Trumps debt ?
 

Donald Trump on Monday shrugged off a New York Times report that detailed at least $650 million in debt among the various companies that Trump owns, suggesting that it is comparably low when the total value of his business empire is taken into consideration.

"Well, the value — if the value is $11 billion, it's a very small amount of debt," the Republican nominee told "Fox & Friends" in a telephone interview. "I have very little debt relative to the assets. I have massive assets."

Trump continued, "Compared to my assets, I think I have less than 5 percent or so in debt, which is a very low debt."

So what is the big deal?

Do you have any idea how much DEBT is held by most small businesses?

Are you aware of the enoormous amounts of debt held by most fortune 500 companies for various financial reasons?

The media or the party is really reaching to the uninformed with this one......no different than most they reach for.

Desparation is a terrible malady!!

Desparation is a terrible malady!

I will be quoting you!

They try to turn an incredible debt to asset ratio into a negative and then repeat it .

Lets see....the President of the United States deep in debt to foreign banks, and you see no problem with that !!!

You do not have a clue about the use of debt in corporate finance . Try educating yourself before you jump into a subject you clearly know nothing about .

No legitimate Real Estate Developer would desire to be debt free . Chew on that for a while because it is factual .

"Chewing" and wondering if you have any problems with the President of the United States being personally deep in debt to foreign banks ?

I will try to get educated but at least make us feel better and tell us that our President being deep in debt to a foreign country makes no difference whatsoever.

Since you appear to be the educated one here, can you supply for my education how you know the true value of his corporation since all we know is what he says !

Boy, this dumb guy would love to see his tax returns. Am I just being so stupid here, but he said he would release what was not under audit and now we know that past years have been released, yet he still refuses. Oh and his campaign manager who used to work for Cruz wanted them BUT NOT NOW. She said since you got on the inside of Trump campaign she learned a lot and now advises him not to release anything at any time.

Again, I know you are smarter but since no candidate except Gerald Ford, who assumed the office, has released them, am I just being silly in wondering why ?

Still waiting for one fact about trump that is worse than Hillarys factual past. Just one.

O, I am sorry, he has too little debt, must be evil.


Are you serious? What's next, what's next, what's next......hmmmmp

Now see I was relying on you being the intelligent one here and making me feel better about the President of the United States being deep in debt to a foreign country, but you went ahead and just skipped it. I suppose it is difficult for someone at your level to even talk to us dumbies.

Oh, and by the way Trump Univ I suppose is nothing to worry about either. Conning people is an acceptable trait for a President I suppose.

Listen I am relying on you to clarify a lot of this....like this recent ad of Trumps which touts illegal immigrants receiving Social Security, which as intelligent guy like you already know is a LIE but see how that confuses us dumb people.

There is much more but you seem to have lost patience with us dumb people and will not even discuss certain things.

I know he is your hero....did you cheat on your wives publicy and mock existing wife ?......maybe you share that or some other trait that makes you defend his immoral and abhorent behavior like labeling anyone who disagrees with him with a cute little playground name usually referring to their appearance or ethnicity.

But again, you are the educated one here, so we learn at your feet and just trying to settle what I thought was elementary school behavior but I will tell my grandchildren who cannot even listen to him because of language and hatred that this very intelligent guy said it was ok

I will advise my children and grandchildren that it appears, despite our supposed free press, that pulling credentials of those who disagree with us is just fine and have you read his tweets of this morning where he enters the rumor pages of the tabloids discussing a tv show.

Are you totally ignorant or just blind?

Instead of going into all the cr@p you are slinging, I will ask you one question, which I am sure you will decline to answer:

Read all of your comment and then tell me what you plan to tell your grandchildren about Hillary Clinton. Or for that matter, any Clinton.

I think that once you put the two on a morality/ethics scale, you will find out which one tips it.

You are addressing different people . Now for your response about debt owed by Commercial Real Estate Corporations to foreign or domestic banks .
1] Foreign banks making loans to properties on US soil must comply to all of the US banking , finance and tax regulations .They must conform to US accounting codes .

2] Bank loans for commercial real estate are made against the value of the real estate . IE they are secured just like a home mortgage .

3] It would make no difference if the bank loans were coming from a US Chartered Bank or the US based operations of a bank which ultimately has foreign owners .

