Unpaid bills pile up in Trump rallies’ wake

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/08/trump-rallies-unpaid-bills-039631


Cities across the country say the president’s campaign has failed to reimburse them for law enforcement costs.

Donald Trump has raised record amounts of money as a presidential candidate. But he’s still left a slew of unpaid bills in his wake.

In city after city, across the nation, Trump has failed to pay local officials who provide thousands of dollars’ worth of security assistance to the president’s campaign during his Make America Great Again rallies.

Story Continued Below

In total, at least 10 cities have complained that the campaign has not reimbursed them for services provided by local police and fire departments, totaling more than $840,000, according to a study by the Center for Public Integrity in June.

Story Continued Below

Minneapolis may find itself next on the list after the president picked a fight with the city’s mayor on Tuesday.

Trump accused Mayor Jacob Frey of overcharging the arena in downtown Minneapolis for services during Trump’s rally, scheduled for Thursday night, alleging that the mayor doesn’t want the president to speak in the overwhelmingly Democratic city.

“The radical Mayor of Minneapolis, @Jacob_Frey, is abusing his power in an attempt to block the President’s supporters from seeing him speak on Thursday,” Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale tweeted. “We refuse to be bullied by a left-winger resister & won’t let him stifle the speech of @realDonaldTrump or his supporters!”

The feud comes days after the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee announced a record-breaking fundraising haul —$125 million in the three-month period ending Sept. 30.

The campaign and the RNC have raised more than $308 million in 2019 alone and have $156 million in the bank. They aim to raise a whopping $1 billion for the re-election. “President Trump has built a juggernaut of a campaign, raising record amounts of money at a record pace,” Parscale boasted in a statement.

It isn’t the first time Trump, a businessman with a global real estate empire, has faced accusations that he didn’t pay his bills. The complaints from local governments echo decades of accusations by private contractors who claim that Trump didn’t adequately compensate them for their work before he was sworn into office.

At least 60 lawsuits and more than 200 liens detailed allegations that Trump and his companies failed to pay various businesses and scores of employees for their work, according to an investigation by USA Today in 2016. Those who claimed they were stiffed by the future president included bartenders, painters, real estate brokers and others.

The Trump campaign declined to answer questions about specific cities.

“It is the U.S. Secret Service, not the campaign, which coordinates with local law enforcement,” Michael Glassner, the campaign’s chief operating officer, wrote in a statement. “The campaign itself does not contract with local governments for police involvement. All billing inquiries should always go to the Secret Service.”

But a Secret Service spokesman said the Secret Service does not pay for law enforcement overtime associated with protective visits. “The Secret Service is not funded to pay police overtime and we don’t have a mechanism to do so,” the spokesman said.

Trump often praises law enforcement. “We love you and will always support you,” he tweeted in January on National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day. But it’s law enforcement agencies that often bill campaigns for helping with crowds, security and closing streets when a candidate comes to town, though some absorb the cost themselves.

Local officials in at least three cities — El Paso, Texas; Tucson, Ariz.; and Lebanon, Ohio — have said in recent days that bills remain unpaid.

El Paso billed Trump’s campaign $570,000 for his visit in February, including a one-time late fee of $98,800.

Lebanon is owed $16,200, mostly to defray the cost of the city’s police department, for an October 2018 event.

Tucson officials billed Trump’s campaign more than $80,000 for Trump’s visit in 2016 where 180 police officers provided security.

Of the 10 cities listed in the Center for Public Integrity study, five — Tucson; Green Bay and Eau Claire, Wis.; Burlington, Vt.; and Spokane, Wash. — date back to 2016 when Trump was running for office.

More at link.

[Stratovarious]

''Cities across the country say the president’s campaign has failed to reimburse them for law enforcement costs.''

Why on earth should he........

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/08/trump-organization-rejects-legal-bill-after-losing-windfarm-court-battle



Trump firm 'refusing to pay' legal bill for windfarm case

Donald Trump’s family firm is refusing to accept a legal bill worth tens of thousands of pounds after he lost a lengthy court battle against a windfarm near his Aberdeenshire golf course, according to the Scottish government.

A Scottish court ruled in February this year the Trump Organization had to pay the Scottish government’s legal costs after his attempt to block an 11-turbine windfarm in Aberdeen Bay ended with defeat in the UK supreme court in 2015.

