Cop really falsely accused someone because he got honked at, then rear ends them, Then strips their rights away, and causes a traumatic event. What a lovely display of justice
I love how he admitted he had seen someone doing somthing wrong and then stopped perusing the person speeding because his ego was hurt, these the kind of people we let “police”
OMG, he started off with a lie. Telling dispatch the driver slammed on his brakes in front of him. Did the lying ass trooper forget he’s being recorded. He needs to be fired immediately!!
Detainee: invokes his right to silence
Officer: “he wants to continue to yell at me!”
It so creepy how comfortable the officer seems while spinning this lie. Hes a professional at it. Sad that we have these dirty officers out there. When an officer lies like this they should be fired immediately.
This is why we must start looking at hiring practices of officers. As a therapist that deals with clinical psychology, there are many personalities that do not belong in the police department. I question that he is one of those people. He is about power, he had no qualms to lie immediately to get his way. This is a bad Officer. Police need to hire professional to deal with the psychology of hiring an officer, or this is what you get. Very sad and very dangerous.
“I’m just doing my job”
Obviously…this dude is the reason why people have a hard time trusting cops. I understand that traffic stops are the most dangerous for police officers, but this guy put people’s lives in danger.
When police officers do stuff like this I understand why some people are afraid of cops
It honestly terrifies me to think about what has been done in the past WITHOUT cameras recording.
I feel so bad for the chick in the car that has to sit through this officer’s bs and even more that shes is apologizing to him and even more that she should know to plead the 5th to not give the cop any ground in court
This makes my blood boil. The cop literally lied by saying “he’s still back there yelling and cursing” fucking unbelievable. I don’t think I could’ve remained so calm
This cop put people in danger over his ego, plain and simple. Departments really need to do better sociological evaluations. The fact this this guy carries a gun is scary.
“This guy was exercising his fourth amendment right to express his frustration at me so I had to put him in cuffs.”
“This is yet ANOTHER encounter where an officer attempted to criminalize behavior that their EGO could not tolerate”
Well said, and the amount of these i have watched where a cop’s ego is a major factor in the encounter is very disturbing.
We don’t just need the bad ones weeded out, but a better job done in the screening process to determine if people like this should be given the job in the first place.
Who knew these “brave” cops were so fragile and could be threatened by curse words. Pathetic.
When a retail employee is expected to have more emotional control while dealing with belligerent people than cops, there’s a problem.
This is exactly the kind of person that will end up wrongfully shooting someone and trying to blame it on them. He should be fired, sued and never allowed to carry a badge again. I support all good cops but this is not one of them. I’m very curious to see what happens with their lawsuit and I hope you will do an update about it.
This cop is a clown. Rips a guy out of his car and then says he needs to start acting like a human being. Constantly interrupts the wife to tell her she’s interrupting then says nothing.
This is soo sad that you still have cops that clearly just joined the force to be a bully .
“When he wants to calm down and act like a human being…” I will attack another person physically if my feelings are hurt and I’m trying to force them to accept my authority but they are the ones not acting like a human being!
This is a classic case of why cops having dash cams and body cams is so important. The video was able to provide proof the officer was lying. Also the victim got citations when he did nothing wrong. But honk of course. Not sure if there is a fine for honking at a police officer who makes an unsafe turn in front of you. I don’t think a police officer lying to fellow officers and on the police report to railroad a citizen who did nothing wrong but honk at him is the conduct of a good officer. I hope he can get his citations taken off his record, get his money back he had to pay. Also have this officer held accountable for his actions. If he is not held accountable and gets away with lying, then he will continue to do so. Future citizens will suffer as a result as well as making his fellow officers and police force look bad by association and for covering up for him.
Damn this cop is screwed even admitting on camera he arrested him for cussing. Biggest issue with police in the US is utter lack of knowledge. Honestly my AIT was 9 months in order to work on aircraft but in a few weeks time you can have a gun in order to enforce laws you have no knowledge of. I would require at least a BS in law in order to become a police officer. Think it would greatly reduce the criminal in blue aspects of so called law enforcement
For anyone who missed it, the second trooper asks Wingo “Are you hot?” to see if they are being recorded. He knew it looked bad and his primary concern was covering for another officer.
