Category Archives: Politics

Short Shots: Race and other matters in America

newspapers 1

It has now been 190 days since Judge Merrick Garland was nominated for a position on the US Supreme Court.  This is the longest wait for any nominee, and the U.S. Senate has not even had the courtesy to hold a hearing on his nomination.  Senator Majority Leader McConnell has a very strange idea of what it means to do his job.  McConnell has also refused to schedule votes on two nominees for the federal bench who are African American, over Senator Cory Booker’s objections. [NorthJersey]  Partisanship and racial bias at play? Why else would a perfectly qualified nominee for the Supreme Court nominated by an African American president, and two African American district court nominees not get a vote?

newspapers 1

How’s this for a howler?

“Donald Trump’s campaign chair in a prominent Ohio county has claimed there was “no racism” during the 1960s and said black people who have not succeeded over the past half-century only have themselves to blame.

Kathy Miller, who is white and chair of the Republican nominee’s campaign in Mahoning County, made the remarks during a taped interview with the Guardian’s Anywhere but Washington series of election videos.”

But Wait! Ms Miller wasn’t finished:

“Miller also dismissed the racial tensions of the 1960s, when she said she graduated from high school. “Growing up as a kid, there was no racism, believe me. We were just all kids going to school.”

Asked about segregation and the civil rights movement, she replied: “I never experienced it. I never saw that as anything.”

Miller added: “I don’t think there was any racism until Obama got elected. We never had problems like this … Now, with the people with the guns, and shooting up neighborhoods, and not being responsible citizens, that’s a big change, and I think that’s the philosophy that Obama has perpetuated on America.” [Guardian]

This from quite possibly the most self referential self absorbed individual available for the County Trump Campaign committee?

newspapers 1

Let’s put this canard to rest – there is NO widespread voter fraud; there isn’t even any widespread potential for voter impersonation fraud.

      • “Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a longtime proponent of voter suppression efforts, argued before state lawmakers that his office needed special power to prosecute voter fraud, because he knew of 100 such cases in his state. After being granted these powers, he has brought six such cases, of which only four have been successful. The secretary has also testified about his review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states, which yielded 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution, which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate.” [Brennan Center]

That isn’t statistically significant in any rational analysis, so let’s just call this what it is – a fraudulent campaign to reduce the number of legitimate Democratic voters.

newspapers 1

Representative Joe Heck (R-NV3) is still running to be Division commander, with an ad that compares himself going to “put his boots in the sand with soldiers” while Cortez Masto took “vacation days.”  All 174 of them in eight years.  If we were being tacky we could say Heck was paid for those 460 days he was deployed – so it was at taxpayer expense, but we’re not being tacky we’d just notice that he’s really dragging out the militarism for this campaign.   By the way, had Cortez Masto not attended national conferences he’d probably be whining she didn’t represent Nevada when she had the opportunity.

newspapers 1

Here’s a nice shot! Compliments of Astrid Silva – 795 new U.S. / Nevada citizens taking the oath at Cashman Field.  Welcome to America!

New Nevada Citizens Have a good day!

Comments Off on Short Shots: Race and other matters in America

Filed under Heck, McConnell, Nevada politics, Politics, racism, Republicans, Vote Suppression

Passion and Politics: Playing Loose with the Truth

Lincoln Cartoon “George Templeton Strong, a prominent New York lawyer and diarist, wrote that Lincoln was “a barbarian, Scythian, yahoo, or gorilla.” Henry Ward Beecher, the Connecticut-born preacher and abolitionist, often ridiculed Lincoln in his newspaper, The Independent (New York), rebuking him for his lack of refinement and calling him “an unshapely man.” Other Northern newspapers openly called for his assassination long before John Wilkes Booth pulled the trigger. He was called a coward, “an idiot,” and “the original gorilla” by none other than the commanding general of his armies, George McClellan.” [Atlantic]

The descendents of those who passionately vilified Lincoln are with us today.   They become particularly noticeable during times when U.S. politics are polarized, polemicized, and full of more propaganda than factual content.  

Case in point: Those “30,000 missing emails” on Secretary Clinton’s server. There are, as we speak, some Internet trolls repeating the claim that Clinton ‘lost’ 30,000 emails during her tenure in the State Department. They’ve got the story bass-ackwards.