The Scottish government has said Trump’s firm has refused to accept the sum it had put forward or reach an agreement on costs, so the case is now in the hands of a court-appointed adjudicator.

“As the amount of expenses has not been agreed, we are awaiting a date for the auditor of the court of session to determine the account. We expect payment when this has been completed,” a government spokeswoman said.

The case is expected to be heard quickly. Sarah Malone, executive vice-president of the Trump golf resort, said claims the firm had refused to pay the sum sought by the government are incorrect. “This is not in our control,” she said. “The matter is in the hands of the auditors of the court of session and the Scottish ministers.”

Trump launched his campaign against the Aberdeen Bay windfarm in 2012 after claiming the “monstrous” project, a scheme to test wind turbine technologies, would ruin the view from his golf resort at Menie, north of Aberdeen, and dissuade guests from playing there.

He took his battle to the Scottish parliament, claiming the country’s heavy investment in onshore windfarms would ruin its tourism industry. In one famous exchange with MSPs, Trump insisted the committee did not need to call any witnesses to verify his claims.

“I am the evidence,” he said. “I’m an expert in tourism. I have won many, many awards … if you dot your landscape with these horrible, horrible structures, you will do tremendous damage.”

Trump fell out with Alex Salmond, the then first minister, who had championed Trump’s claims the economic benefits of his Aberdeenshire resort justified bulldozing a very rare dune habitat he was building it on, as well as overriding local planning rules.

After Trump lost the supreme court case in 2015, Salmond branded him a “loser” and Trump retaliated by describing the then former first minister as a “has-been”.

Trump alleged Salmond promised him the windfarm would never be built when the pair met for dinner in New York in 2007, before Trump won planning permission for the resort. Salmond denied doing so.

Trump made good his promise to fight the windfarm, which was backed by the Scottish government, the European Union and prominent major business leaders in Aberdeen who had previously championed his golf resort application, by launching a court challenge against it in 2013.

Trump’s lawyers alleged in court in 2014 that Salmond had illegally interfered with the windfarm project to ensure it was approved. Those claims were rejected by Scottish civil court judge Lord Doherty. Trump had also tried but failed to become a party in a separate legal battle to stop the Viking wind project, involving 107 turbines, being built on Shetland.

Trump’s critics claimed the property mogul was complaining about the windfarm to deflect attention from his financial problems in Aberdeenshire, and the dire impact of the 2008 global recession on its prospects.

Last month the company admitted the 2008 recession and the collapse in oil prices in 2014 had been the reason the resort was never developed in line with Trump’s original plans. The Trump International Golf Club posted a £1m annual loss for 2018 last week, the seventh loss in a row. Trump and his family firm have now loaned the business £43m and it has yet to turn a profit.

[Stratovarious]

Hillary Clinton is admittedly guilty of multiple counts of espionage, which exposed the US to
billions if not trillions of dollars in potential damages, she's not paying, she is not even in prison, where is zippy ?

:frog:

[specsaregood]

Can we get a comparison to previous presidents and if they paid for their visits?

[Stratovarious]

zippy charts to follow.

[UWDude]

Can we get a comparison to previous presidents and if they paid for their visits?


Fraud: Mayor of Minneapolis sent a bill for $530 thousand to host Trump's upcoming rally. Obama was charged $20 thousand in 2008. It appears the mayor is committing fraud.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-blasts-lightweight-minneapolis-mayor-as-campaign-threatens-lawsuit-over-rally-controversy


P.S. nobody gets charged for police protection, $20K was just the estimate of the cost.

[enhanced_deficit]

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/08/trump-rallies-unpaid-bills-039631



More at link.

Zippy, use caution. Media wing could be trying to push old Hillary story (https://apnews.com/3562b371f6c2434ca670d1330a40cd0e) under a new headline.


Clinton hits Trump by recalling her father’s business

By CATHERINE LUCEYAugust 29, 2016
WARREN, Mich. (AP)

“He expected to be paid when he showed up,” Clinton said recently during an event in Warren, Michigan. “He did the work. He paid for the supplies and the labor he often hired to help him on big jobs. I can’t imagine what would have happened to my father and his business if he had gotten a contract from Trump.”
Clinton hopes to remind voters that despite her years in public life that have left her a multimillionaire, she comes from a middle-class background and understands the life of a small-business owner. She also wants to contrast her biography with that of Trump, who was raised by a successful real estate developer and has drawn criticism for his treatment of small businesses during his career.