Just another example of “one bad apple spoiling the bunch”, or a “thin blue line” culture that protects criminals in uniform over law-abiding citizens?
The officer asking “Are you hot?” is a clear indication that their conversation would have gone ENTIRELY differently had there not been any recording devices active. This conduct is indicative of a blatant disregard for the truth in favor of using their power irresponsibly to fulfill personal agendas.
First off, I’m not a cop. The thing that most everyone seems to overlook is the fact that our US supreme court passed a law in 1974 that states that an officer of the law may lie to a perp in order to get the perp to admit to a crime and there will be no charges or anything at all brought against the police officer for lying. So essencially our supreme court has made every police officer in these United States a LIER!! The only thing that can be done is abolish that law and make all policemen accountable for their actions and make it against the law for them to ever lie to the “PERP”!! There will be no trust in our police force until this law is changed and enforced.
This cop needs to be fired and get sued for falsifying evidence to arrest veteran.
Abolish Qualified Immunity.
You can clearly see the cop hit the veteran.
“There’s no need for the 5th” is easily the slimiest shit a cop can ever say.
Cop who just hit there car: “I’m trying to get him to calm down he’s yelling at me for no reason”
Guy who’s relatively calm for someone who was just rear ended: “i want your name and badge number”
Can you imagine the amount of dirt that was swept under the rug when they didn’t wear cameras and didn’t have a camera phone in every pocket?
This cop is completely out of touch with reality. He says this dude needs to calm down and act like an adult human being. Meanwhile, this cop is a childish bully. Another dangerous mental reject with a badge.
He gets mad because someone honked at him, just imagine how mad he gets in other situations. Absolute egotistical controlling maniac.
I love how the coo keeps stating,”he want to keep yelling and cussing me out” all he said was “you f’ing hit my car” once and never swore after and didn’t even yell after that
Another police officer believes he can do anything to a citizen. We do not need these men in law enforcement.
Wow i can’t believe how blatantly he’s ling even though he knows the dash cam is rolling. Just imagine how they treat citizens when there is no video going. What a joke.
As a veteran, this idiot’s brush off of the wife telling him her husband had PTSD makes me want to send my whole VFW membership after him. This guy is a terrible cop 5x over, and anyone that wants to argue the other things he did were worse, I’d be willing to agree.. but man that pisses me off
It’s so disgusting how the law enforcement officers can lie so easily and think nothing of it. Thank God there is video evidence that spoke the truth of what really happened. And if this officer feels he has the right to pull someone out of the car like that handcuffed them and throw them in the back of the car because his feelings are hurt he needs retraining his feelings count for nothing it’s the law that counts for everything
The word of the year is “accountability”. The guy that got pulled over was holding his officer accountable right there on the spot and the officer didn’t want to hear it.
“He wants to continue to yell at me for no reason” – after he calmly asks for badge number and name – thank goodness for cameras – finally catching some of the BS that goes on out here
As an Arkansan, I can fully verify that this, as well as the many other videos of Arkansas law enforcement posted here, is exactly how Arkansas law enforcement acts on a daily basis. Sense of superiority, flagrant abuse of power, shaming citizens with whom they interact, rarely reprimanding their own. It’s systemic and deeply troubling.
This hits a nerve with me being I’m a fellow disabled combat veteran with PTSD. Mr Donner was super chill compared to what he could really do when actually upset I’m sure.
“you gonna let me talk or interrupt me the entire time?” after the wife explains his severe PTSD. this cop is appalling.
.. I would like to see how this story unravels. They definitely have a case if they pursue it properly.
It’s hard to seek justice when the same people who are suppose to exercise our faith in justice are actually the people destroying our trust in it.
When he said “until he can act like a human being” I almost threw up. This man had a full blown temper tantrum because he was gonna get in trouble for hitting someone’s car, and took it out on innocent people. This man has no place in civilized society
The only thing I can conclude is: These type of officers never had any “control” in their life. All seem to have mommy issues, rough relationships/no relationships, and get a “high” at work when they get to use their powers. Most of these people- look forward to coming into work. Sheesh. They all need help.
As someone who lives in a free country in Europe, I can’t imagine what it must be like to constantly live under this kind of corruption and tyranny. I hope one day Americans can become actually free, rather than the make believe freedom they live in now.
