Sssshhhhhh. Trump made $800,000 in 4 speeches last year.

[Kusa]

link

Trump released financial disclosures indicating he made $557 million last year... a claim many doubt (but his supporters don't care about lying). What is of the most interest, however, is that Donald Trump made $800,000 giving 4 speeches last year. No word on if he'll release the transcripts.

Are you jealous?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I bet you he will. It would not hurt him with his supporters and it would call Hillary's bluff. She has said that she will release her transcripts when everybody else does. Well Trump and Bernie are all that are left, and Bernie has already released his (he has none). She would pretty much have to release her own transcripts and prove what a corporate shill she truly is, which could turn the democratic base even more apathetic about voting for her. This is brilliant on Trump's part. Even if he didn't make any speeches, he should be out there doing it now and releasing transcripts.

I don't think even Higgins is dense enough not to realize Hillary's problem is not "giving speeches for money", except for maybe among the Bernie Sanders "if you make money you must be evil" crowd. Hillary's issue is that she is being paid large sums by those she was in a position to provide government favors for, and those she claims she claims she will regulate the bejeezus out of when speaking before progressive audiences. It seems very unlikely the transcripts of her speeches said stuff like "Gosh darn it, I'm here to regulate the bejeezus out of you".

Oh my gosh... Clinton is friendly with Wall Street. Someone alert the press! And here I thought Hilary Clinton was going to burden Wall Street with bazillions of new regulations and be the biggest liberal flamer ever in the White House.

Trump does not seem to have any of these issues.

He has enough of other issues.

 

[ZiprHead]

edit

- - - Updated - - -

link

Trump released financial disclosures indicating he made $557 million last year... a claim many doubt (but his supporters don't care about lying). What is of the most interest, however, is that Donald Trump made $800,000 giving 4 speeches last year. No word on if he'll release the transcripts.

Are you jealous?

I am. I'd love to make $200K telling people how great I am.

 

[Malintent]

link

Trump released financial disclosures indicating he made $557 million last year... a claim many doubt (but his supporters don't care about lying). What is of the most interest, however, is that Donald Trump made $800,000 giving 4 speeches last year. No word on if he'll release the transcripts.

Are you jealous?

Not sure what "made" means, in the financial world. I've heard of "gross", and "net", and "taxable".. but what a person "made" has no meaning.

If he spent $900,000 to gross $1,000,000, he "made" (net) less than I do in a year.

Please understand that you cannot trust headlines anymore... the days of journalism are over... it is all shock jock paid-by-the-click reality scripted TV-media. In other words, you have to read the article and then check the facts yourself.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

This is yet another of those things that Trump supporters get so worked up about, but are too thick to realize how hypocritical they're being.

The most current outrage, as has been pointed out, is that Bill and Hillary are worth a lot of money. At the same time, they're saying that she's financially irresponsible because the Clintons were broke when they left the White House.

So, someone was broke, but now they're worth a lot of money. That's bad.

How?

Well, they can't really articulate that, except to say that a few speeches paid for by "Wall Street" (whatever that may mean) proves that she's bad, bad, bad!

But how does that comport with the fact of Trump's various failures yet reportedly vast amount of wealth?

It doesn't, but Hillary's an evil liar anyway.

It's this odd mixture of anger at one person for taking advantage of their political connections and fame to get back on their feet again (quite legally BTW), and an unquestioning, uncritical admiration for a man who was provided not just with money, but with an already in-place business structure, which included highly knowledgeable management to help guide him along the way as he got started.

I don't hold Trump's wealth against him. He was able to take advantage of what was given to him and that's not as easy as many people think it is. But given Hillary's situation, the two are relatively comparable. She was able to take advantage of Bill's Presidency to begin making money and catapult herself to the Senate, the Secretary of State, and now to the Presidency. But with or without Bill, Hillary would have been successful in either the public or private sector. Before Bill she was already an accomplished person. Would Trump have been successful without what was given to him? That's not possible to know.

Anyway, the point is this: they hate Hillary for making money, yet they love Trump for making money.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think that Trump will be the worst president of our lifetime. I don't want him controlling the nuclear football.

Did you say football?!?!

Play Ball!!

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I don't hold Trump's wealth against him. He was able to take advantage of what was given to him and that's not as easy as many people think it is.

Given that his current worth is about what it would be if he'd taken the money he inherited and put in an S&P Index Fund, I'd say that it's about exactly as easy as people think it is.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

I don't hold Trump's wealth against him. He was able to take advantage of what was given to him and that's not as easy as many people think it is.

Given that his current worth is about what it would be if he'd taken the money he inherited and put in an S&P Index Fund, I'd say that it's about exactly as easy as people think it is.

If that's accurate, then I have to agree with you.

 

[rousseau]

If the decisions you've made throughout your life (including taking advantage of those additional decisions you've made to create financial opportunities for yourself) have found you making within $10 an hour of minimum wage, then you and people of like-kind might want to show a little restraint and sit back and learn a thing or two before being so quick to judgementally criticize those that chose and commanded a more lucrative route.

Or perhaps not, given that your relative levels of earnings have FAR more to do with accidents of birth, than with any actual decisions you have made.

Commanding a high income is at best very weakly correlated with good judgment. If someone deserves criticism, then you are very well advised not to allow their wealth to dissuade you from making that criticism.

Genes fighting genes.

 

[rousseau]

Or perhaps not, given that your relative levels of earnings have FAR more to do with accidents of birth, than with any actual decisions you have made.

Commanding a high income is at best very weakly correlated with good judgment. If someone deserves criticism, then you are very well advised not to allow their wealth to dissuade you from making that criticism.

I respect you. I'll think real hard about that.

You shouldn't think about things based on respect, you should judge arguments based on their own merit.

Unless of course the person whose ass you're trying to kiss doesn't like the person you're listening to.