Trump Used Campaign Donations To Buy His Own Book (ethical, Democrats, represent)
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.
that has yet to be seen. for trump to have received royalties from those sales would be a violation of FEC law.
So in other words, you have no evidence of wrongdoing.
Do you understand that you have to provide evidence when you make a claim of wrongdoing.
When you have to add, if this, and if that, it means that there is not proof of wrongdoing.
Hillary will be in Reno tomorrow to give a speech. If she shoots somebody, that would be illegal. Being in Reno to give a speech is not illegal, so there is no evidence of wrongdoing.
Do you, and all the other dems on here not see the absolute absurdity of these completely unfounded claims?
He used donor money to buy thousands of copies of his own book, at retail price, diverting money into his own pockets and artificially inflating his book sales.
So in other words, you have no evidence of wrongdoing.
Do you understand that you have to provide evidence when you make a claim of wrongdoing.
all i've done is stated the facts available at this time. we know that:
A): according to the daily beast the trump campaign admits to buying the books.
B): it is a violation of FEC law for trump to receive any of the proceeds from that sale.
so now we're just waiting on word from the campaign to find out how the royalties from that sale were distributed. in the past other politicians have been able to negotiate with the FEC to have the royalties go directly to charity but, if that had been the case here, it seems like an important point the spokesperson should have addressed.
when it comes to the FEC violation i'm actually in agreement. if the publisher hasn't issued the royalties check yet ( or even if they have ) most likely trump and/or his campaign can negotiate where the royalties from those specific sales go to charity.
what i do think is important to note is that this is another case of trump surrounding himself with incompetence. for there not to have been someone on staff knowledgable of FEC regulations is ridiculous. it's also funny to hear that trump is using campaign money to artificially pump up his book.
when it comes to the FEC violation i'm actually in agreement. if the publisher hasn't issued the royalties check yet ( or even if they have ) most likely trump and/or his campaign can negotiate where the royalties from those specific sales go to charity.
what i do think is important to note is that this is another case of trump surrounding himself with incompetence. for there not to have been someone on staff knowledgable of FEC regulations is ridiculous. it's also funny to hear that trump is using campaign money to artificially pump up his book.
What I think is important to note is that this is a completely unfounded claim.
There is absolutely no proof of any wrongdoing, so how is this incompetence?
Many legal experts, and law enforcement professionals disagree with you.
Start citing them, then, because if law enforcement professionals agreed, she would have been charged. The reality is that smoke is often just blowing smoke, and not proof there is a fire.
Even the ridiculous AP report which claimed that as SoS Hillary met with OR spoke to 154 people over 4 years admitted there was no proof of any wrongdoing.
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.