Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, November 25, 2016

Washington Post: President-elect Donald Trump's charitable foundation has admitted to the IRS that it violated a legal prohibition against "self-dealing," which bars non-profit leaders from using their charity's money to help themselves, their businesses or their families. In one section of the form, the IRS asked if the Trump Foundation had transferred "income or assets to a disqualified person." A disqualified person, in this context, might be Trump -- the foundation's president -- or a member of his family, or a Trump-owned business. The foundation checked "yes."

Advertisement

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Another line on the form asked if the Trump Foundation had engaged in any acts of self-dealing in prior years. The Trump Foundation checked "yes" again.

Such violations can carry penalties including excise taxes, and the charity leaders can be required to repay money that the charity spent on their behalf.

During the presidential campaign, The Post revealed several instances -- worth about $300,000 -- where Trump seemed to have used the Trump Foundation to help himself.

In two cases, The Post reported, the Trump Foundation appeared to pay legal settlements to end lawsuits that involved his for-profit businesses.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Unashamed of their sleaze, the foundation checked "yes."

#1 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2016-11-22 11:36 AM | Reply

Unashamed of their sleaze, the foundation checked "yes." #1 | POSTED BY LIVE_OR_DIE

If only more family foundations of wealthy households were as honest and transparent as the Trump Foundation!
Making America Great Again
:)

#2 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-11-22 11:51 AM | Reply

Christ but you're thick.

#3 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2016-11-22 12:04 PM | Reply

Christ but you're thick. #3 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS

"That's what she said."

#4 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-11-22 12:07 PM | Reply

Well, bend obverse because Trump is getting ready - in George Carlie's memorable phrase - to give you the kind of service for which you've set yrself up.

Everybody knows by now, all businessmen are completely full of ----; just the worst kind of low-life, criminal, ----------- you could ever wanna' run into - a ------' piece of ---- businessman. And the proof of it, the proof of it is, they don't even trust each other. They don't trust one another. When a business man sits down to negotiate a deal, the first thing he does is to automatically assume that the other guy is a complete lying ----- who's trying to ---- him outta his money. So he's gotta do everything he can to ---- the other guy a little bit faster and a little bit harder. And he's gotta do it with a big smile on his face. You know that big, -------- businessman smile? And if you're a customer - Whoah! - that's when you get the really big smile. Customer always gets that really big smile, as the businessman carefully positions himself directly behind the customer, and unzips his pants, and proceeds to service...the...account. I am servicing this account. This customer needs service. Now you know what they mean. Now you know what they mean when they say, "We specialize in customer service." Whoever coined the phrase "let the buyer beware" was probably bleeding from the -------. That's business.

#5 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2016-11-22 12:27 PM | Reply

Not a peep will be uttered by the GOP.

#6 | Posted by 726 at 2016-11-23 07:28 AM | Reply

I just hope this doesn't affect the election results.

#7 | Posted by cookfish at 2016-11-25 03:31 PM | Reply

Seems to me something like this should be illegal.

#8 | Posted by truthhurts at 2016-11-25 04:05 PM | Reply

Is it even unethical? If he reported the transactions as he is suppose to, which he appears to have then what is the problem? That is why the form asks so you can properly report things and make sure you are square with the IRS. You people are so desperate.

Oh yeah, he is anti establishment and beat the elites successor. If there is an issue they can fine him 300k and I banks can give a secret speech to some Wall Street guys and they can pay up. That will satisfy the Clinton backers, but it is irrelevant because there is no violation.

Keep digging. Maybe someday you will get a nugget. Go get them!

#9 | Posted by nole74 at 2016-11-25 07:32 PM | Reply

LOCK HIM UP!!!!

Laughing at the TrumpTards here.

#10 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2016-11-25 10:59 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

If that had been the Clinton Foundation, there would have been three GOP Congressional investigations already scheduled, with Lou Dobbs turning purple on the FOX Propaganda Channel.

#11 | Posted by e1g1 at 2016-11-26 01:16 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

New York already determined this and ordered Trump's foundation to cease fund raising in New York. No matter how you do your taxes its only a crime if you lie to an IRS agent. Checking "Yes", prevents any criminal prosecution.

#12 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-11-26 07:01 AM | Reply

New York already determined thie.

#12 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-11-26 07:01 AM | Reply | Flag

Of course they did, he truthfully filled out his tax form. Self dealing could be used any Trump facility or hotel for catering, an event, rented office space anything most of which are not unethical if done at market rates.

Or he could have self reported massive fraud and embezzlement. That is probably not likely because who he is already massively rich and is that dumb to self report that..still some people are so angry and hateful that is the conclusion they jump to conclusions.

#13 | Posted by nole74 at 2016-11-26 09:14 AM | Reply

He admitted he self dealed in prior years but didn't report it
He got caught cheating
Why is this not fraud?

#14 | Posted by truthhurts at 2016-11-26 09:46 AM | Reply

" Self dealing could be used any Trump facility or hotel for catering, an event, rented office space anything most of which are not unethical if done at market rates."

