Donald Trump cannot call himself a Republican and contribute thousands of dollars to the likes of Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Charlie Rangel and Shelley Berkley.
Look it up on fec.gov.
His excuse? Just currying favors.
“As a businessman and a very substantial donor to very important people, when you give, they do whatever the hell you want them to do,” Trump was quoted as saying by The Wall Street Journal. “As a businessman, I need that.”
For no heed to how they were ruining the country and the economy, just look out for No. 1.
WSJ allowed as how Trump has given to more Republicans than Democrats over time, but …. he gave nearly $10,000 to Harry Reid and $5,000 to Ted Kennedy. Days after donating $2,000 to George W. Bush in 2003, he gave the same amount to John Kerry.
The paper didn’t bother to mention the $67,000 for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee or the $24,000 for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Trump also donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation. WSJ said Trump was “practicing situational politics” — a polite way of saying turncoat?
Trump
4TH ST8 
Anyone that has watched Trump over the years knows he’s just a rich, unprincipled weasel searching for his next soundbite du jour.
http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/to-trump-disciples-youre-embarrassing-conservatism-and-yourselves/
Ah shucks…I guess that means Harry’s old buddy Wayne Newton and the rest of the hypocrite “Republicans for Reid” AREN’T Republicans either!
Both ends against the middle.
At least Trump does not pretend to be other than he is — an opportunist who exploits whatever legal loopholes he finds. Contrast this with the Republicans who run as conservatives touting repealing Obamacare, against Obama’s executive amnesty, separation of powers, against increaseing government debt, against abortion, securing the border, etc, and then vote just the opposite or take only show votes that they know are meaningless. Dean Heller and Joe Heck are better than Trump? Not by a long shot!
And I guess we can include Governor Brian Sandoval…a moderate Democrat in RINO clothing on that list too…author of the largest tax increase in Nevada history.
Here’s the Danka Schoen boy now…touting his favorite Senator and holding a fundraiser:
Funny that you think most people give money to politicians for purely ideological reasons.
I know know why they give, but don’t call yourself a Republican if you do.
Far more money will flow into the Democrat machine coffers from Sandoval’s tax increase…than Trumps piddling donations…
So we agree that rich people donate to political campaigns for favors, but we still don’t want any limit over how much they donate and therefore, how many favors they receive. I guess it’s as Clint Eastwood said: “Deserve’s got nothing to do with it.”
“limiting” campaign contributions isn’t going to do anything if we don’t limit the effects money has on representatives in government.
Take away that power and the money won’t mean what it does now.
You beat me to it, Steve. Take away the power …
The Republicans For Reid Hall of Shame…what they did was far worse than a few donations…
http://republicansforharryreid.com/members.html
The message (inevitably) will missed and/or twisted, Tom. Bet me?
Did you notice the Trumpster’s largest donation? 8/19/2012
Yes, I looked it up: “The Congressional Leadership Fund is a super PAC exclusively dedicated to protecting and strengthening the Republican Majority in the House of Representatives.” – See more at: http://www.congressionalleadershipfund.org/about/#sthash.x4STcMyY.dpuf
How do we “take away the power” of and “limit the effects” money has on the representatives in government?
Return the power and the the budgets to the states. A third of Nevada’s entire budget revenue — not general fund — comes from various federal programs.
Define corporation appropriately. Citizens United will be reversed. Problem solved.
An old saying goes “all politics is local”
With an ever growing and more powerful central government that old saying is losing groung, to the point of becoming moot.
Taking the power away from central governments located in far off places, puts the power back in the hands of the local people.
This takes away the power of money.
Nice idea, but I see three problems with it. 1) The people contributing money will fight having the power taken away and, since they have the money, they will win. 2) You don’t think state officials can be bought? Transferring power to the states only shifts the location of the problem. 3) That would make us a lot more like the European Union. Do you admire the way they do things?
“Transferring power to the states only shifts the location of the problem. ”
Bringing the power structure closer to those being governed is the only way to have any chance of curbing the power of money over the powerful.
This is far more effective than any attempt to “limit” campaign contributions. As evidenced by all the success that has had ever since its inception.
hmph
Start going by the Constitution. Limit the power of the Feds to only those areas they have constitutional authority to operate in. Repeal the 17th amendment to make senators accountable to the states. Pass term limits – no more than 12 years in Washington. This would be a good start.
I think we’re off the subject. We were discussing how to keep pay to play out of politics. Moving it to the state level and limiting federal powers by giving them to the states would certainly have little or no impact here in Illinois, where your license plates are made by a former governor. You’re dreaming if you think state politics are cleaner than federal. I could certainly support term limits though, although with two party rule, officeholders would probably just play musical chairs every 12 years.
Since campaign contributions are a form of speech, there should be no implicit right to privacy as they are part of public discourse. Why not make them public in detail, available to all online?
In my old home state of Massachusetts local government trumps county and even state government…for an example of how that worked just look up all the fun Steve Wynn ran into when he went to the General Court of the Commonwealth (you would probably call it a state legislature)
Good ol moneybags Steve Wynn thought he was gonna wow’em and have them eating out ogf his hands in short order…well he did get the state to go for his plans and ideas so off he went to Foxboro (that is the local’s spelling) and once there he his ass handed to him by the towns people and the town council. The road to live casino gaming in Massachusetts has been a comedy of failures in town after town.
All this because local politics is the rule in Massachusetts. AND you liberal types should be all for local politics and taking away power from central behemoths because Massachusetts (as we ALL KNOW) is considered the bluest of the blue states.
Though it may surprise some to know Democrats are NOT the majority registration in the state. Non Partisan voters out number every other party in the state.
Based on Massachusetts, I say taking away every usurped (not explicitly assigned) power the federal government now claims and sending those back to the states should be something liberal would love!
I fired my proof reader….can you tell?
Interesting information Steve. I certainly wouldn’t have thought local rule would be so major in “liberal” Massachusetts With my experiences with local and state governments in Illinois, I do remain skeptical though. The local and state authorities take the reasonable federal building codes and ADA laws and add more onto them, making construction far more costly. That makes them MORE objectionable than the feds in my eyes.
After the MGM fire in the late 70’s…Clark County enacted the most restrictive fire codes in the country. This cost huge sums for hotels and casino’s to retrofit and added large costs to all new construction ever since.
Even though some of those codes have been relaxed had they not been in place for the recent City Center fire things would have been much worse.
This is a Nevada example of local politics working for the locals and their employers. But we have become a central power state with the source of that power being in distant Carson City. Even though in Nevada County government holds sway over city government and towns are no existent other than name only, Nevada’s central government is the rule.
I say this is also wrong though in this area it would be more sensible to have the county governments hold sway over most of the states power.
Hey Barbara – do you still believe that the US is entering a recession this Autumn?
I’m thinking this autumn may well be a good time to get some of my cost basis cash invested!
Bring on the interest rates!
Spot on with both comments Barbara…
[…] by refusing to pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee and not run as an independent. Trump is not a Republican, and anyone who continues to support him is a gullible […]
[…] we are on the topic of money, where has Trump “invested” his money in our political future? Until 2011, he contributed more to Democrats than Republicans. He has […]
[…] The Republican Party never should have nominated this reprobate in the first place. His track record was well known. He is not now nor has he ever been a Republican. […]