Trump has promoted his business record as a key qualification for the White House. But Trump casinos failed on several occasions. When the Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey went bankrupt in the early 1990s, some contractors who worked on the property went under because Trump’s company didn’t pay what they were owed, according to interviews with The Associated Press.

[phill4paul]

$580k for police protection during a campaign rally. LOL. Mr. Mayor is out of his Gott damned mind. Fugg 'im.

[oyarde]

police are public servants . I would put them on salary and have all the ones with a day off work these events if I was mayor. Or they can get a real job.

[AngryCanadian]

Now lets see Hillary's unpaid Rallies bills shall we Zippy lefty?

[devil21]

Odd to see "free marketeers" arguing that Minneapolis isn't being fair with rally cost pricing, requiring up front payment and deciding what rate they want to charge for their services. Sounds like free market in operation to me.

[dannno]

Odd to see "free marketeers" arguing that Minneapolis isn't being fair with rally cost pricing, requiring up front payment and deciding what rate they want to charge for their services. Sounds like free market in operation to me.

Government shake downs are not free market.

[Brian4Liberty]

Hmm. Now why would they need extra “security”?

[phill4paul]

So much winning....


‘‘The arena in Minneapolis has been fully approved,’’ campaign manager Brad Parscale wrote in an e-mail to supporters. ‘‘The Target Center has backed off cancelling the contract, which means President Trump’s Keep America Great rally will go on as scheduled. Consistent with our original agreement with the venue, the Trump campaign has not agreed to pay any additional funds.’’

Shove your shake down, Mayor.

[devil21]

Government shake downs are not free market.

Ahhh so if it's a price you don't like then it's a shake down instead of a free market price. Got it. It's kinda funny to see one government "shake down" another government that performs "shake downs", sorta like eating their own.

[Swordsmyth]

Ahhh so if it's a price you don't like then it's a shake down instead of a free market price. Got it. It's kinda funny to see one government "shake down" another government that performs "shake downs", sorta like eating their own.

So you think the city has a right to charge anything at all?
By what right?

[dannno]

Ahhh so if it's a price you don't like then it's a shake down instead of a free market price. Got it. It's kinda funny to see one government "shake down" another government that performs "shake downs", sorta like eating their own.

If it's the government saying you can't come speak here unless you pay us, then it's a shake down.

What would you have said if they tried to charge Ron Paul a half a million dollars to speak at UCLA?

I went and saw him speak at UCLA and it was free for me. Over 10,000 people were there.

[Anti Globalist]

^^10,000 is nothing. Trump has like 30-40k people showing up to his rallies.

[Stratovarious]

10,000 is nothing. Trump has like 30-40k people showing up to his rallies.
The host cities should have paid Trumps Travel Expenses, and paid for security without biching about it.

[dannno]

10,000 is nothing. Trump has like 30-40k people showing up to his rallies.

10,000 is not "nothing" for a Republican Primary candidate who the media claims was getting 1-2% in the polls, and who they had basically convinced most people had already dropped out of the race.

Also, the arena fit 10,000 people. There were many who got turned away, we don't know how many.. and there were also a lot of people behind the venue, some climbing trees so they could hear him speak.

https://i2.wp.com/libertyhangout.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ron-paul-ucla-rally.jpg

[devil21]

If it's the government saying you can't come speak here unless you pay us, then it's a shake down.

What would you have said if they tried to charge Ron Paul a half a million dollars to speak at UCLA?

I went and saw him speak at UCLA and it was free for me. Over 10,000 people were there.

I wasn't aware that the Target Center was the only place in the entire state of Minnesota that Trump could hold a rally. Are you going to make them bake a cake for Trump too? :tears:

[phill4paul]

I wasn't aware that the Target Center was the only place in the entire state of Minnesota that Trump could hold a rally. Are you going to make them bake a cake for Trump too? :tears:

He had already booked and had a contract. Should he give in to extortion?

