Company with ties to Trump’s brother Robert awarded $33 million government contract

[Chosen Daughter]

 
Company with ties to Trump’s brother Robert awarded $33 million government contract

Josh Partlow 1 hr ago

 
Company with ties to Trump’s brother Robert awarded $33 million government contract

Josh Partlow 1 hr ago

900 children test positive for H.I.V. in Pakistani city

The lucrative government contract, to provide security for federal courthouses and cell blocks, went to CertiPath, a Reston, Va.-based company that has since 2013 been owned in part by a firm linked to Robert S. Trump, the president’s younger brother.

After the contract was awarded, an anonymous rival bidder filed a complaint with the Justice Department’s office of the inspector general, alleging that CertiPath failed to disclose that “one of the President’s closest living relatives stood to benefit financially from the transaction,” according to a copy of the July 22 complaint letter obtained by The Washington Post...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/company-with-ties-to-trumps-brother-robert-awarded-dollar33-million-government-contract/ar-AAJpmRB?ocid=spartanntp

[Chosen Daughter]

This is Washington Post so it must be "fake news".

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/company-linked-to-trumps-brother-awarded-33-million-government-contract

[PeteS in CA]

Looks like CertiPath has an "in" with the Feds, https://www.gao.gov/products/D15420 , at least one previous contract ... awarded in 2016. Who was President in 2016?

And did the WashPost mention that CertiPath has been a contractor to the Federal government longer than Trump has been in office? If not, why not?

[Chosen Daughter]

Looks like CertiPath has an "in" with the Feds, https://www.gao.gov/products/D15420 , at least one previous contract ... awarded in 2016. Who was President in 2016?

And did the WashPost mention that CertiPath has been a contractor to the Federal government longer than Trump has been in office? If not, why not?

Those are valid questions.  I am interested to see what comes out of this.  And was the 2016 award the only one or were there previous? 

[PeteS in CA]

Those are valid questions.  I am interested to see what comes out of this.  And was the 2016 award the only one or were there previous?

I go to the WashPost seldom because of their paywall and my unwillingness to pay. For that reason I didn't bother to try to see if the WashPost article is out in the open.

The 2016 denial of some other company's appeal was just something I found while trying to learn a bit about CertiPath. The 2016 date is an indicator that CertiPath has done business with the Feds at a time when Donald Trump could not have been an influence on the contract award.

I'll go a few steps farther. The grounds of the complaint by the "anonymous rival bidder" - maybe annoymorous is more accurate - has a small pack of dogs that is not barking:

* The quality and suitability of CertiPath's products and services are not questioned;

* CertiPath's bid is not flagged as higher than competitors' nor as suspiciously low;

* "Failure to disclose" includes no assertion that those who awarded the bid knew of Robert Trump's $$ interest in CertiPath, an indication that the award was not improperly influenced such knowledge.

Other than that CertiPath is privately owned, I did not find details about CertiPath's ownership. The vagueness of "owned in part by a firm linked to Robert S. Trump" indicates that the "firm" is one of two or more investment groups with ownership interest in CertiPath, and that Robert Trump's $$ interest in that "firm" is, at most, as one of several partners ("linked" is an interestingly vague term ... maybe one of those "six degreees of Kevin Bacon" links). IOW, the "benefit" to Robert Trump is probably not material, to use an accounting term, if that much.

[catfish1957]

I go to the WashPost seldom because of their paywall and my unwillingness to pay. For that reason I didn't bother to try to see if the WashPost article is out in the open.

The 2016 denial of some other company's appeal was just something I found while trying to learn a bit about CertiPath. The 2016 date is an indicator that CertiPath has done business with the Feds at a time when Donald Trump could not have been an influence on the contract award.

I'll go a few steps farther. The grounds of the complaint by the "anonymous rival bidder" - maybe annoymorous is more accurate - has a small pack of dogs that is not barking:

* The quality and suitability of CertiPath's products and services are not questioned;

* CertiPath's bid is not flagged as higher than competitors' nor as suspiciously low;

* "Failure to disclose" includes no assertion that those who awarded the bid knew of Robert Trump's $$ interest in CertiPath, an indication that the award was not improperly influenced such knowledge.

Other than that CertiPath is privately owned, I did not find details about CertiPath's ownership. The vagueness of "owned in part by a firm linked to Robert S. Trump" indicates that the "firm" is one of two or more investment groups with ownership interest in CertiPath, and that Robert Trump's $$ interest in that "firm" is, at most, as one of several partners ("linked" is an interestingly vague term ... maybe one of those "six degreees of Kevin Bacon" links). IOW, the "benefit" to Robert Trump is probably not material, to use an accounting term, if that much.

Hope its fake news.  Because otherwise he'd sure lose the moral high ground on the Biden issue.

[austingirl]

I go to the WashPost seldom because of their paywall and my unwillingness to pay. For that reason I didn't bother to try to see if the WashPost article is out in the open.

The 2016 denial of some other company's appeal was just something I found while trying to learn a bit about CertiPath. The 2016 date is an indicator that CertiPath has done business with the Feds at a time when Donald Trump could not have been an influence on the contract award.

I'll go a few steps farther. The grounds of the complaint by the "anonymous rival bidder" - maybe annoymorous is more accurate - has a small pack of dogs that is not barking:

* The quality and suitability of CertiPath's products and services are not questioned;

* CertiPath's bid is not flagged as higher than competitors' nor as suspiciously low;

* "Failure to disclose" includes no assertion that those who awarded the bid knew of Robert Trump's $$ interest in CertiPath, an indication that the award was not improperly influenced such knowledge.

Other than that CertiPath is privately owned, I did not find details about CertiPath's ownership. The vagueness of "owned in part by a firm linked to Robert S. Trump" indicates that the "firm" is one of two or more investment groups with ownership interest in CertiPath, and that Robert Trump's $$ interest in that "firm" is, at most, as one of several partners ("linked" is an interestingly vague term ... maybe one of those "six degreees of Kevin Bacon" links). IOW, the "benefit" to Robert Trump is probably not material, to use an accounting term, if that much.

Once again facts emerge that show this story to be just one more nothingburger.

[PeteS in CA]

Once again facts emerge that show this story to be just one more nothingburger.

I was just pointing out things the WashPost probably omitted and what the WashPost might have been hiding behind artful vagueness. The actual details may eventually come out and show the WashPost's narrative is false, but by then the narrative will have become a living thing.