Were folders stuffed with Trump's 'business plan' papers blank props?

[*Nately120*]

(01-13-2017, 09:54 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: According to the article, Trump indicated the paperwork in the stack of folders dealt with him turning over control of his business operations before assuming the presidency. If the papers are blank then they don't relate to transition of control of his businesses. So if he indicating the papers dealt with the transition, but they didn't, wouldn't that be a lie?

I'm sure Jill Stein is assembling a mountain of blank paper that proves Trump stole the election as we speak.

[Rotobeast]

(01-13-2017, 09:54 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: According to the article, Trump indicated the paperwork in the stack of folders dealt with him turning over control of his business operations before assuming the presidency. If the papers are blank then they don't relate to transition of control of his businesses. So if he indicating the papers dealt with the transition, but they didn't, wouldn't that be a lie?

Perhaps they were to deal with the transition, but he hadn't printed the forms ON the paper yet ?

[*bfine32*]

(01-13-2017, 09:57 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Yeah, I heard the high road gets pretty congested this time of day. Luckily for you, the far left lane us for high horses only. 

We do agree that high horses are on the left. 

[*bfine32*]

(01-13-2017, 09:54 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: According to the article, Trump indicated the paperwork in the stack of folders dealt with him turning over control of his business operations before assuming the presidency. If the papers are blank then they don't relate to transition of control of his businesses. So if he indicating the papers dealt with the transition, but they didn't, wouldn't that be a lie?

ppsssttt.... Any agreement was probably drawn up digitally. There's a good chance he used the folders of papers to illustrate a point. But the left is concerned about the actual content of the folder. it's every bit as petty as every argument that has been presented since the election. 

[*Nately120*]

(01-13-2017, 10:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ppsssttt.... Any agreement was probably drawn up digitally. There's a good chance he used the folders of papers to illustrate a point. But the left is concerned about the actual content of the folder. it's every bit as petty as every argument that has been presented since the election. 

Illustrate, fabricate...what difference does it make?

[*bfine32*]

(01-13-2017, 10:40 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Illustrate, fabricate...what difference does it make?

It makes zero difference. As I said before I started entertaining myself with the various responses I have received as to the magnitude of pages in the folders being blank:

Why does anyone care? Shouldn't they be concerned with the actual arrangement? They really can't point to that, so they will point to the petty.

[*Nately120*]

(01-13-2017, 10:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It makes zero difference. As I said before I started entertaining myself with the various responses I have received as to the magnitude of pages in the folders being blank:

Why does anyone care? Shouldn't they be concerned with the actual arrangement? They really can't point to that, so they will point to the petty.

I care more about the fact that he went through the trouble of pretending he had an impressive amount of pertinent documents and then prevented them from being exposed as props. True to Trump fashion, he didn't have ONE folder of documents, he had a veritable pile of important documents!

So, based on actions alone I suppose a better question would be why did Trump feel like he needed to pretend he had a whole stack of important documents? You yourself have stated why the copious folders stuffed to the brim with "important and pertinent documents" were unnecessary, so why did he take them?

We can all draw our own conclusions, but I can certainly see why a guy who is known for fraud and selling the sizzle, not the steak could be frowned at for this. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go wrap a $20 bill around a bunch of monopoly money and pay off some debts.

SHORT VERSION: I think it would be wise for someone who is criticized for being full of crap to NOT go out of his way to plop down a bunch of props and hope no one tries to verify that they are what he says they are. As much as I really want to just forget about this stuff it seems like every day he does something new that is eye-rollingly in tune with his criticisms.

[GMDino]

(01-13-2017, 09:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Basically, I am not. I asked why folks would care if the documents in the folder were actual paperwork or not. 

Because he, through his attorney, said they were.

If they were not...why say it?

If they were not...why have them?

Show over substance.

Again and again and again.

[NATI BENGALS]

(01-13-2017, 10:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ppsssttt.... Any agreement was probably drawn up digitally. There's a good chance he used the folders of papers to illustrate a point. But the left is concerned about the actual content of the folder. it's every bit as petty as every argument that has been presented since the election. 

Unfortunately you are correct, the left is actually concerned with the content. While the right gets bamboozled like a bunch of Trump U students.
  
I am sure there are plenty of Trumpets out there totally amazed at the giant stack of papers comrade Trump signed. And ate it up no questions asked. 

[GMDino]

(01-13-2017, 10:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It makes zero difference. As I said before I started entertaining myself with the various responses I have received as to the magnitude of pages in the folders being blank:

Why does anyone care? Shouldn't they be concerned with the actual arrangement? They really can't point to that, so they will point to the petty.

Quote:Trump's Plan To Shift His Businesses Is Lacking, Ethics Experts Say

Former White House ethics lawyer Norman Eisen, who served under President Obama, said Trump plan doesn't even come close to meeting legal requirements.


"There's a whole body of federal law, so what Mr. Trump announced yesterday is totally deficient and it's based on a distorted understanding," Eisen said in an interview on Morning Edition. "Either he's been fed a bad understanding of the Constitution American law by his counsel or he came to it naturally."

Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, said Trump did not address all the ethical problems involved in this decision.

"I think what we saw this morning was essentially an exercise in smoke and mirrors to give the appearance of doing something about the ethics problems, the Emoluments Clause problems," Clark said on All Things Considered Wednesday.

Essentially, she said, the Emoluments Clause restricts Trump from accepting payments from foreign governments.

FACT CHECK: Trump Lawyer's Claim And Comparison To Rockefeller Is A Head Scratcher

Eisen said the same constitutional restriction extends beyond profits and "encompasses gifts, revenues of any kind, permitting, trademarks."

Richard Painter, who served as an ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, said the branding of Trump's name on buildings across the globe could also potentially become the focus of terrorist attacks.

"This is the type of thing that not only creates ethics problems but a strategic problem for the United States," he said. "It could endanger people's lives."
At Trump's news conference, his lawyer Sheri Dillon said giving up ownership would hurt his company and "greatly diminish the value of the assets."

"President-elect Trump should not be expected to destroy the company he built," she said.

But the government's chief ethics officer said Trump does need to divest.

"I don't think divestiture is too high a price to pay to be the president of the United States of America," Walter Shaub Jr., director of the Office of Government Ethics, said Wednesday.

Eisen and Painter say that giving up his role as a businessman is a fair expectation for the next president.

"All we're asking Mr. Trump to do — it's very simple — sign a piece of paper, turn the properties over to a trustee to figure out what to do with them," Eisen said.

Painter said Trump needs to take his focus off just making money.

[/url]

Quote:[url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38591754]Trump Organization handover plan slammed by ethics chief


The director of the US Office of Government Ethics has criticised Donald Trump's plan to hand control of his business empire to his sons before his inauguration on 20 January.


The plan does not match the "standards" of US presidents over the last 40 years, Walter Shaub said.

A Trump lawyer said earlier the new trust would face "severe restrictions" on new deals.

But Mr Shaub said the plan would not remove conflicts of interest.

"Every president in modern times has taken the strong medicine of divestiture," he said, referring to a process whereby Mr Trump would sell off his corporate assets and put the profits into a blind trust run by an independent trustee.

At a news conference on Wednesday, lawyer Sherri Dillon said that management of the Trump Organization would be transferred to a trust controlled by Mr Trump's sons Don and Eric and chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg.

The Trump Organization is an umbrella company for Donald Trump's hundreds of investments in real estate, brands and other businesses.

"petty"  

[*Nately120*]

(01-13-2017, 11:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: Because he, through his attorney, said they were.

If they were not...why say it?

If they were not...why have them?

Show over substance.

Again and again and again.

This. Trump put himself in a situation where his claims were easily verifiable, and go figure, it was a farce. This one just seems particularly lazy on his part.

The guy's ethics regarding this situation are called into question by actual experts (dumbass doctoral-level experts) and his response is to put blank papers into an impressive pile and either hope no one looks, or just flat-out not give a damn if his latest charade is exposed. My biggest concern with this is how amazingly lazy and half-assed the whole thing is. Trump knows it doesn't matter what he does, and it shows.

[*bfine32*]

I'm not sure which is more amusing. That folks care what was in the actual folders in the conference or that folks accept "sfgate" saying they were blank as definitive proof.

I am so glad that I can accept the Trump Presidency with the same aloofness that I did the Obama Presidency. The "offended" in each case are humorous.

[*Nately120*]

Without bringing Obama into this, you don't think it is somewhat concerning, or at least noteworthy that Trump just threw his detractors a hanging curve by doing this? Just seems like it would be easier and more reasonable to not bring a bunch of blank paper to make a an impressive pile of nothing. He gave us the ammo. It's just amazingly lazy on his part.

Then again, maybe if Trump hadn't brought the prodigious pile of prop paper and said he was going through the process some liberal media dolt would have shouted "Yeah right! If you're doing business stuff where is the big pile of documents to prove it!"

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

Quote:Both he and his lawyer Sheri Dillion claimed that the bundled documents were just a part of the massive paperwork necessary to separate Trump from his business operations. Like her client, Dillon also pointed at pile.

After the session, reporters tried to examine the folders and the documents inside, but Trump staffers would not let them look at any of them.

(01-13-2017, 10:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ppsssttt.... Any agreement was probably drawn up digitally. There's a good chance he used the folders of papers to illustrate a point.

Then he could have used a thumb drive to illustrate his point, maybe?  Helluva lot easier to carry.

Quote:But the left is concerned about the actual content of the folder. it's every bit as petty as every argument that has been presented since the election. 

If Trump indicated the actual agreement is in the folders, shouldn't the reporters be concerned about the actual contents of the folders so they can review the actual agreement?  That way they can actually point to the agreement.