[dannno]

I wasn't aware that the Target Center was the only place in the entire state of Minnesota that Trump could hold a rally. Are you going to make them bake a cake for Trump too? :tears:

The government doesn't have to do anything, he already signed a private contract with Target Center.

However, if the government doesn't come in to protect the peaceful Trump supporters from violent leftist Antifa terrorists that the left created, then it will look pretty bad on their part.

[Swordsmyth]

He had already booked and had a contract. Should he give in to extortion?
Orange Man BAD!
Anyone who attack him by any means GOOD!

[Swordsmyth]

The government doesn't have to do anything, he already signed a private contract with Target Center.

However, if the government doesn't come in to protect the peaceful Trump supporters from violent leftist Antifa terrorists that the left created, then it will look pretty bad on their part.
They have a duty to protect the public and taxes already pay for it.

[devil21]

He had already booked and had a contract. Should he give in to extortion?

Source? If you have evidence that a contract, delineating cost and terms was already signed, and now huge extra charges are being added on after the fact, then yes that's a different story. I haven't seen proof of that and short of reading the actual contract we'll be supposing what is in the contract or forced to believe biased sources on either side of the dispute.

eta: It's also curious that no one seems to be able to say who exactly the contract is between. Campaign says it's the Secret Service. Secret Service says it's the campaign. Someone is lying. Or there's no contract.

[dannno]

Source? If you have evidence that a contract, delineating cost and terms was already signed, and now huge extra charges are being added on after the fact, then yes that's a different story. I haven't seen proof of that and short of reading the actual contract we'll be supposing what is in the contract or forced to believe biased sources on either side of the dispute.

eta: It's also curious that no one seems to be able to say who exactly the contract is between. Campaign says it's the Secret Service. Secret Service says it's the campaign. Someone is lying. Or there's no contract.

They signed a contract with the private Target Center, and typically the public police provide their services for free. But they don't like Trump, so they want to extort him. Sorta like how you don't like Trump, so you are ok with him being extorted.

[devil21]

They signed a contract with the private Target Center, and typically the public police provide their services for free. But they don't like Trump, so they want to extort him. Sorta like how you don't like Trump, so you are ok with him being extorted.

So no source then?

Target Center is owned by the city of Minneapolis btw. Literally 2 seconds to search found that info. Kinda important to the story, no?

[dannno]

So no source then?

Target Center is owned by the city of Minneapolis btw. Literally 2 seconds to search found that info. Kinda important to the story, no?

The city does not manage the contracts or day to day operations of the facility, a private company does.

[dannno]

So no source then?

Target Center is owned by the city of Minneapolis btw. Literally 2 seconds to search found that info. Kinda important to the story, no?

AEG Facility Caught in Political Crossfire as Trump Threatens to Sue Target Center, City of Minneapolis


The President’s reelection campaign threatened to sue the arena for breach of contract after arena officials insisted the campaign incur the $530,000 price tag for additional security at the event.



https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/8532596/trump-aeg-target-center-minneapolis-security-lawsuit

[devil21]

The city does not manage the contracts or day to day operations of the facility, a private company does.

The Target Center is not private.

Still waiting on the source for that claim about a contract already being signed. That's also kinda important to get to the bottom of it.

[dannno]

The Target Center is not private.

Still waiting on the source for that claim about a contract already being signed. That's also kinda important to get to the bottom of it.

Doneski

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?539983-Unpaid-bills-pile-up-in-Trump-rallies%92-wake&p=6871663&viewfull=1#post6871663

[devil21]

Doneski

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?539983-Unpaid-bills-pile-up-in-Trump-rallies%92-wake&p=6871663&viewfull=1#post6871663

Rather important part of the contract (license agreement) in your posted article:

Noting that the arena’s license agreement requires the White House to "pay for any law enforcement services necessary for the Event,” the city estimated the security costs for the Keep America Great rally scheduled for Thursday would total $530,000

That means the amount wasn't specified in the contract and could have been anything the free market called for. Yes, the free market can be politically motivated. See: gay cakes. Any way, the amount has been settled. The lesson is don't sign contracts with open ended cost terms in politically hostile territory. The free market might make you pay a hefty sum.