I use to support the police. However, when I realized that videos like these are uploaded more then once per day and lawsuits are filed daily as well. These lawsuits, if ending up in the victims favor, will not effect the officer one bit as it then becomes the responsibility of the tax payer.
Qualified immunity has got to go, until then law enforcement officials will feel like they can do anything they want.
In addition, being able to plunder people’s treasures during a highway robbery committed by police who simply only need say “this person, whom I know nothing about, shouldn’t have this much money or valuables, they are drug dealers even though I have zero evidence of this” has also gotta go and it’s embarrassing that I even have to say this.
This is insane to me. How does these officers get away with that stuff? I wonder what happened before cameras? Bc if they’d do this on camera? I’d hate to see what they’d do off camera
It’s amazing how many officers seem to take the sound of a car horn personally even when they block the road or drive recklessly. Road rage is not exactly what you want in a police interaction.
This state trooper has zero integrity and all his cases should be reexamined. Willing to blatantly lie on camera and to fellow officers is sickening.
The way the officer opened his door just because he cussed is an immediate sign that he has anger issues and a fragile ego. These people CANNOT be in law enforcement. This is the problem
The audacity he has to say “calm down and act like a human being”. Wow. Just wow. After he pounced on that man like he was some wild animal and wrestled him out of his car to put him in handcuffs and then throw him in the backseat.
Records have revealed that Republican Representative Jim Banks has been conducting his own version of a January 6th investigation, in spite of the fact that he was kicked off the Select Committee before it even began. Banks has been writing to government agencies and even tech companies, claiming to be a “ranking member” who needs access to the same materials these groups handed over to the Select Committee. This seems like a lot of fraud, as Farron Cousins explains.
Link – https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-rep-jim-banks-booted-off-jan-6-panel-is-running-a-shadow-probe
Don’t forget to like, comment, and share! And subscribe to stay connected!
Connect with Farron on Twitter: https://twitter.com/farronbalanced
*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.
A member of the house of representatives on the Republican side has apparently been conducting his own little shadow investigation into the Capitol riots and this individual Republican representative Jim banks, who actually was chosen by house minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, to serve on the January six select committee before Nancy Pelosi said, absolutely not. You cannot have him on there. And of course you can’t have Jim Jordan, neither because they think the whole thing is stupid. And that’s what sparked McCarthy to be like, well fine. I’ll take all my Republicans and leave, but Mr. Banks didn’t think the job was done yet. So what Mr. Banks has been doing is sending letters to all of the governmental groups and to Facebook, at least demanding access to the same materials that these groups have turned over to the January 6th select committee. That includes the department of justice, the department of defense and the department of Homeland security.
And of course, several social media companies of which we know for a fact, he is sent a letter to Facebook. Now here’s the problem in these letters, which the daily beast has seen. He refers to himself as ranking member. Now ranking member implies that he is a ranking member on the January 6th select committee, because that’s how you become a ranking member. If you’re not on the committee, you’re not a ranking member. You just a member of the house of representatives, not of the committee. So it would seem based on what I’m reading here in daily beasts, that Mr. Banks is the frauding. These people.
Now he claims he is totally not defrauding anybody because you know his as member of the house representatives, the Republicans are entitled to the same playmate information, except you’re not, you’re not, you’re absolutely not. If you’re on the committee, you get your hands on this. That doesn’t mean that literally just anybody else in the house of representatives can say all sweet. Hey, give me a copy of that. That’s not how this works. 100% not how this works. If it were, you would have all of the other Republicans in the house as well, requesting the same information. And most importantly, what the hell do you think you’re going to do with it? You’re not on the committee. You’re not actually investigating anybody. So the best I can assume here is that you want to get your hands on this information, strategize with all your other little Republicans who are also not on the committee, then take your case to the American press and try to disparage the information before the Democrats.