4] It is a long standing requirement that by the day of Inauguration every US President must put all of their financial holdings into a " Blind Trust " to be controlled and operated by an independent " Trustee " .

Do you realize your responding to a NY Times quote:1rotfl:

Ok....first I am not blind (have cataracts however) and according to you, I AM ignorant (although you seem to apply that to all users here).

I got confused and must apologize. I thought this thread was about Trump debts, and here you go with Clinton.

As I have said many times before, I will never support Clinton, vote for Clinton in anyway. Do I need to repeat that ?

My amazement is the defense of Trump, a validated immoral man, a man who is actually worse than a compulsive liar; a number of psychiatric articles written in the last months had called him much worse, a serial cheater on wives, which makes him sort of sleazy in my book, a man who refuses to divulge information to the voters like his taxes and expect us to take his word (see comment on his psychological problems with lying), a man who still must answer for his con job called Trump U, a man who reduces any disagreement with him to be personal and thus opens you for PERSONAL immature attacks, who obviously prefers the National Enquirer (who he constantly touts) as his go to newspaper, whose interests are pretty much about HIM, not the country, who espouses policies that would throw our economic system into chaos (sorry, I DO realize how smart you are but I do read a bit), whose foreign policy aspirations would leave our country on an island at a time in history where they is the worst place to be.

I could go on and on about him.

BUT, you now have switched gears to Clinton and despite what you think, I have nothing good to say, except maybe that she has at least devoted her life to public service, much unlike Trump whose serves himself only.

I will vote for neither and as far as what I will tell my grandchildren about the Clintons, I will tell them the truth, some good and some bad. I will need to censor some of it a bit, unlike censoring most of Trump.

I will also tell them that the Clintons were involved in an election in 2016 which is a total embarassment for the country. That she was one of 2 morally corrupt people running for office.

Since you are enamored with Trump but always want to talk about Clinton, I will bid you adieu unless you continue your condescending talking down, because like Trump always said....a better counter puncher, but I cannot publicy ridicule you like he does.

On point number 4, which is the only one that concerns me, you are actually incorrect....

"As president, Trump would not be required to sell any of his investments or businesses. The U.S. Financial Conflict of Interest Statute prohibits unelected officials of the executive branch from holding stakes in assets that would conflict with their ability to properly do their jobs.

For example, former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson sold off his company stock before he became Treasury Secretary in 2006.
Executive branch officials also are prohibited from earning income from their businesses and must abide by strict impartiality rules.
But Congress decided not to apply those restrictions to the president or vice president. They have to disclose their holdings, but they don't have to disown them.

So Donald Trump could be president without selling his businesses."


Trump's 500 businesses would pose 'unprecedented ethical dilemma' - Mar. 16, 2016

This is quite an interesting article actually and if you really want to know what is happening worth a read.

I might tell you that there are in fact "rumors" from unnamed source at NBC, that Trump has already pitched the idea of a Celebrity Apprentice in the White House. Now he wont because NBC is disgusted with the man, but it certainly tells you what is important to this person.

"when Trump first considered running for president, back in 2011, he spoke to NBCUniversal chief executive Steve Burke about continuing The Apprentice… from within the Oval Office.

[A] person with knowledge of the situation noted that the two men had a conversation in which they broached a compromise, albeit one that seems more like a Trumpian fever dream than a network-TV reality. It outlined, presumably fantastically, that Trump should run for president; and on the off chance that he won, he would continue to star in The Apprentice from within the White House. (Via)"

Donald Trump Thought He Could Star In ‘The Apprentice’ As President

I will borrow that mantra that Trump uses on Clinton a lot...you ...."where there is smoke there must be fire"...regarding emails and her health and all other conspiracy theories (much like the birther thing, or Cruz's father in the JFK thing)...

But with Trumps campaign manager being closely associated, and by closely I mean CLOSELY with managing campaigns in Ukraine, having financial interest in the millions there, and Trumps proposals to dismantle NATO which would make Putin happier than any man could be, and his very friendly remarks about Russia and Putin, who have been anything but friendly to USA...

Would that not make Trumps tax returns interesting ?

Imagine if those foreign debts are in Russia ?

..wink..wink...we KNOW he strongly solicited money from there.