[Swordsmyth]

Rather important part of the contract (license agreement) in your posted article:


That means the amount wasn't specified in the contract and could have been anything the free market called for. Yes, the free market can be politically motivated. See: gay cakes. Any way, the amount has been settled. The lesson is don't sign contracts with open ended cost terms in politically hostile territory. The free market might make you pay a hefty sum.

Fraudulent costs aren't the free market, if Trump can prove the law enforcement doesn't cost that much (which should be easy because they charged far less to others) then the city doesn't have a leg to stand on.

[fcreature]

Odd to see "free marketeers" arguing that Minneapolis isn't being fair with rally cost pricing, requiring up front payment and deciding what rate they want to charge for their services. Sounds like free market in operation to me.

Huh? There is nothing at all free market about this situation.

[devil21]

Huh? There is nothing at all free market about this situation.

A corporation is charging another corporation what they want to in exchange for their services, under a supply and demand model. Seems pretty market-based to me. Whether one agrees with the rate is subjective.

[Swordsmyth]

A corporation is charging another corporation what they want to in exchange for their services, under a supply and demand model. Seems pretty market-based to me. Whether one agrees with the rate is subjective.

Wrong.

A government is charging for services it owes the public in return for taxes already charged and then lying about how much they cost.

[fcreature]

A corporation is charging another corporation what they want to in exchange for their services, under a supply and demand model. Seems pretty market-based to me. Whether one agrees with the rate is subjective.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.

[Swordsmyth]

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.

He wants to, he may be required to.

[devil21]

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.

How so?


Or are you one of the many that still don't understand that modern governments are actually corporations? As are political campaigns...

Two corporations entering contracts for services...free market rules of supply and demand should (and in this case, did) apply. Or are you going to argue about political differences not applying to the free market and that "fairness" should be part of the free market? If so, I hope you didn't argue on behalf of bakers refusing to bake cakes for gay couples (political/religious) or ever say that businesses should be able to raise prices to evacuees from hurricanes.

[Swordsmyth]

How so?


Or are you one of the many that still don't understand that modern governments are actually corporations? As are political campaigns...

Two corporations entering contracts for services...free market rules of supply and demand should (and in this case, did) apply. Or are you going to argue about political differences not applying to the free market and that "fairness" should be part of the free market? If so, I hope you didn't argue on behalf of bakers refusing to bake cakes for gay couples (political/religious) or ever say that businesses should be able to raise prices to evacuees from hurricanes.
Are you ever going to address the fact that the city is lying about the cost and that is fraud?

[fcreature]

How so?

Or are you one of the many that still don't understand that modern governments are actually corporations? As are political campaigns...

Two corporations entering contracts for services...free market rules of supply and demand should (and in this case, did) apply. Or are you going to argue about political differences not applying to the free market and that "fairness" should be part of the free market? If so, I hope you didn't argue on behalf of bakers refusing to bake cakes for gay couples (political/religious) or ever say that businesses should be able to raise prices to evacuees from hurricanes.

Nope. You still misunderstand what happened.

The Target Center had a contract with the Trump Campaign leasing out the venue for the night's rally. Shortly before the scheduled day, radical leftist mayor Jacob Frey attempted to pressure the Target Center with bogus security charges. The Target Center gave into the pressure and then tried to pass the charges onto the Trump Campaign. The Trump Campaign then tells the Target Center to fuck off and that they are in breach of contract. The Target Center chickens out again, and allows the rally to proceed on original terms.

So you have a contract in place between the Target Center and the Trump Campaign. You then have a hate-Trump mayor use the full force of government to shake down the Target Center. The Target Center attempts to pass the shakedown onto the Trump Campaign.

You seriously think this shakedown is free market? Are you suffering from TDS?

Not that it matters. The Trump Campaign did not pay the extortion and the Target Center followed their original terms. Now that part was free market.

[devil21]

Nope. You still misunderstand what happened.

The Target Center had a contract with the Trump Campaign leasing out the venue for the night's rally. Shortly before the scheduled day, radical leftist mayor Jacob Frey attempted to pressure the Target Center with bogus security charges. The Target Center gave into the pressure and then tried to pass the charges onto the Trump Campaign. The Trump Campaign then tells the Target Center to fuck off and that they are in breach of contract. The Target Center chickens out again, and allows the rally to proceed on original terms.