“So in 2014, Clinton’s lawyers combed through the private server and turned over about 30,000 work-related emails to the State Department and deleted the rest, which Clinton said were about personal matters.” [Politifact]

The rest of the FBI investigation?

Of the tens of thousands of emails investigators reviewed, 113 contained classified information, and three of those had classification markers. FBI Director James Comey has said Clinton should have known that some of the 113 were classified, but others she might have understandably missed.

Comey said the Justice Department shouldn’t prosecute Clinton because there isn’t enough evidence that she intentionally mishandled classified information. FBI investigators didn’t find vast quantities of exposed classified material, and they also did not turn up evidence that Clinton intended to be disloyal to the United States or that she intended to obstruct justice.  [Politifact]

So, the entire “scandal” doesn’t concern 30,000 emails, those were handed over early in the game; and, it boils down to 3 emails which can’t be shown to have been intentionally mishandled.  Anyone who has been paying attention knows that the investigations were entirely political, entirely overblown, and total malarkey but that’s not the point.  No matter how often the story is fact checked [MMA] [MMA] [Slate] [Star Telegram] [MJ] [WaPo] it is still being pumped by the passionate.

Those in that Basket of Deplorables doing the arm-work to keep the air in that story intended to cause “distrust” of Secretary Clinton are committed to their version – no matter how untrue, no matter how politicized because it’s their version.  Long advised by right wing radio hosts to distrust the media, distrust the ‘establishment,’ and to distrust anything other than the version of events as dispensed by the hosts, they will now easily slip into dismissing any explication which doesn’t fit their personal narrative.  In simpler terms, they don’t care if a statement isn’t true – they’ll find a way to make it that way.

We could add another ten links in the paragraph above to articles debunking the email story (or any other tale for that matter) and the emotional voter will dismiss all as “liberal media.”  Not that they have any idea what the ‘liberal media’ might be – it’s just that they identify as conservative, and the media isn’t enabling their narratives garnered from right wing sources.  Therefore, the media (having been described as liberal on AM radio) must be so. 

If a cavalier dismissal of conflicting information isn’t sufficient, there’s always the conspiratorial element – the ‘liberal’ media must be discredited because “they” are always “hiding something from us.”    Both the Distrust Element and the Conspiratorial Element make up a portion of that Basket of Deplorables – the racists, the misogynists, the bigots, the Islamophobes, the intolerant – which drive some of the support for Trump’s candidacy.

It doesn’t matter how many times the New York Times, or the Washington Post, or any other major news outlet debunks and fact checks Trump’s characterizations of people and events.  These people just aren’t into facts.

Another factor is the capacity of people to filter what they are hearing.  Did Donald Trump say that President Barack Obama was born in the U.S. and is therefore a legitimate president?  Well, they may say slyly, that’s what he said because he had to say it, he just doesn’t really truly mean it.  Interesting that this analysis comes from people who like Trump because “he tells it like it is.”

This isn’t of course to argue that Trump’s 40% support is coming solely from the Deplorables and the Deniers – Secretary Clinton herself acknowledged that there are those for whom our economic system isn’t working.  They’re frustrated, fearful, and in need of assistance not forthcoming from our current political systems.   They’ll vote “against the establishment” whatever that might be (such as Bush, Kasich, etc.) because they want some form of change.

Nor should we forget that there are those who will vote for anyone on the top of the ticket with an R.  There are yellow dog Republicans as well as Democrats.

Hence, this election in 2016 will come down to TURNOUT. Good old fashioned door knocking, phone calling, rides to the polls, TURNOUT.  We can be assured that the Deplorable element will be there, as they were for the mid-terms, and the disaffected will arrive.  It’s a matter of no small importance that Democrats make the same effort to GET OUT THE VOTE.

Comments Off on Passion and Politics: Playing Loose with the Truth

Filed under Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Nevada politics, Politics, racism, Republicans

Scams and Scandals: Is Nothing Enough to Put Nevada Republicans Off Trump?

Trump 1 While the press seems obsessed with ‘foundations’ (especially if discussing the highly rated and respected Clinton Foundation) there was this timeline published on September 6, 2016.