And couple of Republicans on that committee have a chance to fully explain it during the committee hearings. That is what I think is happening right now. But if Mr. Banks is in fact, as the reports say he is, and they’ve seen the documents, if he is referring to himself as ranking member, that should be grounds for expulsion. And I know, oh, they could censure him. Oh, we could do this. We could do that. Then none of that matters. He needs to be expelled from Congress. That is an abuse of power. It is fraud, and he should be kicked out plain and simple. But of course that is also never going to happen because you’re not going to get enough Republicans to go with. The Democrats got to have two thirds in order to kick somebody out. So of course, yeah, that’s not going to happen, but we need to know that you tried folks. That’s the point of this. Sometimes knowing that you put effort into this is enough, but what Mr. Banks is doing here is deeply sinister. It needs to be stopped. And the only way to do that is for Democrats to get out ahead of the issue, make their case to the press, expose all of this horrendous behavior by Mr. Banks, get the public on your side and discredit him before he tries to twist the information and discredit you.
Medium-size reform creates the conditions for bigger things.
Recent state elections — the Democratic landslide in Virginia, followed by Democratic gubernatorial victories in Kentucky and Louisiana — have been bad news for Donald Trump.
Among other things, the election results vindicate polls indicating that Trump is historically unpopular. All of these races were in part referendums on Trump, who put a lot of effort into backing his preferred candidates. And in each case voters gave him a clear thumbs down.
Beyond offering a verdict on Trump, however, I’d argue that the state elections offered some guidance on an issue that has divided Democrats, namely health care. What the results suggested to me was the virtue of medium-size reform: incremental enough to have a good chance of being enacted, big enough to provide tangible benefits that voters don’t want taken away.
Remember, there was a third governor’s race, in Mississippi, in which the G.O.P. held on. True, Mississippi is a very red state, which Trump won by 18 points in 2016. But Louisiana and Kentucky are or were, if anything, even redder, with Trump margins of 20 and 30 points respectively. So what made the difference?
Personalities surely mattered. Louisiana’s re-elected John Bel Edwards was widely liked, Kentucky’s defeated Matt Bevin widely disliked. Demography probably also mattered. Urban and especially suburban voters have turned hard against Trump, but rural voters haven’t, at least so far — and Mississippi is one of the few states left with a majority-rural population.
But there’s another difference among the three states. Kentucky and Louisiana took advantage of the Affordable Care Act to expand Medicaid, leading to steep drops in the number of uninsured residents; Mississippi hasn’t. This meant that voting Democratic in Kentucky and Louisiana meant voting to preserve past policy success, while the same vote in Mississippi was at best about hope for future reform — a much less powerful motivator.
Back in 2010, as Obamacare was about to squeak through Congress, Nancy Pelosi famously declared, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” This line was willfully misrepresented by Republicans (and some reporters who should have known better) as an admission that there was something underhanded about the way the legislation was enacted. What she meant, however, was that voters wouldn’t fully appreciate the A.C.A. until they experienced its benefits in real life.
It took years to get there, but in the end Pelosi was proved right, as health care became a winning issue for Democrats. In the 2018 midterms and in subsequent state elections, voters punished politicians whom they suspected of wanting to undermine key achievements like protection for pre-existing conditions and, yes, Medicaid expansion.
And this political reality has arguably set the stage for further action. At this point, as far as I can tell, all of the contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination are calling for a significant expansion of the government’s role in health care, although they differ about how far and how fast to go.
Which brings me to the latest development in intra-Democratic policy disputes: Elizabeth Warren’s proposal for a two-step approach to health reform. Her idea is to start with actions — some requiring no legislation at all, others requiring only a simple Senate majority — that would greatly expand health insurance coverage. These actions would, if successful, deliver tangible benefits to millions.
They would not, however, amount to the full Bernie, eliminating private insurance and going full single-payer. Warren still says that this is her eventual intention, and has laid out a plan to pay for such a system. But any legislative push would wait three years, giving time for voters to see the benefits of the initial changes.
Sanders supporters are, predictably, crying betrayal. For them it’s all or nothing: a commitment to single-payer has to be in the legislation from Day 1.
The trouble with such demands, aside from the strong probability that proposing elimination of private insurance would be a liability in the general election, is that such legislation would almost certainly fail to pass even a Democratic Senate. So all or nothing would, in practice, mean nothing.
But is Warren giving up on Medicare for All? After all, what she’s offering isn’t really a transition plan in the usual sense, since there’s no guarantee that Step 2 would ever happen.