The New York Times Banking and Finance Beat Writers used to call me once in a while for a quote .

How about you . What recognized authority sought you out for input ?

Oh by the way the Times were not the only publication to seek input from me . Also The Wall Street Journal , The American Banker and Money Magazine to list a few .

So again who sought out your financial insights ?

Hell, my wife doesn't listen to me !

Amazing with all the misinformation you have presented and the questions you run from, I can see why it is USED TO BE.

Me, I am just a dumb old guy who reads both sides of every question, and learns at the feet of people like you who are so intelligent..

But you are letting me down by avoiding and misinforming.

Did you ever find yourself asked for comment by Trumps paper...the National Enquirer ?

And are you not amazed as well that the shriek called Clinton is still in the race?

Her bad deeds amke the worst of anybody else look saintly.

Trump did not betray his country...or lie to congress....or caused lives of Americans to be lost and many more in jeopardy.

A clinton good day would be much worse than Trump or anybody elses worst day(s).

By the way, with your high rating in the financial world, you must know Warren Buffett...bet you are angry at him for calling out Trump in his taxes.

Sorry Sir but you are incorrect . Presidents can and do place their financial interests into a " Blind Trust " which means that they give up control and any knowledge of any changes to their investments
during their time in office . Their interests are managed by a Fiduciary known as an Independent Trustee .
However prior to entering office they can divest themselves of some or all of their investment holdings.
And they can undertake a combination of the two .

Can you never stay on subject. Are you trying to have me defend Clinton, which I can't, except to say ALL your charges are unproven, simply strong charges.

It appears you have grown tired of the thread subject, and want to attack instead of actually discuss.

You can defend Trump as much as you like. He is still a secretive, vile human being, and I can validate as you know...all.

You, along with others who either ARE uninformed or WANT to STAY uninformed, choose to turn anyone who has a real, valid fear of Donald Trump into a Clinton supporter. Very shallow

CAN AND DO IS CORRECT.

You said they were required...they are not. Most do. Trump will not is my opinion

Thank you for the inside information . You might want to contact CNN or the NY Times with your insights .

:bigbow:

"
in the context of conflict of interest regulation and avoidance. Initially, it should be noted
that there is no federal statute which expressly requires that particular federal officials
place assets into a “blind trust” upon entering public service with the Federal"

The Use of Blind Trusts by Federal Officials

It would facilitate any discussions if you actually read

So what is your far Leftist point ? Do you expect that the Clinton Foundation which hands out a mere 10% of it`s intake will shut down and go away when Her Highness Hillary The Crooked Liar takes up her throne ?

Actually when i was working Mr. Buffet purchased over 10% of the company I worked for .

Once each year in late January he would come to our Headquarters for an update on the our financial performance for the past year and a presentation of our Business Plan for the new year .

Once the presentations were completed each of the presenters was invited to sit with him for a group lunch . I was one of the presenters for several years .

Also one of my best friends is now the Chairman of a company which is 100% owned by Mr. Buffet .
And you sir ?

I must be missing something. The President is personally deep in debt to foreign banks? Personally? Another point is who sets the debt limit?

Listen, I haven't done "****ing contests" since maybe 8th grade.

You will need to find another to compare whatever's.

You or someone else challenged me . And here is another one for you . When your girl was a US Senator I dealt directly with her and her assistants several times a year .

One particular year when I attended the major annual dinners in Washington as the guest of one of Mr. Buffet`s companies [ not the one I worked for ] your girl left the Dias when she spotted me and sat down in between courses and chatted me up for a while .
The more I saw of the inner workings of her office and her the lower my opinion .

A piece of advice I fear you will not heed.....

The MORE you speak of yourself or shroud everything in "you", the LESS people listen.

Don`t listen or read . The fact is I only speak about my history in
100% true facts . I had a very interesting and long career .

Began as a Trainee out of my Undergrad days and worked my way up to very near the very top .

You and others call me out and then I have responded with the truth which you apparently do not like hearing about .
And besides why should I care what you and others on this site may think about me . You`re not writing me a paycheck and you are not my friend .
You and your crowd are just determined to finish off this Nation. I have no idea what you motives might be but I could never understand your rationale either .

I do not call you out. I am here by hapinstance. I am trying to get some things done and was distracted by someone defending Donald Trump.

