@coldjoint,
Avenatti is akin to genital herpes for the Left: It was loads of fun when he was in bed with them attacking Trump, but now look at what they have to put up with.
CNN can't seem to get enough of him, so their dose is going to be particularly painful.
One can only hope that he makes good on his expressed desire to run for office (the presidency no less). Wouldn't it be a joy to watch him debating Biden, Warren, Harris, Booker et al? Maybe we can win the jackpot and Hillary will be up on the stage with him.
Alas, it's more likely that he will be on the run from the law or in jail by then. He just personally served with a judgment for almost $4 million that he cheated out of a partner and was evicted from his office space in CA. A real class guy.
@coldjoint,
I voted today, here in Texas, and I was pleasantly surprised to see the size of the turnout for a mid-term election. It wasn't much less than for the 2016 election.
Now of course, I've no solid idea of how many people were voting Dem or Republican, but I sat outside for about an hour and
people watched (Voting was at the Town center which has a nice little garden area)
I saw three people wearing MAGA hats (one a woman), but couldn't find anyone wearing an
"I'm With Her" hat.
@Finn dAbuzz,
This years election is going to be an all mail in ballot process this year, I prefer in person voting.
Did anyone notice you were voted down because you voted or plan to? More anti American group think.
@coldjoint,
Only brain dead ultraconservative Americans who believe that a few thousand Spanish aliens will bring down the u. s. government.
@RABEL222,
I haven't heard or read anything about
a few thousand Spanish aliens coming to America. How are they getting here? It's a long way from Malaga to Miami. I think a flotilla would be too perilous.
I also haven't heard or read any claim from anyone that seven thousand or more Central American immigrants might bring down the U.S. government.(Even if a few Mexicans join in)
You must have some unique sources for news.
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:This is why no one takes you seriously,
You are attempting to explain an untrue premise.
glitterbag wrote:and nonsense you wrote is incredibly offensive. It’s particularly odious to those of us who knew people at the pentagon.
I realize that liberals do not like hearing the truth, but that's no reason for me to not tell the truth.
@najmelliw,
najmelliw wrote:Right. I think almost every person in Western society considered it a tragedy.
Quite a few liberals were delighted by the massacre.
najmelliw wrote:What is it about you that you claim people on the left side of the political spectrum would put their ideology before their compassion?
I like to tell the truth. It's a hobby of mine.
najmelliw wrote:For that matter, what was there to cheer about? That it happened when Bush was president? What? Did you think people on the left believed that he would be held accountable for what happened? Did they think that the support for the president would be less after 9/11?
Liberals cheered because they were happy about the massacre of innocent Americans.
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:I cannot believe that you actually believe that . Its borderline sick.
It's true. Liberals were happy over the 9/11 attacks.
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:Whenever is responsible for the investigation should be commended for what we already know they’ve done.
Witch hunts are appalling and not deserving of commendation.
maporsche wrote:They’ve recovered tens of millions of dollars of tax evasion and have indicted or secured guilty pleas of some 20-30 criminals.
Given the nature of Democratic witch hunts, most of these people are probably innocent.
maporsche wrote:Justice is being served. All Americans should be applauding their work.
There is nothing just about liberals convicting innocent people of imaginary crimes.
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:Yes, this is exactly the kind of incitment that leads to murder.
Liberals are responsible for their own hate. It isn't anyone else's fault.
No One Wanted Trump’s Portrait So His Charity Had to Buy It, Lawyer Says
By Erik Larson
October 25, 2018, 12:06 PM EDT Updated on October 25, 2018, 5:10 PM EDT
When Donald Trump offered to pay $10,000 from his personal charitable foundation for a six-foot oil portrait of himself, the future president only meant to "get the bidding started" during a 2014 auction at his Mar-a-Lago resort, his lawyer told a New York judge.
“No one else bid,” attorney Alan Futerfas said in a packed Manhattan courtroom on Thursday, so “he’s stuck with the painting."
Trump’s lawyer offered the account as one of several reasons why New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood’s lawsuit against the Donald J. Trump Foundation should be tossed out, arguing that the transactions at the center of the case have innocent explanations or were corrected by the charity.