The lesson I take from the politics of Obamacare, however, is that successful health reform, even if incomplete, creates the preconditions for further reform. What looks impossible now might look very different once tens of millions of additional people have actual experience with expanded Medicare, and can compare it with private insurance.
Although I’ve long argued against making Medicare for All a purity test, there is a good case for eventually going single-payer. But the only way that’s going to happen is via something like Warren’s approach: initial reforms that deliver concrete benefits, and maybe provide a steppingstone to something even bigger.
The administration said it needed citizenship data to protect voting rights. New documents tell another story.
A trove of documents brought to the attention of the Supreme Court on Thursday makes it hard to see the Trump administration’s efforts to include a citizenship question on the 2020 census as anything but a partisan power grab.
The court will decide before the end of June whether Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary, was justified under federal law in adding the citizenship question — a move that would nearly certainly lead to a serious undercounts of Hispanics and in immigrant-rich communities. During a hearing on the case in April, it appeared that a majority of the justices was prepared to allow the administration to include the question.
But the explosive new evidence disclosed by the plaintiffs in the case ought to give the justices pause about the ruling they’re about to issue. This is one of the most consequential cases before the court this term. The decision on it will have far-reaching effects on the distribution of political power and federal funding across the country for the next decade and beyond.
According to the plaintiffs who brought the New York challenge to the citizenship question, Mark Neuman, a key adviser to Mr. Ross on census issues, and John Gore, a Justice Department official who oversees voting rights enforcement, gave false or misleading testimony during the course of the litigation about why the Trump administration was so intent on including a citizenship query in the decennial count.
The files show that he wrote to President Trump’s transition team to tack the question onto the census and helped to write a draft Justice Department letter claiming that the question was needed to enforce the 1965 Voting Rights Act. That was the pretext the administration later used to justify its decision to include it — and which Judge Furman rejected.
Judge Jesse Furman of Federal District Court, the first of three judges to strike down the citizenship question, has asked the Justice Department to respond to the charges and has scheduled a hearing for next week.
Lawyers challenging the citizenship question told Judge Furman on Thursday that, according to a 2015 study written by Mr. Hofeller, adding a citizenship question would create “a structural electoral advantage” that would benefit Republicans and non-Hispanic whites. The documents were unearthed last year by Mr. Hofeller’s estranged daughter, who found them among his effects on four external hard drives and 18 thumb drives.
The files show that he wrote to President Trump’s transition team to tack the question onto the census and helped to write a draft Justice Department letter claiming that the question was needed to enforce the 1965 Voting Rights Act. That was the pretext the administration later used to justify its decision to include it — and which Judge Furman rejected.
Mr. Neuman admitted in a deposition last year that Mr. Hofeller was the first person to suggest the addition of the citizenship question. The plaintiffs accuse Mr. Neuman and Mr. Gore of providing false testimony in their explanations for this whole charade.
“The new evidence demonstrates a direct through-line from Mr. Hofeller’s conclusion that adding a citizenship question would advantage Republican and non-Hispanic whites” to the rationale advanced by the Justice Department, the lawyers wrote.
In a civil rights case, this would be powerful evidence that the Trump administration took the action for the express purpose of disadvantaging minorities. This, however, is a case dealing with administrative rules, which require officials to act in good faith and offer legitimate reasons for advancing a particular policy goal.
An accurate and fair count of everyone in America isn’t just any policy goal. There’s much at stake with the 2020 census — from the future of the next redistricting cycle to how billions of dollars in federal funding will be allocated. The Supreme Court should see this new evidence for what it seems to reveal: A blatant attempt to rig a constitutional mandate.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) barked at female sex-crime victims, “Grow up!” He called Christine Blasey Ford a “pleasing” witness. He shooed women away with a flick of his wrist. Hatch also posted “an uncorroborated account from a Utah man questioning the legitimacy and sexual preferences” of Julie Swetnick, one of Brett M. Kavanaugh’s accusers. The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board raked him over the coals:
The despicable attack launched by Sen. Orrin Hatch and the Senate Judiciary Committee — more precisely, the Republicans on that committee — on one of the women who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault is a textbook example of why more victims do not come forward.
Worse, it betrays a positively medieval attitude toward all women as sex objects who cannot be believed or taken seriously.
