By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sundin13 on 17 September 2016
Edit Thread
fatslob-:O said:
sundin13 said:

It conflicts with the country's interests. If you are president, the country's interests come before your own. If he is in a situation as president where a decision he could make in regards to foreign policy could benefit him financially, that is a clear conflict of interest. He has foreign ties all over the world.

For example in South Korea where Trump Organization is partnered with Daewoo Engineering and Construction. Now Trump could very well be put in a situation where he has to make a decision about how to aid South Korea. Does he continue to provide American support or does he pull back and encourage them to develop their own military, including nuclear weapons? Well, wouldn't you know, Daewoo Engineering and Construction is one of the major companies involved in nuclear energy, so pushing for South Korea to militarize themselves could provide large financial gains to Daewoo, which would directly benefit Trump financially... You can't really get a more clear conflict of interest then that.

Here is a more in depth look into some of the conflicts of interest which arise from Trump's business: http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/donald-trump-foreign-business-deals-national-security-498081.html

Hmm, OMG Trump will lose 9 million dollars from licensing so he should definitely give in give in to the demands of small fry's LOL ... 

FYI, Daewoo E&C's speciality isn't even an arms developer so how would they even begin making weapons let alone a nuclear one ? 

South Korea would have better luck depending on it's own military to make nuclear weapons ... 

sundin13 said:

So we shouldn't worry about blatant conflicts of interest in one branch because there are two more? That is an extremely dangerous precedent to set my friend. We should do everything in our power to remove such conflicts of interest, and unless Trump and his family pledge to step away from the business personally, we will be tied up with these massive conflicts of interest through the course of his presidency.

If you think 9 million dollars worth (not even all of it) of potential conflict of interest is worse than taking in 165 million dollars in donations for granting special access then I think this discussion has met it's course ... 

Yes, you've definitely convinced me that the Clinton Foundation is worse than The Trump Organization (which makes most of it's foreign money off of licensing or owning some shares) when it comes to conflicts of interests even though 85 people were granted access with the Secretary of State LOL ... 

Well first of all, according to the piece I linked, Trump makes about $8million per year directly from those properties in South Korea. However, beyond that, it also states that Trump Organization is still allied with Daewoo, implying that there are likely more indirect sources of funds. What helps out Daewoo not only would be helping Trump's business partner, but Trump would also likely see indirect gains through their partnership.

Now, you then go on to say that Daewoo isn't an arms manufactures. That is true, but it is also true that nuclear energy is pivotal to developing nuclear weapons. If South Korea did move to developing nuclear weapons, it is highly likely that Daewoo would become involved and make a lot of money off of these changes.

However, as I very clearly stated, that is far from the only issue here. We also have concerns with India, Turkey/Pakistan, Russia, China and other foreign ties. These are very real conflicts of interest involving significant amounts of money which could be pivoting on whether or not America makes certain decisions (not to mention the foreign power that comes with being POTUS).

Now as far as the Clinton Foundation is concerned, yes, I believe that potentially making massive sums of money by making personally favorable decisions in foreign policy is significantly more of a threat than people donating to a charitable organization. The Clintons don't make money fromt he Clinton Foundation (including salary http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-09-16/the-clinton-foundation-vs-the-trump-foundation ). Further, the figure you pulled up (85 people) first of all doesn't say anything about whether the access was granted due to donations, and even if it was, that was 87 people out of thousands (AP decided to skew that figure as much as they could) and if you actually read the details of what was found, there was absolutely nothing untoward about any of those meetings. When the biggest hit you can find on the foundation is that she met with a Nobel Peace Prize winner and spoke to someone who was involved with AIDS charity while running an AIDS charity, you ain't got shit.

But yeah, I can see you have no interest in any actual discussion so I think this discussion has run its course.