Posted on 02/19/2016 9:33:47 PM PST by joanie-f
Sorry, but the man is simply not eligible for POTUS no matter his resume.
It sure is, Windflier. It's "deja vu all over again."
I rate Ronald Reagan as the best, most effective president of the twentieth century. Certainly, he had no foreign policy experience as governor of California. And yet, under his leadership, America won the Cold War, hands down, without firing a shot.
Thanks so much for writing!
Thank you all for your responses here. I am currently out of town, with a full plate, but will answer many of your comments here when I return next week.
I just want to make a few brief observations regarding the character of Donald Trump, simply because it amazes me that so many friends and acquaintances who I know to be deeply moral and religious people are overlooking, to me, what I believe are frightening red flags, and telling insights into the man’s heart.
I believe there are many other red flags in this man’s policy/beliefs history (and I will gladly debate them with anyone who has an interest in doing that, once I return home), but for now let’s just look at three examples of character-related ones:
(1) We all know that, in 1993, Trump attempted to abuse the Founders’ Constitutional intent regarding the use of eminent domain, when he tried to use that legal concept to force an elderly woman out of her home in order to construct a limousine waiting area outside one of his casinos. The end of their protracted legal battle resulted in Vera Coking being allowed to remain in her home — which she continued to do for seventeen more years, until health problems forced her to move to a retirement home nearer to her children and grandchildren.
During the legal battle between Trump and Coking, Trump accused her of being a money hungry, anti-progress person (and worse) and stated that, because her home was preserved, people would be forced to ‘stare at a terrible house instead of staring at beautiful fountains and beautiful other things that would be good.’
Even today, more than twenty years later, Trump insists that he had every right to attempt to force her out of her home, simply because he offered her more than it was worth (which is still a matter of contention among people who are familiar with the legal battle).
Let’s look at just that aspect of the man’s character:
What does it tell us when a man believes that the only value of a home rests in its monetary value? Vera Coking had lived in her home for thirty years. She had raised her children there before the passing of her husband and she intended to live there for the rest of her life, God willing. Yet a perfect stranger feels (even today) that he has the power to simply declare that the intrinsic memory-rich, nostalgic value that house held for her has no real meaning. The almighty dollar invariably trumps the individual’s right to define what is deeply important, and precious, to him or her.
Trump’s statement ‘They’re staring at a terrible house instead of staring at beautiful fountains and beautiful other things that would be good,’ is the utterance of a dictator. What leader of a free society believes he has the power, and the right, to call another person’s house ‘terrible’ simply because it isn’t being used to turn a large profit, and to declare that ‘beautiful fountains’ are ‘good’? The man believes that he, not an average American citizen, has the ability ... even the right ... to define what is terrible and what is good, even when the object of the discussion is something about which he has no knowledge or acquaintance, and something about which that average citizen knows every corner and included, and personally indelible, memory.
This, by the way, was Vera’s ‘terrible’ house:
(2) Mr. Trump has recently discovered that Marlene Ricketts, part owner of the Chicago Cubs, has donated three million dollars to a super PAC that is running ads against his candidacy. Ms. Ricketts’ donations have been completely above board and were properly reported in public documents filed with the Federal Election Commission.
Donald Trump’s response upon hearing about the donations? He went on Twitter and accused Marlene Ricketts of ‘secretly’ spending money against him, and tweeted, ‘I hear the Rickets family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $’s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!’
Keep in mind, this is a man who is seeking the presidency of the United States, and the leadership of the free world, attacking an American citizen for doing nothing more than exercising her right to spend her money as she sees fit. And then he publicly threatened to expose supposed skeletons in her family’s closet as a result of her exercise of that right.
That, in plain English, is called extortion.
(3) The story of Trump University paints a grotesque picture of a heartless man, who has absolutely no compassion for the innocent everyday Americans whom he bilked out of tens of thousands of dollars of their hard-earned money.
Trump claimed, over and over, to be completely involved with the university, having hand-picked the ‘professors’, and having kept a close watch over the formulation/content of the curriculum, and yet most of his ‘professors’ turned out to be people he had never met, and, worse than that, they were simply sales associates, with absolutely no educational background at all. Two of these ‘professorial experts’ even filed for personal bankruptcy during the time they were teaching at this so-called ‘university’, and few of them were even in the midst of their own business bankruptcy proceedings when they were hired to teach classes on how to get rich in real estate.
As if the empty promises weren’t bad enough, and as if bilking hundreds of ordinary Americans (many of whom are plaintiffs in the suits filed against the university) out of tens of thousands of dollars each weren’t enough, Trump, to this day, claims that this entire endeavor was nothing more than an altruistic, charitable venture, and that all of his profits would go to charity ... yet Trump himself pocketed $5 million of the $40 million poured into the organization by unsuspecting ‘average Americans’, enriching his own personal many-billion-dollar coffers at the expense of the ‘little people’ whose votes he is courting by means of his faux compassion for the American middle class.
The ‘university’ also used constant bait-and-switch tactics, conning their ‘students’ to invest in more and more expensive ‘classes’, and instructing them to arrange with their banks to dramatically increase the credit limits on their credit cards so as to be able to afford the (useless) ‘classes’.
When accompanied by nothing more meaningful than grandiose words, a man’s character comes into serious question and his promises, such as his phony, non-existent hands-on connection to his university, appear meaningless. Donald Trumps candidacy consists in large part of nothing more than grandiose promises ... and angry tirades, or worse, aimed at those who dare question the sincerity, viability or depth of those promises.
Just ask the Vera Coking, the Ricketts Family, and the ‘students’ of Trump University. They’ll tell you an earful.
I’m afraid they’re not listening Joanie.
The Pied Piper is playing their tune.
We have a chance now to take back our government
and instill the safeguards our founders left us
by putting in place a conservative, one who is
steeped and guided by our Constitution.
We can only pray that that person is our nominee.
Oh, I can vote for Trump if the choice is him
or Clinton but I am afraid these many people who
believe Trump is the answer to all the problems
that plague us will find out once he’s in office
that they have been mistaken.
I am well, more or less, as a 70 year old can be
don’t know if I still have your current address
so if you would send it to me by Freemail I would
be obliged.
Our Ga. Primary is coming soon and I will vote for
the man of my choice but if he doesn’t end up the
candidate I will support whoever it is because the
alternative is not in the interests of the country.
God bless and hope you and yours are ok.
tet68.
According to him, Trump is the most Christian man you will ever find.
How could he possibly be guilty of any of your allegations?
< /s >
Hi Joanie! You offer three observations about Donald Trump that purport to show him as a truly wicked man, a man of execrable character so evil he cannot be trusted in the Oval Office: His views on (1) the usage of eminent domain; (2) his reservations about anonymous campaign contributions; and (3) the brou-ha-ha over “Trump University.”
I’ll leave aside gratuitous remarks regarding the seemingly privileged view you have of the state of Donald Trump’s heart and soul, other than to say that certainly, I cannot claim to have any such privileged insights myself.
Let’s start with eminent domain, going back to square one, to Article V of the Bill of Rights:
...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.Note two things: (1) “public use” is not defined in Article V; (2) “just compensation” historically has been construed by American courts as “fair market value.”
In the article on eminent domain that appears in The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States [Oxford University Press, 1992], William B. Stoebuck, Professor of Law, University of Washington, wrote:
Eminent Domain is the power of government to compel owners of real or personal property to transfer it, or some interest in it, to the government. Eminent domain has long been regarded as an inherent power of both the federal and state governments. State governments have delegated this power to their subdivisions, such as cities and counties. The federal and state governments have also to some extent delegated the power to private corporations that perform quasi-public functions, such as railroads and public utility companies....In light of this background, some takeaways from the 1998 eminent domain case involving Donald Trump and the poor widow — Vera Coking of Atlantic City — he was allegedly abusing to enrich himself personally:
Eminent domain compels owners to sell to the government for public purposes. But under the Constitution [unlike British law at the time of the Founding] an owner will receive the fair market value of the property. Thus, a compromise is struck whereby needed public projects may be carried out, but owners are made whole. [Italics added for emphasis]
Trump, as a private citizen, had no standing to bring an eminent domain action. It was brought by a local municipality with an interest in urban renewal, evidently deemed by the local authorities as a “public purpose.” As far as I know, this belief on their part was legit; there is no suggestion that bribery or corruption was involved. The locals sought a developer, who was a private person: The Donald, a man with an excellent reputation as a developer, who was contracted to build a casino on a property that entailed the widow’s long-time residence.