“Trump-Bondi Timeline

August 23, 2013
Donald Trump’s attorneys “launched an aggressive campaign against New York state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, as the state’s chief law-enforcement officer continues an investigation into the billionaire’s education company.” —WSJ, Aug. 23, 2016

(This is one day before AG Schneiderman filed the suit.)

Mid-Late August 2013
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi “personally solicited a political contribution from Donald Trump” “several weeks” before Bondi’s “office publicly announced it was deliberating whether to join a multi-state lawsuit proposed by New York’s Democratic attorney general.”

” ‘The process took at least several weeks, from the time they spoke to the time they received the contribution,’ Reichelderfer told AP.” —AP, June 6, 2016

ca. Sept. 10, 2013
Ivanka Trump donates $500 to Bondi (or the PAC?) “a week before her father’s money was reported as being received.” —AP, June 6, 2016

Sept. 13, 2013
Bondi “publicly announced she was considering joining a New York state probe of Trump University’s activities.” —AP, June 6, 2016

Sept. 17, 2013
And Justice For All, political group backing Bondi, “reported receiving” the $25,000 check from Trump foundation. —AP, June 6, 2016

Sept. or October, 2013
“In 2013, [Trump] wouldn’t answer Times/Herald questions about why he was contributing to an attorney general’s race in Florida. But he did release a statement calling Bondi ‘a fabulous representative of the people’ and Schneiderman ‘a political hack.’ ” —Tampa Bay Times, March 14, 2016

“In 2013, Trump acknowledged making the contribution.” [TPM]

Meanwhile in Texas:

In 2009 the state of Texas began an investigation into Trump University,  after complaints surfaced regarding the advertising placed in Texas newspapers:

“The probe began in the fall of 2009, apparently in response to an advertisement that Trump University had placed in the Chronicle, according to an internal memo that Attorney General’s Office lawyer Rick Berlin sent to Owens and three other supervisors.

“The free workshop advertisement advises you to ‘Cash in on the Greatest Property Liquidation in History!’ ” the memo said. “The full one page ad …quotes Donald Trump as saying ‘I can turn anyone into a successful real estate investor, including you.’ The ad further professes that you can buy real estate from banks at up to 70% below market value.” [HoustonChron]

The case progressed:

“Two months later, in January 2010, the Attorney General’s Office notified Trump University it was under investigation for “possible violations of 17.46(a) and 17.46(b) of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices – Consumer Protection Act,” records show.

Those provisions prohibit “false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.” The notification letter demanded 12 categories of documents.” [HoustonChron]

And when records were released in California regarding Trump’s activities, this emerged:

“Abbott received donations totaling $35,000 from Trump three years after deciding not to sue – the only major donation the New York billionaire has made to a Texas politician in years.” [HoustonChron]

On May 6, 2010 the state of Texas was preparing to file suit and requested a variety of documents from Trump.

“Investigators were scheduled to meet with Trump representatives on May 19, 2010, to pitch the $5.4 million settlement proposal. That meeting never took place, Owens said. Instead, the division received “verbal notification” that the investigation and the lawsuit were over.” [Salon]

So, what has all this to do with Nevada politics?  

The jury is still literally out on the Trump University case, the one in which Mr. Trump famously declared he couldn’t get a fair hearing because the judge (Curiel) is of Mexican heritage – but we can get a bit of information about Nevada candidates for whom the Trump University/Trump Foundation/Trump Institute morass isn’t troubling enough to warrant putting some distance between themselves and at least the “optics” of the Trump scams.

The Reno Gazette Journal published a full list of Nevada politicians who have either endorsed or said they would support Mr. Trump – in spite of the continuing pile of scandals in which he’s involved.  Some of the more notable on the list are:

Gov. Brian Sandoval – Yes

Lt. Gov. Mark Hutchison – Yes

Attorney General Adam Laxalt – Yes

U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei – Yes

U.S. Rep. Joe Heck – Yes

U.S. Rep. Cresent Hardy – Did not respond, but has said he will support the nominee * (yes, see below)

Nevada Senate Majority Leader Michael Roberson, Henderson – Yes

Nevada Assembly Majority Leader Paul Anderson, Las Vegas – Yes

State Sen. Don Gustavson, Sparks – Yes

What seems particularly troubling is that when the Governor and the Attorney General are supporting the candidacy of Mr. Trump the ‘optics’ appear that they would not be interested in pursuing any litigation against Mr. Trump’s scams.  Representatives Heck and Amodei seem not concerned enough to distance themselves from the candidacy.