What I have noticed is that you simply ignore and do not respond when called on your errors. I also notice you make statements that are false..ie., saying the President must establish a blind trust...and most of those incorrect statements are preceded by you loudly patting yourself on the back.

I have met a lot of folks who insist they are ALWAYS correct, and baffle with BS by trying to dazzle with degrees, accomplishments, associates, etc.

None of this folks impressed me because most have a NEED to give their resume. I prefer to talk to people who still are learning, do not profess themselves, are willing to learn whether they be truck drivers, landscapers, servers, VP of companies, etc.

Everyone who posts here has credentials of some sort. Perhaps if you respected that, and posted without your inordinate and usual need to impress. Read and learn....respect yourself, but also respect those to whom you speak.

Trust me, especially on this particular forum....nobody cares about your education or past accomplishments. You are wasting your time bragging in here.

I just need to insure you know I will not be responding on here because it is fruitless. It serves a purpose but not for me. People, I don't think make fun of you...they instead do not care what you think of yourself.

To quote your hero in speaking to blacks over the heads of an all white audience...."what the hell do you have to lose"....try listening instead of lecturing.

1] I have no need to impress .
2] I do not come out and brag on this site
3] If you look back someone tried to insult me by saying in effect oh I suppose that you know Buffet . Well guess what I did .
So should I just ignore them and go away and suck my thumb or should I call them out .
4] I do not need to be lectured by you any more than you need to be lectured by me .
5] I may stand corrected on the " Blind Trust " issue however as I recall it has been the practice of each and every newly elected president sine Eisenhower .

Your posts are so easy to pick out, as they are written with intelligence and common sense beyond what is predominately seen in this forum from the 'rabid right.' :thumbup:

And no, I'm not saying everyone on the right is 'rabid'...just that it's easy to see which ones are.

While I will be voting for Clinton, I completely understand (and respect) your unwillingness to do so...as she is far from ideal.

Due to the current political party makeup however, if I chose not to vote for her I am scared chitless that Trump might actually win...which is something I couldn't live with myself should that happen.

Until such time as a true Centrist (economically a little right of center, socially a little to the left) becomes viable, I will pull the lever for Hillary while holding my nose.

I'm also impressed with the fact that you don't feel the need to try and impress others with your personal/educational/professional accomplishments as so many others and are willing to call out those who do...for the insecure people that they are.

I've been falsely accused of being multiple people in this political forum, but you are one of the few that being confused with...I actually feel is a compliment. :D


G'day. :ho:



:wave:

CNM

Speak for yourself. If you don't like what someone writes, dispute it with facts, not your personal opinion of the poster. When you make comments like this, all you are doing is proving that you have no dispute with what they say, only that you don't like it. Not much different than calling names.

We are not going to have to worry about this, as she is not going to win the election. This is going to be one of those rare cases where polls will not be accurate in predicting the outcome of the election.

Points:

Polls are taken via telephone calls to those at home about who they might vote for.

Hillary had a 20% reduction in voter turnout in the primary.
Trump had a 50-60% increase in voter turnout.

Hillary has had a one or two hundred audience participation at her rallies.
Trump has had thousands attending his rallies

Republican voter registration has increased substantially this year.

Summary:

Polls are taken at home and reflect a democrat preference for Hillary. No surprise. However, with the actually participation rate being so low, you can expect a poor performance at the voter booths on election day for Democrats. Blacks turned out in force for Obama but are not likely to show Hillary the same amount of support. They know a lying con person when they see one. Democrats had less than 75% the total votes of Republicans in the primaries.

On the other hand, even with low polling Trump has caused a larger Republican voter turn out and a significant increase in Republican voter registration. Trump has thousands of rally attendees, showing an active participation rate for Republican voters.

These factors are predictors for the coming election. Trump is likely to win by a large margin (land slide).

There is such a fear among law and order voters of liberal media pollsters that the Bradley effect is in effect even in telephone polls. Most Americans do not publicly pledge their allegiance to trump, look at all the thugs that spit on them without repercussion.

Liberals can only have wet dreams and think the polls are accurate.

Add to that all the additional damning information yet to be released on clinton and her pending seizures.

Nope there's only one of you, a good thing :clap2: