Posted on 01/05/2016 10:55:57 AM PST by conservativejoy
You don't often see "retaliated by withdrawing the medical benefits critical to his nephew's infant child" in profiles of political front-runners.
But Sunday's New York Times article, discussing Donald Trump's relationship with his late brother Freddy, includes it at the bottom. Then came the unveiling of Fred Sr.'s will, which Donald had helped draft. It divided the bulk of the inheritance, at least $20 million, among his children and their descendants, "other than my son Fred C. Trump Jr."
Freddy's children sued, claiming that an earlier version of the will had entitled them to their father's share of the estate, but that Donald and his siblings had used "undue influence" over their grandfather, who had dementia, to cut them out.
A week later, Mr. Trump retaliated by withdrawing the medical benefits critical to his nephew's infant child. "I was angry because they sued," he explained during last week's interview. But hey, no worries; I'm sure that cutting off medical care for an infant won't come up in attack ads in the general election.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
No he didn't, back then there was no such thing as pre-existing conditions....Second of all, Fred Jr. and his family were all very well off to begin with.
This was nothing more than a pissing contest between the trump adult family and the children of the Fred Jr. who died an alcoholic.....
Because the family said they would. Trump's brother was dead and the child in question was Trump's grand-nephew. But that was before the will and the lawsuit.
That story is fifteen years old and little William was 18-months old at the time. Now (if he survived) he’d be nearly 17. Can anyone provide an update on his condition now or what happened to the boy?
You are wrong to say that back then there were no preexisting conditions that affected insurance. I lived that with my own child. We could not get insurance because of his congenital heart condition.
This statement I made to you is wrong, I apologize.
No they weren't. Fred Jr. worked in aviation and was a pilot before his drinking forced him to give it up. He died in 1981 in poor shape financially. Supposedly Fred, Sr. didn't like his daughter-in-law so no support had been provided after Junior's death.
Here is a 2013 article.
http://m.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Trump-family-gives-back-to-agency-that-helps-4590816.php
I’m guessing the fund-raiser was not held at a Trump golf course.
How’s the kid doing today? How is Fred 3rd and his wife doing? This branch of the family sound like libs.
Held at Trump Nat’l golf course NY, owned by his uncle... Donald Trump.
Thanks for the update.
Yep me too and at the short end of the stick. But I'd rather be with the short end than single and alienated from family over stupid estate monies that I never worked for............
" Donald, for his part, said last week that all this feuding and hurt feelings could have been avoided if his nephew Fred had come to talk to him. "It's sort of disappointing. They sued my father, essentially," said Donald. "I'm not thrilled when someone sues my father. "Fred shouldn't be hurt," he added. "I have helped Fred over the years. That was the will of my father. He had four children left, and that's who he wanted to leave his estate to.
It was my husband, and he got the short end, too. In my view the blame belongs to his mother, but she did it freely. It wasn’t our money. Did others help it along? Probably. So what? Human nature is what it is. They didn’t hold a gun to her head. She was a self-righteous busybody but we probably should have been more forgiving. So there were two sides. She wanted to have conversations with our son’s teacher behind our backs. We thought she shouldn’t. Both sides dug in. Didn’t talk. And in the end, she probably felt like she got the last stab with the will. What we got for the price were years of not having to stress out over her meddlesome ways. On the one hand, it was probably worth it. On the other hand, we probably fell short of the forgiveness we should have shown. I grieve the loss of doing the right thing more than the loss of money. Then again, maybe I am being too hard on myself. It is useless to worry since it is too late.
She would be very happy to know that her son (my husband) died a year after she did. She hated me the most. Oh well. That’s life. And death. Those who got the money can’t take it with them either. Then we all stand before God. What we did or did not inherit will not matter one iota.
Even if they had to use a dead guy......
Ok, so what’s the problem? If the libs have to go back to dad’s Will, well, that’s lame. None of that has anything to do with running the country.
Amen
COBRA has been around for more than 35 years.
If you lost your job or your employer stopped providing health insurance or goes out of business, by law you are allowed to enroll in the program which is a continuation of your present insurance.
If you change employers or don’t have insurance at birth, I would agree with you.
But in the discussed situation, coverage continuance was available. It has been available for more than 35 years. At one time, it was for a maximum of 18 months. Then changed to a longer/unlimited time based on legal circumstances.
Bottom line: kid had coverage available.
Not for pre-existing conditions. At that time, insurance companies did not have to cover those conditions. I know. I was in that situation with my son.
He didn’t cut off the medical care. He cut off the money for the medical care.
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.