Posted on 11/22/2016 9:55:50 AM PST by Kaslin
Sunday Morning’s political talk shows, as well as President Obama’s Victory Lap press conference (live from Peru), focused on the faux issue of the difficulties and challenges and, of course, Trump’s moral failings -- over his plan for putting his wealth in a “blind trust” to be managed by his children. There seem to be two conflicting positions -- and most pundits and rhetorical question-askers seem to embrace both of them.
On the one hand, these nitpicking naysayers acknowledge that it would take longer than President Trump’s entire first term -- or perhaps longer than his first and second terms (heavens forefend!, they shudder) -- to dismantle Trump’s almost unbelievably immense financial empire. What, they wonder, is a poor, well-meaning president to do?
Yet on the other hand, they condemn Mr. Trump for -- instead of liquidating his assets and putting them in T-Bills (as the relative pauper, Barack Obama, did) -- turning his assets over to his children to manage. This, they insist, remains a horrifying conflict of interest, even though (as they already admitted), it would be impossible for Trump to divest himself of a multi-billion-dollar financial empire -- a financial empire larger than the GDP of some smaller countries.
What these progressives expect Trump to do is the impossible (of course). However, in creating this expectation, they ignore other factors that are far more important than their latest attempt at vilifying Mr. Trump.
There are two different ways of looking at this dilemma they are trying to create through jawboning and filibustering. The first approach addresses the impossibility -- or at least acute implausibility -- of what they are demanding of president-elect Trump. The other approach addresses the necessity -- or, rather, the lack of necessity -- for what they are demanding.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Trump will ignore the media — and scumbags like McCain, Graham and Flake, who will agree — and it will go away.
Trump has worked hard for the American people and will work even harder and sacrifice even more once he is sworn in as our 45th president. But, now the Democrats and liberals in the press want to deny him the ability to make a decent living while he is in the White House.
Trump is a businessman and he needs to be left alone to do what is best for America and his own companies.
Should he ignore the entire media? I'm not sure if that would be a good thing.
“Should he ignore the entire media? I’m not sure if that would be a good thing. “
So how is “entire media” defined? My best guess is Lame Stream and Drive-by are just synonyms for “entire!” And for me, ignoring all of them is the right way to go, since the “front pages” have long since morphed into the “editorial pages.” Ditto for the cretins on TV.
As long as the USA doesn’t need any golf courses or hotels it will be ok.
I don’t recall where putting one’s assets in a blind trust is a requirement for the job, whereas not accepting bribes certainly is. Because Trump has so much money there is no need for him to accept bribes or to use the government to make money. George Washington who was one of the most wealthy people in the US certainly didn’t put his property in a blind trust, I say if it’s good enough for George it’s good enough for Donald.
Listening to them on CNN and MSNBC last night was so challenging! I only torture myself so that I know what lies they are telling, truths they are stretching, and what they are making up as they go along. All they could talk about last night was how he must liquidate all assets... they, especially on MSNBC, are drooling at the thought that the Trump brand will be shut down, his businesses run by strangers, his kids basically destroyed because their father had the nerve to run and win! The media will never let him rest, they will never let him have a single good day! And they would love to see his kids pay a huge price... last night they wanted nothing else!
The Trump Organization is a family business. So, his children should also divest it? Not doesn’t seem fair.
I understand the need to try and avoid conflicts of interest, but part of the business is the Trump brand. And as has been argued, the value of that brand fluctuates. Should the Trump name be removed from all assets? Should Don Jr. and Eric be legally required to change their names?
While we have had wealthy Presidents in the past, most, if not all of their assets were local. We’ve never had a President with global assets to the extent that Trump does.
This is all unprecedented. There will be no easy answers.
The people of this country knew that Donald Trump had/has a very large pool of assets, and that he would not be liquidating it just to serve as President.
They also knew that he would be turning over management to his children - he said so many times.
They also knew that he cannot be bought as others running for (and in) office can be, simply because of the size of his fortune.
So despite - and probably BECAUSE - of all of that well-known information, the American people elected him to be our next President. So this entire issue is a non-starter.
NEXT STORY.
The author says the same more or less and I agree with you and the author.
Why "dismantle?" While I agree with this guy in principle, he is so wrong. A single Trump attorney can write up a blind trust with a pour-over Will in a few days. Sheesh, you can go on-line, fill in the blanks on the standardized forms, print out, have it Notarized, and there you go. There is standard legalese to include all assets, no matter how diverse your holdings. I have both and I bet Trump already has them being the astute businessman he is.
All the more reason to ignore the media.
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.