Not a single Republican spoke up to criticize him. One would think someone would point out that he brought dishonor on himself, his party and the Senate. But clearly Republicans take no umbrage at such conduct.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) attempted to excuse the lack of a single Republican woman — ever — on the Judiciary Committee. “It’s a lot of work — maybe they don’t want to do it.”
Kavanaugh snapped and sneered at female senators on the Judiciary Committee. Republicans didn’t bat an eye or hold it against him. He was just mad, you see.
President Trump repeated the calumny that if the attack was “as bad” as Ford said she’d have gone to the police. He declared it was a “scary time” for young men. He openly mocked Ford at a rally to gin up his base’s anger. Republican apologists said he was just explaining the facts. He actually misrepresented her testimony, falsely claiming she couldn’t recall many facts — the neighborhood of the house where she was attacked.
William Saletan called out Trump and his defenders: “It’s true that Ford can’t recall important details about place and time. It’s true that she can’t recall how she got to the house or how she left. It’s true that every accused person is entitled to a presumption of innocence. But Trump’s portrayal of Ford’s testimony wasn’t true. It was a pack of lies. And people who defend it, like Lindsey Graham, are liars too.”
His demonization of the news media won’t fall on deaf ears... “Hey Bret, what do you think? Do you think the pen is mightier than the sword, or that the AR is mightier than the pen?”.. Perhaps the reason Trump voters are so frequently the subject of caricature,” I wrote, “is that they so frequently conform to type.”.. Which brings me to the July 20 meeting between Trump and two senior leaders of The Times, publisher A.G. Sulzberger and editorial page editor James Bennet... he warned the president that “his language was not just divisive but increasingly dangerous,” and that characterizations of the news media as “the enemy of the people” are “contributing to a rise in threats against journalists and will lead to violence.”.. Sulzberger’s warning had no effect... By now, it almost passes without comment that the president of the United States not only violates the ground rules of his own meetings with the press, but also misrepresents the substance of the conversation... in a follow-on tweet, that the media were “very unpatriotic” for revealing “internal deliberations of our government” that could put people’s lives at risk. That’s almost funny considering that no media organ has revealed more such deliberations, with less regard for consequences, than his beloved WikiLeaks.
.. What can’t be ignored is presidential behavior that might best be described as incitement. Maybe Trump supposes that the worst he’s doing is inciting the people who come to his rallies to give reporters like CNN’s Jim Acosta the finger. And maybe he thinks that most journalists, with their relentless hostility to his personality and policies, richly deserve public scorn.
Yet for every 1,000 or so Trump supporters whose contempt for the press rises only as far as their middle fingers, a few will be people like my caller. Of that few, how many are ready to take the next fatal step? In the age of the active shooter, the number isn’t zero.
.. Should that happen — when that happens — and journalists are dead because some nut thinks he’s doing the president’s bidding against the fifth column that is the media, what will Trump’s supporters say?
.. neither is he the child who played with a loaded gun and knew not what he did.
.. Donald Trump’s more sophisticated defenders have long since mastered the art of pretending that the only thing that matters with his presidency is what it does, not what he says. But not all of the president’s defenders are quite as sophisticated. Some of them didn’t get the memo about taking Trump seriously but not literally. A few hear the phrase “enemy of the people” and are prepared to take the words to their logical conclusion.
.. We are approaching a day when blood on the newsroom floor will be blood on the president’s hands.
Comment:Mocks Bernie for his hair.Mocks Maxine for a low IQAttacks the media for “Fake news”.Another perfect Projection score.
He’s long-boasted of how his business acumen makes him fit for president. But, Kurt Eichenwald delves into the history of his deals and finds a catalogue of calamitous ventures
The year was 1993, and his target was Native Americans, particularly those running casinos who, Trump was telling a congressional hearing, were sucking up to criminals.
Trump, who at the time was a major casino operator, appeared before a panel on Native American gaming with a prepared statement that was level-headed and raised regulatory concerns in a mature way. But, in his opening words, Trump announced that his written speech was boring, so he went off-script, even questioning the heritage of some Native American casino operators, saying they “don’t look like Indians” and launching into a tirade about “rampant” criminal activities on reservations.