(01-13-2017, 10:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It makes zero difference. As I said before I started entertaining myself with the various responses I have received as to the magnitude of pages in the folders being blank:

It is amusing to watch the right defend a lie by pretending Trump didn't lie.  Then act as if they are taking the high road by calling others petty.  I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt at the beginning of this thread, but . . .

Quote:Why does anyone care? Shouldn't they be concerned with the actual arrangement? They really can't point to that, so they will point to the petty.

That's an unfortunate choice of words. Do you know why the reporters can't point to the agreement?  Because the folders aren't filled with the agreement.

The content is kinda "the point," isn't it? (I see what I did there.)  Trump pointed to the "agreement," his attorney pointed to the "agreement," the reporters tried to read the "agreement" Trump and his attorney pointed to, but they weren't allowed to read the "agreement" so they can point to the "agreement."

And nothing says you're above the pettiness than "pointing" the finger at other people and calling them "petty" . . . because they can't "point" to the Trump "agreement" because the "agreement" Trump "pointed" to isn't the "agreement."  Anyways, I'm gonna leave you with this one.  Keep up the good fight.

[*bfine32*]

(01-14-2017, 03:17 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Then he could have used a thumb drive to illustrate his point, maybe?  Helluva lot easier to carry.


If Trump indicated the actual agreement is in the folders, shouldn't the reporters be concerned about the actual contents of the folders so they can review the actual agreement?  That way they can actually point to the agreement.


It is amusing to watch the right defend a lie by pretending Trump didn't lie.  Then act as if they are taking the high road by calling others petty.  I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt at the beginning of this thread, but . . .


That's an unfortunate choice of words. Do you know why the reporters can't point to the agreement?  Because the folders aren't filled with the agreement.

The content is kinda "the point," isn't it? (I see what I did there.)  Trump pointed to the "agreement," his attorney pointed to the "agreement," the reporters tried to read the "agreement" Trump and his attorney pointed to, but they weren't allowed to read the "agreement" so they can point to the "agreement."

And nothing says you're above the pettiness than "pointing" the finger at other people and calling them "petty" . . . because they can't "point" to the Trump "agreement" because the "agreement" Trump "pointed" to isn't the "agreement."  Anyways, I'm gonna leave you with this one.  Keep up the good fight.

What's amusing is watching the Left's witch hunt.

First off,Nobody here or those reporting on it know what was in the folder. "Wrong paper size" (for real).

Secondly, regardless what the media think they are entitled to; they may not be entitled to review Trump's business plan. I am sure it will be presented to those that have a need to know.

Finally, remove the emotion, step back, and openly look at what folks are upset about in this instance: The files are in the Computer Zoolander.

[*bfine32*]

(01-13-2017, 06:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I forgot to really address the OP. Who cares? He had a table full of Trump goodies at his press conference. He is a salesman, he likes props. His will be the infomercial presidency. He is full of shit most of the time, but let's focus on the important stuff he is bull shitting us about. Whether or not the folders they were pointing to were real or just blank pages matters very little.

Are you insane!?!?! Of course it matter what was actually in those folders because.....

[Benton]

(01-14-2017, 11:28 AM)bfine32 Wrote: What's amusing is watching the Left's witch hunt.

First off,Nobody here or those reporting on it know what was in the folder. "Wrong paper size" (for real).

Secondly, regardless what the media think they are entitled to; they may not be entitled to review Trump's business plan. I am sure it will be presented to those that have a need to know.

Finally, remove the emotion, step back, and openly look at what folks are upset about in this instance: The files are in the Computer Zoolander.

to the secondly, that depends. A blind trust allows him to get around requirements of disclosing business interests, which is good when you're heavily in bed with foreign powers. If he doesn't go with a trust, he has to disclose where his money comes from. And he's avoided that so far.

[GMDino]

(01-14-2017, 11:30 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Are you insane!?!?! Of course it matter what was actually in those folders because.....

It was explained, multiple times and quite clearly, that what was actually in the folders is only important as (another) sign of the snake oil show Trump is.


I've also answered your question about the plan itself.

But you can continue to try and derail the thread because YOU don't care about either.

[*bfine32*]

(01-14-2017, 11:45 AM)Benton Wrote: to the secondly, that depends. A blind trust allows him to get around requirements of disclosing business interests, which is good when you're heavily in bed with foreign powers. If he doesn't go with a trust, he has to disclose where his money comes from. And he's avoided that so far.

No doubt he must be transparent with his business matters while serving as POTUS to those that have oversight; it's just that the press may not be the one charged with oversight. Not sure what depends.

[*bfine32*]

(01-14-2017, 12:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: It was explained, multiple times and quite clearly, that what was actually in the folders is only important as (another) sign of the snake oil show Trump is.


I've also answered your question about the plan itself.

But you can continue to try and derail the thread because YOU don't care about either.

I am derailing a thread about papers in a folder perhjaps being blank by suggesting who cares?

Yes the plan is important; whether or not it was in the folder he pointed to was not. The title and motive of this thread are both petty and I have no problem pointing it out and enjoy watching those feign outrage.