Now I’m not a big fan of casinos; but they are legal, and they create jobs, leading to renewed economic vitality. It was the local authority, not The Donald, which brought the eminent domain action. I understand the latter offered to pay the compensation to the widow, and that his offer was for more than FMV, just to make the deal more appealing to her. But she declined, preferring to stay in her home; and brought suit in court challenging the characterization of “public purpose.” After a long court battle, Mrs. Coking won in court. Atlantic City backed off. She retained her home and lived there until declining health caused her to move to an assisted living community. The Donald developed the casino property AROUND her. This was back in 1998. Eventually, the property was sold in a private market transaction. I don’t know what happened to it after that.
MEANWHILE, Ted Cruz is running TV ads claiming that Donald Trump colluded with Atlantic City insiders to bulldoze the home of a helpless elderly widow, for a casino parking lot. This greedy ogre just wanted to toss granny over the cliff, just to make even more filthy lucre! TALK ABOUT DISHONESTY!!! TALK ABOUT “BAD CHARACTER!”
I’m running on long, so will be brief about your other two points, Joanie. As far as I’m concerned, the Achilles Heel of the Citizens United decision is the ability for persons to make unlimited political donations IN COMPLETE ANONYMITY. Geez, what could go wrong with that???
Lastly, had The Donald not named his real-estate-developer training school a “ university,” NOBODY would have cared; no bureaucrat would have objected. It would have been a total non-story.
Jeepers. There seems to be some kind of anti-Trump PSYCHOSIS going around in certain parts. And it appears to be catching....
Thanks for the ping, betty boop. Excellent rebuttal.
Well nice post of Ted’s resume but what it shows is that Ted Cruz is one dang fine litigator. Perfect credentials for US Attorney General.
What your post also points out by omission is that Ted Cruz has never managed a popcorn stand. He has no executive experience and the position of President of the United States is charged with administering the governmental agencies of our country, writing a budget proposal to submit to Congress and a host of other administrative tasks too numerous to list here.
So we are trying to decide whether to elect a Constitutional attorney or the CEO of a multi billion dollar conglomerate to manage the largest economy in the world. Can you see how many people find that to be an easy choice?
At the end of the day I vote against democrats, communists and socialists. IMHO electing Trump as POTUS is like giving the keys to a new bugattii veyron to a drunk 16 year old teenager....... Promises, no political voting record or printable past support on conservative issues, personal attacks that drive by presstitutes and polidiots drive in the glassy eyed virtual reality voters minds 24/7 be they true or not.
I hear all his talking points and trigger words that say what any new car buyer wants to hear, what any disease ridden human wants to hear from a snake oil peddler because their need to be cured of the woes and wants they have exceed clear thought at times.
I’m searching and reading every pro Trump piece I can find an will gladly vote on his past conservative record if I could find it.... I’m really trying to believe the old school freepers here as the recent / new ones seem to be in the “vote Trump or you suck” sort of solution ...versus a simple education I seek on WHAT makes Trump the answer to that which has contaminated our beloved republic.
Stay Safe !
The one point you make that I cannot let slide without comment is your argument that the 'local municipality', rather than Donald Trump, brought the eminent domain suit against Vera Coking. Do you seriously believe that, especially since his casino complex was next door to that home, and eventually built itself up around it, and knowing full well the power Trump yielded in Atlantic City at the time, Trump applied no pressure in order for the municipality to do so? I believe he simply used his personal/financial power in order to persuade the powers that be to do his legal bidding.