Not legally. "Market rates" have no bearing on whether he used money earmarked for charity for his personal expenses. In addition, if the Foundation had a meeting at a Trump facility and paid market rates, that would NOT be considered "self-dealing".

You just don't have a clue, do you?

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 09:54 AM | Reply

"Why is this not fraud?"

IOKIYAR.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 09:55 AM | Reply

if the Foundation had a meeting at a Trump facility and paid market rates, that would NOT be considered "self-dealing"
#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 09:54 AM | Reply

You should educate yourself so you dont seem so foolish..this is straight from a law book on endowment and foundation law, which is in a related field to my work.

"Self-dealing involves most direct or indirect transactions between a foundation and a "disqualified person" regardless of whether the prohibited transaction would benefit the foundation and is otherwise a fair and reasonable transaction."

#17 | Posted by nole74 at 2016-11-26 10:11 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Like I explained these self daling transactions are not inherintley unethical and may be renting office space in Trump Tower at market rates, paying for official business at one of his hotels or even a gold tournament at his resort...all at market rates which is self dealing but not necessarily at all unethical.

Only a moron would assume, absent any evidence at all, Trump self reported this and it is money laundring or fraud.

#18 | Posted by nole74 at 2016-11-26 10:14 AM | Reply

"Like I explained these self daling transactions are not inherintley unethical and may be renting office space in Trump Tower at market rates"

Like I explained, that would NOT be considered "self-dealing". Do you simply not understand the meaning of that word?

"absent any evidence at all"

The Foundation itself admitted violating the rules. Exactly how much more evidence are you waiting for?

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 10:21 AM | Reply

Don't look now, but your definition of self-dealing just proved my point, not yours.

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 10:24 AM | Reply

"You should educate yourself so you dont seem so foolish."

I've sat on multiple non-profit boards, and am speaking from the training I received regarding the rules. You?

#21 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 10:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"this is straight from a law book on endowment and foundation law, which is in a related field to my work."

So you work in in a "related field" to non-profits, yet you've never had ethics training? What position do you hold?

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 10:43 AM | Reply

#5 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS

The solution then is to ban business and let the government take complete charge, right, Doc? You know, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." All things will come from Big Brother and God help you if you ever do anything to piss 'em off. I can't wait....

While we're on it...any comment on the Clinton Foundation along this same topic? Nawww, I thought so. Man! The hypocrisy and double standards are really thick in here.

#23 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2016-11-26 10:43 AM | Reply

"While we're on it...any comment on the Clinton Foundation along this same topic?"

Sure: check all the public forms for the Clinton Foundation. Their "self-dealing" boxes are checked "NO".

In addition, had the CF admitted self-dealing as the TF has had to, you and others like you would be apoplectic. As it is, only one Foundation has been found violating the rules. Of course, that point is lost on you. The hypocrisy and double standards are really thick in here.

#24 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 10:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"The solution then is to ban business and let the government take complete charge, right"

Why wouldn't the solution be to follow the Constitution?

#25 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 10:48 AM | Reply

#22 - *popcorn* while waiting

#23 - Seriously? Dumb wasn't enough, now we have to have Dumber chirping in?

Back to watching the Cat toying with the mouse mice...

#26 | Posted by YAV at 2016-11-26 10:49 AM | Reply

"...still some people are so angry and hateful that is the conclusion they jump to conclusions."

I doubt seriously if Trump actually sat down and wrote checks violating the self-dealing laws. Someone probably got caught during an audit or something and reported it. It reminds me of the days when people shouted that Nixon burlarized the Watergate,

#27 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2016-11-26 10:50 AM | Reply

"I doubt seriously if Trump actually sat down and wrote checks violating the self-dealing laws."

And in a nutshell, that'll be Little Donnie's mantra:

The Buck Stops Over There.

HRC, not even in the military chain of command, was responsible for not sending help to Benghazi that night, but Little Donnie gets a pass for hiring someone else to break the rules for him.

" It reminds me of the days when people shouted that Nixon burlarized the Watergate,"

Well, who authorized it, and who erased the tape of the day he and John Dean discussed it?

#28 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 11:01 AM | Reply

I've sat on multiple non-profit boards, and am speaking from the training I received regarding the rules. You?

#21 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 10:26 AM | Reply | Flag:
| Newsworthy 1
Then you probably know larger independent endowment or foundations try to avoid self dealing but family foundations usually rent space from the family and thus very often have these conflicts.

Did you know that?

#29 | Posted by nole74 at 2016-11-26 11:09 AM | Reply

"Did you know that?"

Of course. Do you know paying $25,000 out of your Foundation to a political campaign to stop a fraud lawsuit violates these rules? Did you know buying a painting of yourself to put in your for-profit business violates these rules?

Did you also know every Republican talking head would be exploding if President-Elect HRC was doing the same thing?

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 11:30 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Lol...dont be so angry Danforth.