So you have a contract in place between the Target Center and the Trump Campaign. You then have a hate-Trump mayor use the full force of government to shake down the Target Center. The Target Center attempts to pass the shakedown onto the Trump Campaign.

You seriously think this shakedown is free market? Are you suffering from TDS?

Not that it matters. The Trump Campaign did not pay the extortion and the Target Center followed their original terms. Now that part was free market.

I guess you missed the part of the thread earlier where it was plainly stated that the security charges in the contract were open ended. How does one breach a contract where the specific terms of the contract are not defined in the contract? Indeed it was resolved and that's good, but saying that it was under the terms of the original contract ignores that the original contract had no specified security fee. Most likely the settlement amount was something higher than what the Trump campaign wanted and something lower than the $500k+.


Are you ever going to address the fact that the city is lying about the cost and that is fraud?

I don't know if that was the cost or not, nor do you and whether it was the actual cost is irrelevant. Are you suggesting that contracts should only be in the amount of the costs for the selling party? Sounds pretty socialist to prevent the City of Minneapolis (a corporation) and the Target Center (the corporation's property) from profiting from their services and the use of their property. For someone that cries about the dangers of socialism you sure seem to like to apply the principles of socialism (no profit, no free control of private property) when it involves anything Trumptastic.

[Ender]

I guess you missed the part of the thread earlier where it was plainly stated that the security charges in the contract were open ended. How does one breach a contract where the specific terms of the contract are not defined in the contract? Indeed it was resolved and that's good, but saying that it was under the terms of the original contract ignores that the original contract had no specified security fee. Most likely the settlement amount was something higher than what the Trump campaign wanted and something lower than the $500k+.



I don't know if that was the cost or not, nor do you and whether it was the actual cost is irrelevant. Are you suggesting that contracts should only be in the amount of the costs for the selling party? Sounds pretty socialist to prevent the City of Minneapolis (a corporation) and the Target Center (the corporation's property) from profiting from their services and the use of their property. For someone that cries about the dangers of socialism you sure seem to like to apply the principles of socialism (no profit, no free control of private property) when it involves anything Trumptastic.

The cost for protecting/guarding Trump Tower was YUGE & a big deal 2 years ago- funny how no one seems to recall that.


Officials estimate New York City is spending between $127,000 and $146,000 daily to protect Trump Tower. Most of the costs are related to the New York Police Department. They said they expected the daily cost to rise to $308,000 when Mr. Trump is in the five boroughs.

The city spent about $24 million to protect Trump Tower between Election Day and Inauguration Day, the officials said.

Other city agencies, like the Fire Department of New York, have also incurred costs related to Trump Tower. The FDNY has spent at least $1.7 million since Election Day, for example.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/nyc-to-recover-security-costs-for-trump-tower

[Swordsmyth]

I don't know if that was the cost or not, nor do you and whether it was the actual cost is irrelevant. Are you suggesting that contracts should only be in the amount of the costs for the selling party? Sounds pretty socialist to prevent the City of Minneapolis (a corporation) and the Target Center (the corporation's property) from profiting from their services and the use of their property. For someone that cries about the dangers of socialism you sure seem to like to apply the principles of socialism (no profit, no free control of private property) when it involves anything Trumptastic.
We know that's not the cost of security because the security charge to other campaigns and events was nowhere near as much and we are discussing the security cost clause not the whole contract that already included a profit for the venue.

And the city failed to provide adequate security so they are in breach of contract in addition to being guilty of fraud.

[fcreature]

I guess you missed the part of the thread earlier where it was plainly stated that the security charges in the contract were open ended. How does one breach a contract where the specific terms of the contract are not defined in the contract? Indeed it was resolved and that's good, but saying that it was under the terms of the original contract ignores that the original contract had no specified security fee. Most likely the settlement amount was something higher than what the Trump campaign wanted and something lower than the $500k+.

They absolutely were in breach of contract, and that's why they backed down after being called on it.

If they had done this to Ron Paul in 2008, you'd have been screaming mad.


For someone that cries about the dangers of socialism you sure seem to like to apply the principles of socialism (no profit, no free control of private property) when it involves anything Trumptastic.

I'm really not sure if you are mistaking me for someone else or not, but I didn't vote for Trump in 2016. And the only reason I'll be voting for him in 2020 is to drive the TDS sufferer such as yourself even more insane than they already are.

