TOLD YOU SO: The Trump Betrayal Train Continues at Breakneck Pace

[Norm Lenhart]

Mexico is cutting a check for that wall.

I need a pair of GTX 1080 graphics cards to play Skyrim in VR better. I wonder if I voted for Trump if they'd buy them too.

Lets make Normie's gaming rig great again! ;)

[roamer_1]

PS. The wall will cost well over $10 billion.

More than that - more like twenty or thirty... For the promise of it. And then the promise won't be kept. A ten year environmental study, an 'endangered species', and !poof! VaporWare. watch and see.

[libertybele]

Those that bolstered Trump will bear that responsibility going forward.  Some people just refuse to see Trump for the bombastic narcissist he really is and others won't admit that they were duped.  Tried to warn you AND told you so! 

[austingirl]

I always thought it would be a loan. I was slammed in several different ways for suggesting it. I actually think it was a smart move to do so. The part where he insisted he was "self funding" and suggesting others were"bought" for not doing the same was sleazy.

Deceptive Donald is always very smart about holding onto his own money. Self-funding was a fantasy. His smears and attacks on his opponents were disgusting.

[elhombrelibre]

I don't fault Trump for structuring the money he gave to his campaign as loans, or using Trump Corp. assets with the expectation of being reimbursed. I'm sure he's expecting interest to be paid on the money he lent his campaign as well. I don't see anything wrong with any of this. He did nothing illegal and he made money on his time.

What I do find objectionable is the bald face lying that he was self funding his campaign. The clear point being he was giving his money to his campaign with no expectation of being repaid. If he had been honest about what he was doing I could respect it. However, with everything Trump you always find that the whole truth doesn't come out of his mouth.

Well said.  Don't believe Trump.  If he's elected, his hubris will be the only thing that guides him.  He's as vain as his pals the Clintons, as amoral, and as devoid of principles. 

[Sanguine]

Translation: I don't like what the article says so I'll just dismiss it thereby relieving me of the duty to refute it with facts

[Henry Noel]

"Hold on!  Just a word, gentlemen."  They stopped to listen.  "We are sold—mighty badly sold.  But we don't want to be the laughing stock of this whole town, I reckon, and never hear the last of this thing as long as we live.  No.  What we want is to go out of here quiet, and talk this show up, and sell the rest of the town!  Then we'll all be in the same boat.  Ain't that sensible?" ("You bet it is!—the jedge is right!" everybody sings out.) "All right, then—not a word about any sell.  Go along home, and advise everybody to come and see the tragedy." Mark Twain, Huckleberry Finn

[Free Vulcan]

What facts"? Its Red State in Desperation tossing garbage out.

Well then it should be very easy to refute.

[R4 TrumPence]

Why does redstate keep lying about self funding.

FEC rules on self funding...
When you self fund your campaign, it must be done as a loan. Just as Mitt also did  in 2012.
Then you may or may not pay yourself back.
(Mitt did not or had not paid his back as of January 2016.)

Redstate leaves out that little FEC requirement, every time the bring they bring up the subject.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Why does redstate keep lying about self funding.

FEC rules on self funding...
When you self fund your campaign, it must be done as a loan. Just as Mitt also did  in 2012.
Then you may or may not pay yourself back.
(Mitt did not or had not paid his back as of January 2016.)

Redstate leaves out that little FEC requirement, every time the bring they bring up the subject.

In Buckley v. Valeo the SCOTUS ruled that the FEC could not limit donations from a candidate to himself.  I have searched the web for over an hour and can find nothing that says a donation must be in the form of a loan...only that it is the preferred method of the wealthy so they can recoup the loan later with a "debt-burning" fundraiser where lobbyists and political action committees can grease the palms of the newly elected lawmakers.  The only contradiction I find is limits on self financing when a candidate intends  to accept public financing for his campaign.  Given Trump's track record I would not rule out the possibility that Trump would pat himself on the back for self financing and then dip in to my tax dollars.

Could you provide some proof that what you claim is true?

[R4 TrumPence]

In Buckley v. Valeo the SCOTUS ruled that the FEC could not limit donations from a candidate to himself.  I have searched the web for over an hour and can find nothing that says a donation must be in the form of a loan...only that it is the preferred method of the wealthy so they can recoup the loan later with a "debt-burning" fundraiser where lobbyists and political action committees can grease the palms of the newly elected lawmakers.  The only contradiction I find is limits on self financing when a candidate intends  to accept public financing for his campaign.  Given Trump's track record I would not rule out the possibility that Trump would pat himself on the back for self financing and then dip in to my tax dollars.

Could you provide some proof that what you claim is true?

I can not find the article on the fec. I read it few months ago, and did not think to save it.

I found another one with similar information, but not discussing it being an fec rule.
It seems to be how all the other self funders did it, which is legal.
I will try and remember how/where I found my original info, and will post when i do.

Trump, it turns out, is following the standard practice of wealthy candidates who use their own money for presidential campaigns, a review of Federal Election Commission records shows.

Just like Trump in 2016, Jon Huntsman in 2012, Mitt Romney in 2008 and Steve Forbes in 1996 each made multimillion-dollar loans to their presidential campaigns, which they never repaid.

"All campaign lawyers advise candidates to do these things as loans. I certainly do," said Ben Ginsberg, a longtime Republican campaign attorney. That's because once a candidate hands over a personal check as a contribution, there's no way to ever recoup the money. "They'd all like to get paid back, if possible," Ginsberg said.

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-03-09/trump-wont-repay-presidential-campaign-loans-manager-says

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I can not find the article on the fec. I read it few months ago, and did not think to save it.