I am just pointing out the premise of the whole article is misguided. Many of not a majority of family foundations have conflicts like the one pointed out here. Most posters are less informed than you and think or imply that it is unethical or unusual.

Glad you know that writing an article about checking this box on tax form for this type of foundation is kinda silly and misleading

#31 | Posted by nole74 at 2016-11-26 11:43 AM | Reply

*headdesk*

#32 | Posted by YAV at 2016-11-26 11:46 AM | Reply

"I am just pointing out the premise of the whole article is misguided. "

That the President should be adhering to the Constitution? My, how Republicans have changed so much, so fast.

"Many of not a majority of family foundations have conflicts like the one pointed out here."

Not true. You're making shiite up. Please provide an independent link to proof.

"Glad you know that writing an article about checking this box on tax form for this type of foundation is kinda silly and misleading"

There's a "penalty of perjury" clause when these forms are filed. Does that requirement fall into the "silly" column for you, or is that part simply "misleading"?

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 12:14 PM | Reply

During one meeting, we realized we needed a caterer for our annual Holiday party, and someone suggested my bride, who was running a catering company at that time. She's a brilliant cook, and everyone who had eaten her food was wildly enthusiastic, until the Treasurer (me) pointed out no expenditures are allowed which would benefit any board members.

She was immediately ruled out, even though the transaction would've been transparent and completely normal, were it anyone else.

Too bad Trump wasn't on the board; it would've been fine with him.

#34 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 12:19 PM | Reply

"Too bad Trump wasn't on the board; it would've been fine with him."

Of course, even if he were, the lowly Treasurer would've set him straight. No self-dealing, period.

#35 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 12:24 PM | Reply

Quote from WaPo article
"The Washington Post could not immediately confirm if the same forms had actually been sent to the IRS."

Fake news no need to work up a lather!

#36 | Posted by focusonzenergy at 2016-11-26 01:17 PM | Reply

"The Washington Post could not immediately confirm if the same forms had actually been sent to the IRS."

So the best thing Trump -------- are hoping for is two sets of books.

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 01:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I laugh at the stunning yet amazing hypocrisy of the TrumpTard's here.

Their argument changes depending on what letter a politician has after their name.

These troglodytes only believe what they hear on Fox News, Breitbart, InfoWars, Worldnetdaily, Newsmax, and other alt-right propaganda sources.

The "Big Lie" is the standard for these propaganda sites, and the rubes fall for it hook line and sinker every damn time, LOL.

Looks like the effects of "home schooling" are severly damaging the alt-right rube's ability to think for themselves and have no ability left for independent thought. I guess it's easier for the alt-right rubes to parrot talking points than to think for themselves.

I'm starting to believe the (R) stands for "retarded".

#38 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2016-11-26 05:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I laugh at the stunning yet amazing hypocrisy of the TrumpTard's here.

Their argument changes depending on what letter a politician has after their name.

These troglodytes only believe what they hear on Fox News, Breitbart, InfoWars, Worldnetdaily, Newsmax, and other alt-right propaganda sources.

The "Big Lie" is the standard for these propaganda sites, and the rubes fall for it hook line and sinker every damn time, LOL.

Looks like the effects of "home schooling" are severly damaging the alt-right rube's ability to think for themselves and have no ability left for independent thought. I guess it's easier for the alt-right rubes to parrot talking points than to think for themselves.

I'm starting to believe the (R) stands for "retarded".

#39 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2016-11-26 05:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Worth saying twice.

#40 | Posted by YAV at 2016-11-26 05:37 PM | Reply

Worth flagging NW twice.

#41 | Posted by jpw at 2016-11-26 06:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#42

Wow!

The "I know you are but what am I?" defense.

Brilliantly played! Clearly the pinnacle of FSU students on display!!!

#43 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 06:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Brilliantly played! Clearly the pinnacle of FSU students on display!!!

Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 06:46 PM | Reply

They had Jameis Winston for Crying out loud.

#44 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2016-11-26 06:48 PM | Reply

"They had Jameis Winston for Crying out loud."

True, but when did JW rise to the "I know you are, but what am I?" level? Never, that's when!

#45 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 06:51 PM | Reply

Aborted_monsoon can dish it, but can't take it, thus needs Danforth to intervene?

Quite sad.

#46 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-11-26 07:03 PM | Reply

They had Jameis Winston for Crying out loud. #44 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

Chose FSU over Stanford, went on to lead his team to a National Championship victory, earned the Heisman trophy (among numerous other accolades), and drafted with the first pick of the first round of the NFL. Wins-a-ton also hosts youth football camps, volunteers at children's hospitals, and gives back in other ways to his local community.

He's alright 😉.

#47 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-11-26 07:07 PM | Reply

"Aborted_monsoon can dish it, but can't take it, thus needs Danforth to intervene? Quite sad."

Gonoles backing "I know you are but what am I" logic?

Quite predictable.

#48 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-11-26 07:50 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

-->
Drudge Retort