If the Trump University scandal is insufficient incentive to put some distance between themselves and Trump’s candidacy perhaps there are other items which might cause them to back off?

Apparently the housing discrimination scandals of 1973-75 which resulted in Trump agreeing to abandon the discrimination policies and to submit its operations to a regular review by the NY Urban League weren’t enough to make these Nevada politicians wary of Mr. Trump. Nor were Mr. Trump’s machinations involving a Central Park property and the abuse of the residents therein enough to make Nevada politicians nervous? [Atlantic]

Perhaps they find Mr. Trump’s position on immigration policy appealing, but without delving into his immigration practices:

“In order to construct his signature Trump Tower, the builder first had to demolish the Bonwit Teller store, an architecturally beloved Art Deco edifice. The work had to be done fast, and so managers hired 200 undocumented Polish workers to tear it down, paying them substandard wages for backbreaking work—$5 per hour, when they were paid at all.” [Atlantic] Mr. Trump was aware of these practices.  [Time]

There have been other allegations published about Trump’s dealings with his Modeling Agency and the women who were undocumented working there. [Mother Jones]

Nevadans are usually particularly sensitive to casino operation policies. Trump’s were highly questionable – enough so that he’s no longer in the casino business.

“In 1990, with Trump Taj Mahal in trouble, Trump’s father Fred strolled in and bought 700 chips worth a total of $3.5 million. The purchase helped the casino pay debt that was due, but because Fred Trump had no plans to gamble, the New Jersey gaming commission ruled that it was a loan that violated operating rules. Trump paid a $30,000 fine; in the end, the loan didn’t prevent a bankruptcy the following year. As noted above, New Jersey also fined Trump $200,000 for arranging to keep black employees away from mafioso Robert LiButti’s gambling table. In 1991, the Casino Control Commission fined Trump’s company another $450,000 for buying LiButti nine luxury cars. And in 2000, Trump was fined $250,000 for breaking New York state law in lobbying to prevent an Indian casino from opening in the Catskills, for fear it would compete against his Atlantic City casinos.” [Atlantic]

Surely such a record would cause Nevada politicians to retreat from the prospect of supporting Mr. Trump? Evidently not.

Perhaps some highly questionable  name-licensing agreements would be enough to make Nevada politicians uncomfortable?  Especially if the agreements involved real estate transactions?

“In the case of Trump SoHo, in Manhattan, Trump’s partners turned out to have a lengthy criminal past. Trump said he didn’t know that, but—atypically—settled a lawsuit with buyers (while, typically, not admitting any wrongdoing). Another, Trump International Hotel & Tower Fort Lauderdale, went into foreclosure, and Trump has sued the complex’s developer. In 2013, hesettled a suit with prospective buyers who lost millions when a development in Baja Mexico went under. Trump blamed the developers again, saying he had only licensed his name.” [Atlantic]

Either Mr. Trump is not being honest about his relationship with these failed developments, or he is remarkably naive about to whom and under what circumstances he licenses his name?

Would Nevada Republican politicians sound the retreat from the Trump Camp if it were known that Mr. Trump has a track record of stiffing small business owners and employees – the very people the Republicans claim to uphold and protect?  Again, from the Atlantic summation:

“Trump has offered various excuses, including shoddy workmanship, but the scale of the problem—hundreds of allegations—makes that hard to credit. In some cases, even the lawyers Trump has hired to defend him have sued him for failing to pony up their fees. In one lawsuit, a Trump employee admitted in court that a painter was stiffed because managers determined they had “already paid enough.” The cases are damaging because they show Trump not driving a hard bargain with other businesses, but harming ordinary, hard-working Americans.”

USA Today reported:

“Donald Trump often portrays himself as a savior of the working class who will “protect your job.” But a USA TODAY NETWORK analysis found he has been involved in more than 3,500 lawsuits over the past three decades — and a large number of those involve ordinary Americans, like the Friels, who say Trump or his companies have refused to pay them.”

The aforementioned list of Nevada Republican officials and candidates can evidently swallow all manner of scandals involving housing discrimination, employment discrimination, stiffing small businesses, highly questionable casino operation policies, immigration practices (as opposed to empty rhetoric), and publicized infractions of the acceptable ways to use foundation funds —

Perhaps they can sputter about the “e-mails,” a large nothing-burger of specious speculation and Republican investigations of the investigations and the people investigating the investigations … or the Clinton Foundation with its top ratings from Charity Navigator and Charity Watch [AP] but the hard facts remain that Mr. Trump has been and may continue to be involved in practices which are illegal at worst and ethically questionable at best.

Representatives Amodei, Hardy, and Heck, Attorney General Laxalt, and Governor Sandoval should be asked directly how they can continue to support a presidential candidate who has demonstrated a willingness to break the rules of casino operations? To engage in housing discrimination? To refuse payment to employees and contractors (including his own campaign staff)? To engage in unlawful immigration practices?

The answers should be enlightening?

*Cresent Hardy has since decided he will do everything he can to get Mr. Trump elected. [LV Sun]

Comments Off on Scams and Scandals: Is Nothing Enough to Put Nevada Republicans Off Trump?

Filed under Amodei, Heck, Nevada politics, Politics

Important Dates: 2016 Election

Nevada Voter Registration 2016

_____ Register to vote

_____ Check your own registration

_____ Help someone else register to vote

_____ Help them check their registration

Comments Off on Important Dates: 2016 Election

Filed under elections, Nevada politics, Politics

Heck + Altria

Heck Altria donations

Just Asking? 

1 Comment

Filed under Heck, Nevada politics, Politics

Read the Fine Print: Heck and the Kochtopus

Heck Kochtopus

If you strain just a little you can read the fine print at the end of the ads being run by the Heck Campaign against Catherine Cortez Masto.  The ads telling you she hates old people, etc… are from “Freedom Partners.”

A word about that outfit. First we’ll return  to a September 2013 article in Politico

“An Arlington, Va.-based conservative group, whose existence until now was unknown to almost everyone in politics, raised and spent $250 million in 2012 to shape political and policy debate nationwide.

The group, Freedom Partners, and its president, Marc Short, serve as an outlet for the ideas and funds of the mysterious Koch brothers, cutting checks as large as $63 million to groups promoting conservative causes, according to an IRS document to be filed shortly.”  (emphasis added)

Now, let’s bring this back home to Nevada – as of June 2016 the Koch Brothers had some hefty plans for the Silver State:

“The group announced last week that it plans to spend $1.2 million on advertising in Nevada, where Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto is running against Republican Rep. Joe Heck to replace Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.” [Roll Call]

And Representative Heck is no stranger to the Koch Brothers and their deep pockets:

“Between 2011 and 2014, Koch Industries gave $30,000 to the Republican. During his re-election campaign in 2014, Americans for Prosperity made a $200,000 ad buy for Heck, “praising” his opposition to the ACA. Since announcing his run for Senate, Heck has received $2,500 from the Kochs.” [RKF]

More recently, Heck received $2,500 (March 31, 2016), to add to the $2,500 he’d already received on November 30, 2015, directly from the Koch Industries PAC. (FEC reports)

What do the Koch Brothers want in return for all this largess? 

Social Security and Medicare “Reform”

Freedom Partners is happy to tell us that Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are “entitlements.”  However, NOT as in “we are entitled to these benefits because we paid payroll taxes for them” – no, it’s as in we’re bankrupting the government with these “entitlements.”

One of the questions in a candidate survey conducted in 2015 by the Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce is:

“Question #18: Do you support Social Security and Medicare reform that would increase the age of eligibility and reduce benefits for wealthier retirees?”

Translation: Do you support raising the age at which a person is eligible for Social Security benefits, and do you supports ‘means testing’ for Social Security benefits?

