Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, it's pretty simple, show that there were recommendations to investigate, or sue Trump U, and that Bondi's office made the decision not to take action.
You dems are claiming that Bondi made the decision not to take action, but nobody has provided any evidence that there were recommendations to investigate, or sue Trump U.
if an investigation progresses then bondi's staff will have to explain why they felt the complaints did not deserve an investigation.
if an investigation progresses then bondi's staff will have to explain why they felt the complaints did not deserve an investigation.
The point is that there isn't any evidence that there was any action being proposed against Trump U, so there couldn't possibly be any bribery involved.
This is no different than all the other completely unfounded claims being made against Trump.
The point is that there isn't any evidence that there was any action being proposed against Trump U, so there couldn't possibly be any bribery involved.
This is no different than all the other completely unfounded claims being made against Trump.
You're making a bad assumption. Your assumption is that the initial investigation was COMPLETE and that there was no proposed action against Trump. Was the initial investigation shut down BEFORE it had reached the point of making a proposal either for or against action? If so, why?
The point is that there isn't any evidence that there was any action being proposed against Trump U, so there couldn't possibly be any bribery involved.
If you go to Google.com, you can often find information you are seeking
On Sept. 13, 2013, ages ago really, the Orlando Sentinel reported Bondi’s office was looking into the Trump complaints. Campaign finance records show Bondi’s political committee, And Justice for All, received the $25,000 donation from Trump on Sept. 17, 2013.
Bondi has stated she referred complaining customers in Florida to a lawsuit filed in New York but decided not to join that lawsuit, even though Florida has participated in other multi-state lawsuits.
Seems she admitted knowing that people were complaining about being defrauded and that it was serious enough to prompt a lawsuit in NY.
There's more, but:
“Evidence strongly indicates that Bondi’s decision not to initiate or participate in litigation against Trump University was given in exchange for Trump’s contribution based on the short time period between the receipt of the political contribution and the announcement of Bondi’s decision not to participate in the New York litigation,” Larrabee’s complaint states."
The point is that there isn't any evidence that there was any action being proposed against Trump U, so there couldn't possibly be any bribery involved.
This is no different than all the other completely unfounded claims being made against Trump.
The Dems are getting all excited about nothing it appears. You are right there just isn't evidence. This appears to be going nowhere fast.
The Dems are getting all excited about nothing it appears. You are right there just isn't evidence. This appears to be going nowhere fast.
she is a yes man- --but:
In June 2016 a spokesperson for Governor Rick Scott stated that the state's ethics commission is looking into the matter.[SIZE=2][22][/SIZE] In September 2016 it was reported that the donation violated laws against political contributions from nonprofit organizations, and that Donald Trump had reimbursed the foundation from his own money and paid the IRS an excise tax as a penalty.[SIZE=2][23][/SIZE] Trump has said in the past that he expects and receives favors from politicians to whom he gives money.[SIZE=2][24][/SIZE][SIZE=2][25][/SIZE]
The Dems are getting all excited about nothing it appears. You are right there just isn't evidence. This appears to be going nowhere fast.
Ironic the way the RW carried on about pay-for-play with Clinton with no evidence whatsoever other than an occasional meeting that never resulted in anything other than that meeting.
Whereas, here is an actual evidence of pay-for-play reported in newspapers, and the RW is going, "Whatever."
Ironic the way the RW carried on about pay-for-play with Clinton with no evidence whatsoever other than an occasional meeting that never resulted in anything other than that meeting.
Whereas, here is an actual evidence of pay-for-play reported in newspapers, and the RW is going, "Whatever."
do you know why the trump foundation payed a $2,500 fine to the IRS?
"Donald Trump paid the IRS a $2,500 penalty this year, an official at Trump's company said, after it was revealed that Trump's charitable foundation had violated tax laws by giving a political contribution to a campaign group connected to Florida's attorney general."
Actually, since a fine wasnt really assessed, it was more of a bribe to make that matter go away.
and the fact that they "paid a fine", doesnt mitigate ones first amendment rights, nor should it.
You guys have no problem with Planned Parenthood getting involved with politics, so spare me the fake outrage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