For example, Futerfas said it was "troubling" that Underwood would focus on a payment that was made to benefit a charity that aids children and young adults with developmental disabilities. He also claims the suit is politically biased, part of an effort by Democrats to undermine Trump’s presidency.
Enrique Acevedo
✔
@Enrique_Acevedo
Hey @Fahrenthold just checked and the portrait is still hanging at the Champions Lounge. How much did you say it cost the Trump Foundation?
12:32 AM - Sep 21, 2016
But Underwood claims in the lawsuit that the nonprofit was little more than Trump’s "piggy bank," and that legitimate donations were overshadowed by rampant violations of state charity law and the use of donated funds for business purposes. She’s seeking to dissolve the charity and to ban the president from serving on a New York not-for-profit for 10 years.
“It is beyond dispute that these were improper self-dealing transactions," Yael Fuchs, a lawyer for the attorney general, said at the hearing.
New York State Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla ended the hearing without making a ruling, after largely shutting down Futerfas’s assertions of political bias by Underwood.
"I don’t want to get into that," Scarpulla said.
Campaign Finances
The case will instead hinge on Underwood’s claims about campaign finance violations and the various transactions by the Trump Foundation, including the portrait acquisition. Underwood alleges that after Trump misused charity cash to buy the painting, he gained further benefit from the work when the Trump Organization hung it on the wall of Trump’s hotel in Doral, Florida.
"This was improper self-dealing, since foundation money was used to buy a painting to decorate a Trump business property," the attorney general said in a court filing.
But Futerfas says the portrait only graced the hotel’s walls because staff found it sitting in a storage room and didn’t realize it belonged to the charity. Shortly after the election, amid media scrutiny, the hotel returned the painting to the charity and paid it $185.82 plus interest as a fair rental value.
Among the other violations cited was the foundation’s involvement in a January 2016 Trump Campaign fundraiser in Iowa. The attorney general alleges the foundation illegally participated in a political campaign by allowing senior campaign staff to dictate how $2.8 million raised at the event was spent, "all for the purpose of influencing the 2016 presidential election."
The other transactions cited in the state’s lawsuit are:
$100,000 used in 2007 to pay a Mar-a-Lago legal settlement. Underwood says the payment was illegal because the foundation wasn’t a party to the suit; Trump says the money eventually went to charity anyway.
$158,000 used in 2012 to help pay a $1 million "Hole-in-One" golf award. Underwood says it was an illegal use of charity cash for a business obligation; Trump says the money was used exactly how the foundation said it would be -- to benefit a charity -- but that the foundation was repaid anyway “out of an extraordinary abundance of caution.”
$25,000 paid in 2013 to a political organization helping to re-elect Florida Attorney General Pamela Bondi. Underwood says the donation violated the Internal Revenue Code; Trump says the improper contribution was due to a back-office error and that the foundation "took immediate remedial steps" to correct it with the IRS and reimburse the foundation.
$5,000 paid in 2013 to the DC Preservation League, a charity that helped with the conversion of the historic Old Post Office in Washington into what is now the Trump International Hotel. Underwood says the money was used to improperly advertise the Trump Hotel Collection; Trump says the benefit to his business was "incidental" and he repaid his foundation.
$32,000 paid in 2015 to a land-preservation organization. Underwood says the money wrongfully benefited an entity that manages land used for recreation by Trump’s family. Trump said the payment was self-reported to the attorney general’s office and his foundation was reimbursed.
The judge said she can’t decide the case until after an appeals court rules in a different case on whether Trump has presidential immunity from litigation in state courts. In that lawsuit, former "Apprentice" contestant Summer Zervos accuses Trump of defamation for denying her allegations that he groped her.
Futerfas said the case against the Trump foundation is wrongfully focusing on a few transactions out of hundreds that involved money going to organizations in need, amounting to nearly $19 million. Every penny raised by the foundation was donated to charity, aside from $1.7 million being held up by the litigation, Futerfas said.
(Updates with hotel staff finding painting in a closet.)
We are now up 12 bombs, one was addressed to Booker and another addressed to Clapper. Just reported it on MSNBC.
Shouldn't some kind of state of emergency be declared or something?
A suspect is in custody in FL