Questions #19 and #20 are also instructive:

Question #19: Do you support expanding Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act?  (the preferred answer is NO)

Question #20: Do you support capping federal spending on Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by allowing states to control those funds in the form of federal grants? (the preferred answer is YES)

Tax Break for the Wealthy Tax Increases for Everyone Else

Then there was this question: “Question #13: Should tax reform eliminate all preferential treatment and credits for individuals, industries and activities in order to lower marginal tax rates?” Sounds nice, BUT there’s always a kicker.

Flat taxation schemes overwhelmingly favor the top 0.01% of income earners, and those in what are now the upper income brackets. [USNWR] [WaPo] [CNBC]  We can probably conclude with some reasonable certainty that while Representative Heck will likely not come out in favor of a flat tax scheme, he’ll no doubt stay close to the “no new taxes on anyone wealthy” line the Koch Brothers find appealing.

Oh, The Irony!

There’s no small amount of irony involved in trying to argue that Catherine Cortez Masto is tied to “special interests,” when the Heck Campaign is entangled in the Koch Brothers Very Special Interest money.  And, no doubt more of it is on the way, such that we can get even more extremely misleading ads like the Uber Debacle

Those interested in preserving Medicare and Social Security, and in maintaining a healthy economy (one not predicated on the GOP Trickle Down Hoax) would be better served by having Catherine Cortez Masto in the U.S. Senate.

Comments Off on Read the Fine Print: Heck and the Kochtopus

Filed under Heck, koch brothers, Nevada politics, Politics

Charity Begins At Home: Trump vs. Clinton Foundations

Clinton Foundation logo Before the discussion of the Clinton Foundation gets any more ridiculous – it’s time to do a bit of push back on the attacks.  First, there’s the mission of the charity: “We convene businesses, governments, NGOs, and individuals to improve global health and wellness, increase opportunity for girls and women, reduce childhood obesity, create economic opportunity and growth, and help communities address the effects of climate change.”

The mission statement all but invites attacks from the radical right wing; What? The charity supports global health, places a focus on projects that help women, supports efforts to reduce childhood obesity?  Oh, and then there’s the “climate change” element which generally sends the Deniers into a low orbit.   We should come back to these efforts after dealing with some of the more idiotic charges leveled by the Trump Campaign.

Here’s Trump’s latest:

“It is impossible to figure out where the Clinton Foundation ends and the State Department begins,” Trump said at a rally in Austin. “It is now abundantly clear that the Clinton’s set up a business to profit from public office. They sold access and specific actions by and really for I guess the making of large amounts of money.” [NBC]

Hogwash.  And we know this is hogwash because, as the article continues:

“Trump cited no evidence of any quid-pro-quo between the foundation’s donors and Clinton’s State Department Tuesday night, but still described Clinton as having been “bought and sold” and characterized the foundation as “a threat to the foundation of Democracy.” [NBC] (emphasis added)

Thus, on the basis of NO evidence whatsoever, Mr. Trump has decided that a charitable organization must be Investigated! Prosecuted! because….why? Perhaps it’s because the interminable Benghazi investigations turned up exactly zilch, and the emails proved absolutely nothing, the GOP is attempting to manufacture another “outrage” for low information public consumption.

Comparing the Clinton and Trump Foundations

Clinton Foundation: The Clinton Foundation is not rated by Charity Navigator, one of the more popular check sites available online.  The rationale for non-rating is made clear:

“We had previously evaluated this organization, but have since determined that this charity’s atypical business model can not be accurately captured in our current rating methodology. Our removal of The Clinton Foundation from our site is neither a condemnation nor an endorsement of this charity. We reserve the right to reinstate a rating for The Clinton Foundation as soon as we identify a rating methodology that appropriately captures its business model.   A lack of a rating does not indicate a positive or negative assessment by Charity Navigator.”

Translation: It is NOT that the Clinton Foundation couldn’t be rated, it is not rated because CN’s rating methodology doesn’t fit the business model.   But, But, sputter the critics, the Clinton Foundation was put on the Watch List by CN… Not. So. Fast.

