looks like a yuuuuuuuuuge bite!  If anyone watched the Veterans behind Trump during his media speech on his Veteran contributions you would see disappointment.  I watched and I think they were taken aback that Trump made their appearance in support of him about a sleaze reporter.  He invited those Veterans to show their support of him.  He didn't support them.  When he spoke it was this sleaze.  Not how the men behind him served our nation.

[Mesaclone]

Trump may not have been the one to have personally made the decision not extend an offer of employment to Col. Charles Beattie but as the owner/CEO of Trump Shuttle, he would have most certainly been involved with and aware of many of the details of the acquisition.  It was a high profile purchase although not a large one in terms of hard and soft assets – number of planes, other equipment and the pilots - former United Shuttle employees. 

In a merger or acquisition it is SOP for the HR and legal folks of the purchasing company to be up on all the relevant laws and certainly should have been well aware of the Veteran's Reemployment Rights Act ("VRRA") which was in place at the time.  It would also be SOP and part of due diligence to be aware of any of the predecessor’s company’s employees out on any type of approved leave or any outstanding litigation or potential litigation issues surrounding employment and inform those higher up the chain of those issues.  I know as I’ve been on such teams representing HR and or Payroll Management during several mergers and acquisitions.

I would think that prior to this case going to court, Trump Shuttle, Inc. would have had the opportunity to adjudicate and make things right as to Col. Beattie but instead attempted fight his claim, allow it to go to court and further to make the claim that Beattie’s 9-month enrollment at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces was “voluntary” among other objections to his claim that the court ultimate ruled were invalid under VRRA.

While he may not have made the initial decision or knew who Beattie was at the time he was denied employment because he was still serving his military obligation, I cannot for one-minute think that Donald Trump was at least not made aware of this prior to it going to court.  If he wasn’t, that would indicate that he doesn’t have much at all to do with the companies that he owns or much control over how they operate.

If he was and then made an executive decision to fight it in court as IMO would be his call as the owner/CEO, that would indicate that either he takes bad legal and HR advice from an incompetent staff or gets good advice from a competent staff and chooses to ignore it.

Even though Trump owns or is in a partnership with many, many separately incorporated companies, I would think that some things such as HR policies, procedures and oversight would be centralized. It would be very unusual and extremely inefficient not to do so.   

And I know some folks hate us HR and payroll type folks, sometimes I will admit for good reasons, but a good HR / payroll management team is there to protect the interests of the company but also to protect the legal rights of employees - if only as to protect the company from losing litigations and facing fines and penalties for violations of employment laws.

We’ve been told numerous times by Trump himself and by his supporters that Trump hires only “the very best” people and is a CEO of unparalleled success and qualifications, and that he would do the same as POTUS.

But we now have a 3rd “known” case of Trump having to settle a court case over the hiring or termination of veterans and reservists.  Yet Trump tells us how important it is to “take care of our veterans”.

We are also told that he “delegates” but there is much evidence that Trump is also a micro-manager.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/14/donald-trump-former-employee-interviews-ego-diversity

As to the claim that he has 30,000 employees – there is some questions as to the number he actually employs on his payroll.  He has claimed to “employ” people for properties he does not own or operate but only with whom has only has a licensing agreement.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-claims-he-employs-many-people-at-honolulu-hotel/


And as to Trump Shuttle – it was wasn’t such a great deal and was plagued by bad decision after bad decision, many made by Trump himself.  He didn’t understand the business or take the advice of the airline experts he had initially hired, nor did he understand the needs of the shuttle’s customers. For instance:

“He spent more than $1 million on each jet, going well beyond the normal cabin upgrades to add thick maroon carpeting, maple-veneer paneling, beige leather seats, and even faux marble sinks and gold-colored fixtures in the lavatories.” 

“The bathroom was a work of art,” joked Nick Santangelo, who ran maintenance and engineering at the shuttle.

“They used ideas from the hotel business, which wasn’t bad, but they didn’t always work.” Older jets in particular guzzle fuel and airline executives are obsessed with saving even a few ounces of weight. Not so Trump: “At first they wanted to put in a ceramic sink, that was too heavy,” said Santangelo. “Then one of his henchman decided they were going to put brass handles on the doors you use to get out in an emergency. Normal handles weigh a few ounces, and these things probably weighed five pounds each... you’d kill to save one pound, and they wanted to add 20 to 30 pounds to each plane.” 

“We spent a lot on service,” recalls Harteveldt. “Bagels and coffee in the morning; boxed dinners with sliced chateaubriand and salad; the flight attendants hustled to serve everyone meals and then pour two or even three rounds of drinks” in the 45 minutes the plane was in the air.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/04/the-crash-of-trump-air.html

So instead of having ANY evidence at all that he was even off-handedly informed of this at the time...you're simply saying you THINK he should have been told. Well, the truth is he was not personally running Trump shuttle and doubtless had virtually no direct involvement in the company's day to day affairs. Businessmen at this level have legal teams that handle smaller civil cases and which either work to settlement or go to court based on what is deemed most financially sound. Should those lawyers have placed the needs of a veteran above a basic cost analysis...of course. But if you think that discussion of that small of a business addressing that small of an incident came to the plate of Mr. Trump...well you have to have SOME kind of evidence. And you just don't. If you guys are going to dredge up small civil cases from 30 years ago with no way to demonstrate that Trump was involved in any way...well, its going to be a disappointing summer and fall for you.

[RoosGirl]

So instead of having ANY evidence at all that he was even off-handedly informed of this at the time...you're simply saying you THINK he should have been told. Well, the truth is he was not personally running Trump shuttle and doubtless had virtually no direct involvement in the company's day to day affairs. Businessmen at this level have legal teams that handle smaller civil cases and which either work to settlement or go to court based on what is deemed most financially sound. Should those lawyers have placed the needs of a veteran above a basic cost analysis...of course. But if you think that discussion of that small of a business addressing that small of an incident came to the plate of Mr. Trump...well you have to have SOME kind of evidence. And you just don't. If you guys are going to dredge up small civil cases from 30 years ago with no way to demonstrate that Trump was involved in any way...well, its going to be a disappointing summer and fall for you.

Why do you keep pushing the 'it was 30 years ago" thing when there are 2 recent cases.  3 cases (that we know of) across 30 years.  That's a pattern.  If Trump was as pro-veteran as he claims he is then there would be a corporate culture of being pro-veteran.  Just like chik-fil-a has a certain image because that is the image of the owner.

[Mesaclone]

Why do you keep pushing the 'it was 30 years ago" thing when there are 2 recent cases.  3 cases (that we know of) across 30 years.  That's a pattern.  If Trump was as pro-veteran as he claims he is then there would be a corporate culture of being pro-veteran.  Just like chik-fil-a has a certain image because that is the image of the owner.

Chick fil a is a single business. Trump has owned hundreds and on a vastly larger fiscal scale.

And again, show the link in which Trump was informed directly of any of this. Not speculation about could have/should have, actual evidence that he had any input into these specific decisions. Or is it far more likely that a legal department in this company simply handled these cases, albeit unwisely. Having a positive corporate culture for Veterans does not make any company immune, particularly over a 30 year span, from individuals in that company making some poor choices. In fact, given this was only 3 poor decisions over such a tremendously long span of time, its rather clear that these instances were clear aberrations from the norm and from the corporate culture.

And let's keep this relevant.

Of the two candidates now running in the General election,which has done vastly more than the other to help veterans?

[Mechanicos]

Why do you keep pushing the 'it was 30 years ago" thing when there are 2 recent cases.  3 cases (that we know of) across 30 years.  That's a pattern.  If Trump was as pro-veteran as he claims he is then there would be a corporate culture of being pro-veteran.  Just like chik-fil-a has a certain image because that is the image of the owner.

IF you want to know start digging and ignore anything since he announced.

Just one example showing there is no negative pattern here

Flashback: Trump Saved NY Veterans Day Parade Marking 50th Anniversary of End of WWII (1995)

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/01/flashback-trump-saved-ny-veterans-day-parade/

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/leader-york-veterans-group-defends-donald-trump/story?id=32571459

Little more history in an older ABC Trump hit Piece.

many more.

Much of his Veteran's help is not in the news because he keeps it quite, It usually comes from others talking about it.

as Mesaclone points out the negative hit pieces on Trump like the vets issue is the exceptions to the rule taken out of context to create present day hit pieces.

[RoosGirl]

Chick fil a is a single business. Trump has owned hundreds and on a vastly larger fiscal scale.

And again, show the link in which Trump was informed directly of any of this. Not speculation about could have/should have, actual evidence that he had any input into these specific decisions. Or is it far more likely that a legal department in this company simply handled these cases, albeit unwisely. Having a positive corporate culture for Veterans does not make any company immune, particularly over a 30 year span, from individuals in that company making some poor choices. In fact, given this was only 3 poor decisions over such a tremendously long span of time, its rather clear that these instances were clear aberrations from the norm and from the corporate culture.

And let's keep this relevant.

Of the two candidates now running in the General election,which has done vastly more than the other to help veterans?

I think there is a reasonable expectation that Trump knew that this was happening in his company.  I also think that it is reasonable to believe that if Trump was as over the top, pro-veteran as he claims to be the corporate culture would be likewise.  There is no way anyone can prove either case, but I'm sure you know that.  But, I think there is a possibility of there being something to this.

[Mesaclone]

I think there is a reasonable expectation that Trump knew that this was happening in his company.  I also think that it is reasonable to believe that if Trump was as over the top, pro-veteran as he claims to be the corporate culture would be likewise.  There is no way anyone can prove either case, but I'm sure you know that.  But, I think there is a possibility of there being something to this.

I try not to condemn people based on possibilities. But I also find it unlikely that anyone could run a huge conglmeration of companies for 30+ years without some people in those organizations having made unwise decisions that harmed...well, pretty much a few people from every possible interest group or demographic. 3 instances over a 30 year span, of which we know of no direct involvement from Mr. Trump, seems like very thin sauce indeed. I'm not saying these things are unworthy of examination, just that its wrong to overstate the significance of small civil cases or poor ethical decisions amongst mid-level managers in a vast corporate environment. I believe Mr. Trump, had he known, would have condemned all of these actions...and that he does so now. He has worked long and tirelessly for Veterans causes for MANY years.

[RoosGirl]

I try not to condemn people based on possibilities. But I also find it unlikely that anyone could run a huge conglmeration of companies for 30+ years without some people in those organizations having made unwise decisions that harmed...well, pretty much a few people from every possible interest group or demographic. 3 instances over a 30 year span, of which we know of no direct involvement from Mr. Trump, seems like very thin sauce indeed. I'm not saying these things are unworthy of examination, just that its wrong to overstate the significance of small civil cases or poor ethical decisions amongst mid-level managers in a vast corporate environment. I believe Mr. Trump, had he known, would have condemned all of these actions...and that he does so now. He has worked long and tirelessly for Veterans causes for MANY years.

Barring further people coming forward with legitimate claims, there's no reason for things to go further than they already are.  I'm sure the current cases will be settled equitably.  Just information to be filed away and added to the big picture.

[sneakypete]

No. I'm telling you a man with 30,000 employees is not going to be directly involved in the hiring and firing of every individual employee...in fact, a businessman is going to hire only a few key players directly and the rest are delegated to managers. Its a delegated task, and given that this supposedly happened 30 years ago its an absurd reach to pretend Trump fired this guy personally. Its an embarrassingly bad attempt to create a negative perception using something he almost certainly had no involvement in whatsoever.

And *I* am telling you that ego-maniacs that own corporations also set corporate policy,and have the tools they hire to run them report to them.

Trump is and always has been a self-important ignorant bleep who has only survived because he managed to inherit enough money to hire good lawyers and tax advisors. Make no mistake about it,though. Trump is a control freak that sets policy in every organization he owns.

[sneakypete]

You must be smarter than that. You think a billionaire running for the presidency in which his every action is scrutinized with a fine tooth comb, is going to abscond with a few million dollars from a Veteran's fund raising event he initiated and raised money for

Anybody and everybody who knows anything about Trump knows he will do this because he really and truly only cares about himself and his mini-mes.

He screws everybody on every deal he ever makes,and runs off with the money. He has always done this and will continue to do it because stealing is all he really understands.

Frankly,I am amazed that anybody who has ever spent 10 minutes watching him in a debate or at a press conference still thinks he's smart. He is just flat eat UP with the dumbass.