.. His words were, as is so often the case, incendiary. Lawmakers, latching onto his claim to know more than law enforcement about ongoing criminal activity at Native American casinos, challenged Trump to bring his information to the FBI. One attacked Trump’s argument as the most “irresponsible testimony” he had ever heard.
.. For opponents of Trump’s presidential run, this contretemps about Native Americans might seem like a distant but familiar echo of the racism charges that have dogged his campaign, including his repeated taunting of Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas” because she claims native ancestry.
.. Trump, through his offensive tantrum, was throwing away financial opportunities, yet another reminder that, for all his boasting of his acumen and flaunting of his wealth, the self-proclaimed billionaire has often been a lousy businessman.
.. As Trump was denigrating Native Americans before Congress, other casino magnates were striking management agreements with them.
.. in his purposeless, false and inflammatory statements before Congress, Trump alienated politicians from around the country, including some who had the power to influence construction contracts –problems that could have been avoided if he had simply read his prepared speech rather than ad-libbing.
.. Lost contracts, bankruptcies, defaults, deceptions and indifference to investors – Trump’s business career is a long, long list of such troubles
.. arrogance and recklessness of a businessman whose main talent is self-promotion... He is also pretty good at self-deception, and plain old deception... “I’m just telling you, you wouldn’t say that you’re failing,” he said in a 2007 deposition when asked to explain why he would give an upbeat assessment of his business even if it was in trouble. “If somebody said, ‘How you doing?’ You’re going to say you’re doing good.” Perhaps such dissembling is fine in polite cocktail party conversation, but in the business world it’s called lying... And while Trump is quick to boast that his purported billions prove his business acumen, his net worth is almost unknowable given the loose standards and numerous outright misrepresentations he has made over the years. In that 2007 deposition, Trump said he based estimates of his net worth at times on “psychology” and “my own feelings”. But those feelings are often wrong – in 2004, he presented unaudited financials to Deutsche Bank while seeking a loan, claiming he was worth $3.5bn. The bank concluded Trump was, to say the least, puffing; it put his net worth at $788m, records show.
.. He personally guaranteed $40m of the loan to his company, so Deutsche coughed up. He later defaulted on that commitment.
.. Trump’s many misrepresentations of his successes and his failures matter – a lot.
.. He has no voting record and presents few details about specific policies. Instead, he sells himself as qualified to run the country because he is a businessman who knows how to get things done, and his financial dealings are the only part of his background available to assess his competence to lead the country. And while Trump has had a few successes in business, most of his ventures have been disasters.
.. When he was ready for college, Trump wanted to be a movie producer, perhaps the first sign that he was far more interested in the glitz of business than the nuts and bolts.
.. He applied to the University of Southern California to pursue a film career, but when that didn’t work out, he attended Fordham University; two years later, he transferred to the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania and got a degree in economics.
.. Almost all of his best-known successes are attributable to family ties or money given to him by his father.
.. The son of wealthy developer Fred Trump, he went to work for his father’s real estate business immediately after graduating from Wharton and found some success by taking advantage of his father’s riches and close ties to the power brokers in the New York Democratic Party, particularly his decades-long friend Abe Beame, the former mayor of the city.
Even with those advantages, a few of Trump’s initial deals for his father were busts, based on the profits.
His first project was revitalising the Swifton Village apartment complex in Cleveland, which his father had purchased for $5.7m in 1962. After Trump finished his work, they sold the complex for $6.75m, which, while appearing to be a small return, was a loss; in constant dollars, the apartment buildings would have had to sell for $7.9m to have earned an actual profit. Still, Trump happily boasted about his supposed success with Swifton Village and about his surging personal wealth.
.. in 1970, he took another shot at joining the entertainment business by investing $70,000, to snag a co-producer’s credit for a Broadway comedy called Paris Is Out! Once again, Trump failed; the play bombed, closing after just 96 performances.
.. The next year, he moved to Manhattan from the outer boroughs, still largely dependent on Daddy. In 1972, Trump’s father brought him into a limited partnership that developed and owned a senior citizen apartment complex in East Orange, New Jersey.
Fred Trump owned 75 per cent, but two years later shrunk his ownership to 27 per cent by turning over the rest of his stake to two entities controlled by his son. Another two years passed, and then Fred Trump named him the beneficiary of a $1m trust that provided him with $1.3m in income (2015 dollars) over the next five years.