The charitable organization rating group placed the Foundation on its watch list after several negative reports were published in the news between February and November 2015.  After which the Foundation was removed from the watch list because:

“In accordance with our policy for removing charities from the CN Watchlist, Charity Navigator removed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation from the Watchlist in December 2015 because the charity provided publicly accessible information regarding their amended tax Forms for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. This information, along with the public memorandum submitted addressing the other issues raised in the Watchlist entry, meets our requirements for removal.”  [CN] (emphasis added)

Now, let’s compare the Clinton Foundation, which provides “publicly accessible information,” which and The Trump Foundation, of which Charity Navigator reports:

“This organization is not eligible to be rated by Charity Navigator because it is a Private Foundation.
Private foundations receive the majority of their money from only one individual, family or corporation. This differs from the public charities that Charity Navigator evaluates. Public charities have a broad-base of support from the general public as well as variety of other funding sources. The IRS requires that private foundations file a Form 990-PF which differs from the document public charities file. This makes it impossible for us to compare the financial performance of private foundations to public charities.” [CN]

There is a whopper sized difference between not being able to rate because of data indicating a different business model, and not being able to rate because it’s impossible to evaluate the financial performance of a private foundation.  Put more simply – it’s the difference between a public charity, fully transparent, with publicly accessible information about programs and projects, and a private foundation about which practically nothing is known.

There is a way to drill down on the Trump Foundations listed but it requires more key strokes.  The portal was created by ProPublica, and from thence on to the individual 990-PF downloads in PDF.  The drilling exercise is instructive.

The Mission is the Message

One of the names appearing on the 2013 Trump Foundation 990-PF is Richard Ebers. whom Huffington Post has already noticed:

“A New York-based ticket broker named Richard Ebers has given more than $1.8 million to Trump’s foundation since 2011. When asked by phone what prompted the donations, Ebers, who’s been described as a high-end scalper, said he had “no comment.” Representatives for the Trump Organization also declined to answer any questions about the money from Ebers.”

The New York Times devoted a full piece to the Ticket Man.  Perhaps Mr. Trump believes that foundations are for “getting something” because that’s the way he has used his?  Again, the Huffington Post reports:

“…the foundation’s money has come from people and companies that do business with Trump or want something from him. In 2006, People magazine gave the foundation $150,000. Trump gave the magazine exclusive photos of his newborn son, Barron, in April of that year. NBC Universal gave the foundation $10,000 in 2007 and another $500,000 in 2012. Trump’s popular reality shows “The Apprentice” and “The Celebrity Apprentice” aired on NBC from 2004 to 2015. And in 2011, Comedy Central gave the foundation $400,000 as an appearance fee for the billionaire’s participation in The Comedy Central Roast of Donald Trump.”  [HuffPo]

Perhaps this is the origin for the attacks on the Clinton Foundation? A person who believes that as he acts, thus does everyone else?  Compare this to the projects associated with the Clinton Foundation, as exemplified by the following two examples:

A self help, entrepreneurial, project in Peru — “Chakipi (meaning “to your home” in Quechua, an indigenous Andean language) Acceso is a last-mile distribution enterprise that equips women in various regions in Peru with sales training and products such as nutritious foods, personal care items, pharmaceuticals, and solar lamps. The Chakipi entrepreneurs then sell these products to others within their communities – providing essential, life-changing goods that are otherwise hard or impossible to access.”

Or CHAI, Building on the work of the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), a separate, affiliated entity, to scale up HIV testing and treatment for children, CHAI’s Prevention of Mother-to-Child Transmission (PMTCT) program takes a comprehensive approach to stopping new pediatric infections. CHAI supports mothers and babies “across the cascade,” meaning from pregnancy and delivery through breastfeeding and into long-term care for HIV-positive mothers and children. Unlike many PMTCT efforts that focus only on one part of the cascade, CHAI’s work is demonstrating that a comprehensive, integrated system of care will be critical to reaching the ultimate goal of eliminating new pediatric HIV infections.”

Not to put too fine a point to it, but I’d much prefer the operations of the Clinton Foundation which does things like help women establish home based business enterprises or seeks to prevent the transmission of HIV between mother and child, to the smaller and rather more self serving projects described in the Huffington Post article.  As one of the two Corinthians might have said to Mr. Trump:

A final word from Matthew (7:5)

Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

Comments Off on Charity Begins At Home: Trump vs. Clinton Foundations

Filed under Clinton, Politics, Republicans, Women's Issues