[devil21]

They absolutely were in breach of contract, and that's why they backed down after being called on it.

You can't just claim breach of contract but not explain how it breached the contract. Trump proclaiming it a breach of contract doesn't make it a breach of contract either. In fact, it sounds like both sides engaged in good old fashioned free-market negotiation (one party wants low cost, other counters with high cost, then resolution is found somewhere in the middle). The bonus is that the Trump campaign got the Trumpkins all spun up in the meantime. Political manipulation 101.


If they had done this to Ron Paul in 2008, you'd have been screaming mad.

Maybe. Didn't happen so not relevant.



I'm really not sure if you are mistaking me for someone else or not, but I didn't vote for Trump in 2016. And the only reason I'll be voting for him in 2020 is to drive the TDS sufferer such as yourself even more insane than they already are.

I didn't quote you so not sure why you're taking that part personally. But by all means vote for whomever you like and for whatever vapid reasons you come up with. Since you couldn't see that I quoted SS, not you, it seems TDS maybe has two sides?

[dannno]

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.

TDS will do that to you.

[devil21]

TDS will do that to you.

Indeed, it seems to make people lose all rational ability. Now, Trumpkins are crying that there wasn't enough security since some of them allegedly were attacked after the rally. You get what you pay for, I guess. Same as it ever was.

[Swordsmyth]

Indeed, it seems to make people lose all rational ability. Now, Trumpkins are crying that there wasn't enough security since some of them allegedly were attacked after the rally. You get what you pay for, I guess. Same as it ever was.

Why shouldn't they complain for being overcharged for insufficient security?
The city wouldn't have provided any better security if their blackmail had been paid if that is what you are implying.

[Superfluous Man]

Trump proclaiming it a breach of contract doesn't make it a breach of contract either.

This simple fact will never register for the redhats.

Trump said it. They believe it. That settles it.

If you dispute it, it's because you're a traitor.

[fcreature]

This simple fact will never register for the redhats.

Trump said it. They believe it. That settles it.

If you dispute it, it's because you're a traitor.

What the hell are you guys even talking about? How can you be getting this so wrong?

The Target Center is a private vendor. The Target Center had a contract with the Trump Campaign. The city of Minneapolis attempted to get in the middle of a contract between private entities by extorting make believe security fees to the Target Center.

The contract stated that these costs would not be incurred by the campaign. Additionally, security in these situations is always handled by the Secret Service.

I'm not saying the tax payer won't end up eating these costs, or that it is right. What I am saying is that the costs clearly were not, as a matter of agreed upon contract, the responsibility of Trump's campaign to pay. The Target Center ultimately knew this, and honored the contract without breaching terms.

Yea, Trump said it. But it's also true.

Why must you guys lie about such a non-issue? I thought we were all capitalists here who believed that private parties could engage in commerce in agreed upon terms?

[bv3]

I'll be writing in Ron Paul again, but it doesn't seem like Trump's mislead adherents are provided much security...

[Superfluous Man]

The Target Center is a private vendor. The Target Center had a contract with the Trump Campaign. The city of Minneapolis attempted to get in the middle of a contract between private entities by extorting make believe security fees to the Target Center.

The contract stated that these costs would not be incurred by the campaign. Additionally, security in these situations is always handled by the Secret Service.


What kind of self-immolating Trump worshiper would bother even looking into any of what you just said?

[devil21]

What kind of self-immolating Trump worshiper would bother even looking into any of what you just said?

It's a recurring theme that Trumpkins don't take two moments to research anything before regurgitating whatever the latest Breitbart article claims. Or in this case, even take the time to read the short thread first. The Target Center is owned by the City of Minneapolis. I can't wait to read the mental gymnastics of how the City interfered in a contract about the use of its own property.



Why must you guys lie about such a non-issue? I thought we were all capitalists here who believed that private parties could engage in commerce in agreed upon terms?

You may think it is a non-issue but I think this is actually one of the more relevant discussions that has sprung out of anything Trump related lately. Contracts, free market, ownership, etc with a side of politics. At least it's a Trump related topic with some level of intellectual substance to it, as opposed to the latest nonsense about the FISA court or whatever.