You are certainly not the only citizen who believes that the Founders' original intent in penning the eminent domain concept into the Constitution would include taking a person's private property, against his will, with compensation, for 'public use' would include defining 'public use' as creating more jobs and increasing the tax base of a municipality.
I do not believe the Founders would have condoned such government over-reach, for many reasons, only one of which is the fact that they debated long and hard when penning the Declaration of Independence as to whether to word the famous phrase 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' as, instead, 'life, liberty and property.' That alone reflects just how incredibly sacred they believed a person's property should be. I cannot imagine them placing jobs and tax revenues above the right of a person to retain his long-held family home. Then again, that is one person's opinion, and your hold an apparently very different one.
I have enjoyed many interactions over the years with you, betty, here on Facebook, and have come away from all of them with a sense of kinship, and have quite often learned valuable information, and lessons, from you. Yet, because of my stance on Trump vs. Cruz, you have chosen to call some of my remarks 'gratuitous' and have chosen to label my vantagepoint a 'privileged view' (while also, yourself, calling Ted Cruz 'dishonest' and of 'bad character'). You also ended your remarks by using the word 'psychosis' in order to describe those who speak badly of Donald Trump.
I will offer no personal commentary about that, other than the above. Nor will I ever write anything to disparage your vantage point, or your method of conveying it.
I wish you all the best, as always.
Dear Squantos, I am an "old-school freeper" here, having joined the forum in March 1998. I regard myself as, not only a constitutional conservative, but also an economic and social conservative as well.
I do not say "vote Trump or you suck." What I do say is, please, bring reason and evidence to bear in judging him.
What I am not is an ideological conservative of, say, the Mark Levin school. He is one of the most brilliant intellects and constitutional scholars we have. But I believe him to be long on ideology, and short on common sense. Or to put it in Christian terms, long on doctrine and short on Grace.
JMHO, FWIW.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me!
Dear trisham, thank you so very much for your kind words of support!
I’ll vote for Trump in the general over Hillary or Sanders or any other Rat.
That said, I do so full of regret, feeling that I am voting for a possible Mussolini, who cares no more about the Constitution than Obama.
Even so, if he stops the immivasion, it will be worth it. But I don’t expect a free or fair election in 2020, no matter who wins in 2016. We are at the end of an age. I feel like we are in the 1930s, and things will happen fast and black swans will be swarming all over.
Given a choice between a .357 between the eyes, a gram of arsenic, or a gram of cyanide, there is only one rational choice.
Given a choice between Lenin, Hitler and Mussolini, there is only one choice.
But don’t look for me out there goose-stepping with the euphoric fanatics of the cult of personality of Donito Trumpolini.
Don’t delude yourself about the least of evils.
Trumpolini
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZTwmqLVBbA
Over the past few months I've been called all kinds of names by his supporters here because of my support for the proven conservative candidate Ted Cruz. The bad treatment by Trumps supporters has only hardened my opinion of a man that I consider to be immoral.
Did you know that Donald met Marla Maples in his church and they sat together during Sunday services. This is the same church he married his first wife Ivana in thirteen years earlier and was still married to at the time.
Did you know that his Casino in Atlantic City was the first to have a strip club in it.
Christians Cringe at Donald Trumps Sexy Past
In his book 'The Art of The Deal' to quote from the link above: Trump boasted about bedding other mens wives "If I told the real stories of my experiences with women, often seemingly very happily married women this book would be a guaranteed best-seller". he wrote.
This is not the kind of person that I would consider worthy enough to have any interaction with much less lead my country.
We can get thru this election just fine..... color me just extra cautious with things these days..... Stay Safe !!
“I do not say “vote Trump or you suck.” What I do say is, please, bring reason and evidence to bear in judging him.
What I am not is an ideological conservative of, say, the Mark Levin school. He is one of the most brilliant intellects and constitutional scholars we have. But I believe him to be long on ideology, and short on common sense. Or to put it in Christian terms, long on doctrine and short on Grace.”
What an excellent way to describe why conservatives are supporting Donald Trump. Eloquent too, I might add. I hope lots of skeptical Freepers see your explanation and take the time to examine their own feelings about him in that context.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.