I found another one with similar information, but not discussing it being an fec rule.
It seems to be how all the other self funders did it, which is legal.
I will try and remember how/where I found my original info, and will post when i do. :patriot:http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-03-09/trump-wont-repay-presidential-campaign-loans-manager-says

Please do post it if you come across it.

Nobody is saying Trump is breaking the law, and I am certainly not saying Trump is doing something unusual.  Previous candidates have loaned their campaigns money while intending to get paid back by special interests, lobbyists, or political action committees anxious to buy their attention after they won...I just don't remember them basking in the glow of their self sacrifice so much.

Meet the new Boss!

[BuckeyeTexan]

When you self fund your campaign, it must be done as a loan. Just as Mitt also did  in 2012.
Then you may or may not pay yourself back.
(Mitt did not or had not paid his back as of January 2016.)

Where did you find that information? It appears incorrect.

According to fec.gov, Romney loaned his 2008 campaign approximately $45 million and converted all but $250,000 to contributions. He didn't loan his 2012 campaign any money. He secured a bridge loan from the Bank of Georgetown for $20 million in 2012 but paid back all of it by year end. Neither the 2008 or 2012 campaign owes any debt or has any outstanding loans and didn't at anytime in 2016.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Why does redstate keep lying about self funding.

FEC rules on self funding...
When you self fund your campaign, it must be done as a loan. Just as Mitt also did  in 2012.
Then you may or may not pay yourself back.
(Mitt did not or had not paid his back as of January 2016.)

Redstate leaves out that little FEC requirement, every time the bring they bring up the subject.

Redstate leaves it out because there is no such rule.

Candiate's Personal Funds

When candidates use their personal funds for
campaign purposes, they are making contributions
to their campaigns. Unlike other contributions,
these candidate contributions are not
subject to any limits. 110.10; AOs 1991-09,
1990-09, 1985-33 and 1984-60. They must,
however, be reported (as discussed below).

Expenditures by Candidate

Campaign expenditures made by the candidate
from personal funds that are not to be reimbursed
are reported as in-kind contributions from the
candidate and reported like other in-kind contributions.
See “Reporting In-Kind Contributions” later
in this chapter for more information on reporting
these expenditures by candidates. If, on the other
hand, a personal expenditure by the candidate
is intended to be reimbursed, it is treated as an
advance from the candidate for reporting purposes.
See Section 11 on reporting advances.

Loans from Candidate’s Personal Funds

The candidate may loan personal funds to the committee
and may charge interest at a commercially
reasonable rate, provided the committee reports
the loan and the interest rate from the outset on
Schedule C. The committee continues to report
the loan until it is repaid. 116.11; AO 1986-45. See
Section 17 of this chapter, “Reporting Loans.”

http://www.fec.gov/rad/candidates/documents/CanGuide29-30.pdf

[RoosGirl]

@BuckeyeTexan Coming through with the goods again.  Thank you.

[skeeter]

It seems to be how all the other self funders did it, which is legal.
:patriot:http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-03-09/trump-wont-repay-presidential-campaign-loans-manager-says

No doubt.

But thats not what Trump was saying back when he was condemning Cruz and the others for taking donations.

[Sanguine]

No doubt.

But thats not what Trump was saying back when he was condemning Cruz and the others for taking donations.

Yes, that's the issue.  He said he couldn't be bought because he was self funded and implied that the others could be bought.  Turns out to have not been the case.

[Cowboyway]

More than that - more like twenty or thirty... For the promise of it. And then the promise won't be kept. A ten year environmental study, an 'endangered species', and !poof! VaporWare. watch and see.

Can't wait to see the specs for building a wall down the middle of the Rio Grande...................

[Cowboyway]

Yes, that's the issue.  He said he couldn't be bought because he was self funded and implied that the others could be bought.  Turns out to have not been the case.

Just another yankee con man.

[RoosGirl]

Can't wait to see the specs for building a wall down the middle of the Rio Grande...................

That has already been walked back.  Last I read it might be 1000 miles of the 2000 mile border.

[Sanguine]

Just another yankee con man.

New York values at work!

[Oceander]

Can't wait to see the specs for building a wall down the middle of the Rio Grande...................

Or the construction timeline.  With usual constuction times as well as years-long delays for environmental litigation, potential illegal aliens born today would be in their dotage before the wall would be near completion. 

Which means, more or less that after starting a diplomatic disaster and possible trade war with Mexico and spending at least a billion dollars for planning, studies, and initial construction, we'll end up with a half-assed white elephant only a hundred miles or so long.  A wall to nowhere to match the bridge to nowhere in Alaska. 

[BuckeyeTexan]

That has already been walked back.  Last I read it might be 1000 miles of the 2000 mile border.

Believe it or not, Trump walked that back in July, 2015 during his first visit to the border town of Laredo. It's unfortunate that so many continued to chant, "Wall, wall, wall!" because it was always horsesh*t.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Yes, that's the issue.  He said he couldn't be bought because he was self funded and implied that the others could be bought.  Turns out to have not been the case.

There is no question that Trump played up the self-funding claims to his benefit. In August, he answered that he would be billing willing to spend $1 billion of his own money if that was what it took to win the WH. Romney and Obama spent that much. So the intimation and, in fact, the question asked were regarding Trump's willingness to self-fund the general election.

However,  as early as September, 2015, Trump said that he would depend upon the RNC to help him in the general election. So, the continued claims of self-funding were apparently regarding the primary election.

[Right_in_Virginia]

New York values at work!

Sure, keep pounding that mantra.  It sure proved to be a winner.