.. In 1978, he boosted his son’s fortunes again, hiring him as a consultant to help sell his ownership interest in a real estate partnership to the Grandcor Company and Port Electric Supply Corp. The deal was enormously lucrative for Donald Trump, particularly since it just fell into his lap thanks to his family. Under the deal, Grandcor agreed to pay him an additional $190,000, while Port Electric kicked in $228,500. The payments were made over several years, but the value in present-day dollars on the final sum he received is $10.4m.
.. Despite having no real success of his own, by the late 1970s, Trump was swaggering through Manhattan, gaining a reputation as a crass self-promoter. He hung out in the fancy nightspot Le Club, where he was chums with prominent New Yorkers like Roy Cohn, the one-time aide to Senator Joe McCarthy who was one of the city’s most feared and politically connected attorneys. Cohn became one of the developer’s lifelong mentors, encouraging the pugilistic personality that showed itself all the way back in second grade, when Trump punched his music teacher.
.. Soon Trump gained the public recognition he craved. Through a wholly owned corporation called Wembley Realty, Trump struck a partnership with a subsidiary of Hyatt Hotels. That partnership, Regency Lexington, purchased the struggling Commodore Hotel for redevelopment into the Grand Hyatt New York, a deal Trump crowed about when he announced he was running for president.He failed to mention that this deal was once again largely attributable to Daddy, who co-guaranteed with Hyatt a construction loan for $70m and arranged a credit line for his boy with Chase Manhattan Bank.
.. The credit line was a favour to the Trump family, which had brought huge profits to the bank; according to regulatory records, the revolving loan was set up without even requiring a written agreement. Topping off the freebies and special deals that flowed Trump’s way, the city tossed in a 40-year tax abatement. Trump’s “success” with the Hyatt was simply the result of money from his dad, his dad’s bank, Hyatt and the taxpayers of New York City.
.. Despite the outward signs of success, Trump’s personal finances were a disaster. In 1978, the year his father set up that sweet credit line at Chase, Donald’s tax returns showed personal losses of $406,386 – $1.5m in present-day dollars. Things grew worse in 1979, when he reported an income of negative $3.4m, $11.2m in constant dollars. All of this traced back to big losses in three real estate partnerships and interest he owed Chase. With Trump sucking wind and rapidly drawing down his line of credit, he turned again to Daddy, who in 1980 agreed to lend him $7.5m.
.. All of these names and numbers can grow confusing for voters with little exposure to the business world. So to sum it all up, Trump is rich because he was born rich – and without his father repeatedly bailing him out, he would have likely filed for personal bankruptcy before he was 35. As his personal finances were falling apart, Trump got a big idea for how to make money: casinos... At the time, Trump was deep into plans to turn Bonwit Teller’s flagship department store into Trump Tower – a transformation achieved with the help of Roy Cohn, who fought in the courts to win Trump a huge tax abatement. Still, Trump jumped on the casino idea and had a lawyer reach out to the owners to negotiate a lease deal... Trump wanted to build a 39-story, 612-room hotel and casino, but the banks refused to finance his adventure. So, instead, he struck a partnership with Harrah’s Entertainment in which the global gaming company and subsidiary of Holiday Inn Inc put up all the money in exchange for Trump developing the property. In 1984, Harrah’s at Trump Plaza opened, and Trump seethed. He had wanted his name to be the marquee brand, even though Harrah’s had an international reputation in casinos and he had none. He even delayed building a garage because his name was not being used prominently enough in the marketing.
..According to court papers, Harrah’s spent $9.3m promoting the Trump name, giving the New York developer a reputation in the casino business he’d never had before. And Harrah’s quickly learned the price – now, with Trump able to argue he knew casinos, financing opportunities that did not exist before opened up, and he was able to use Harrah’s promotion of him as a lever against the entertainment company. Soon after that first casino opened, Trump took advantage of his new credibility with financial backers interested in the gaming business to purchase the nearly completed Hilton Atlantic City Hotel for just $320m; he renamed it Trump Castle. The business plan was ludicrous: Trump had not only doubled down his bet on Atlantic City casinos but was now operating two businesses in direct competition with each other. When Trump Castle opened in 1985, Harrah’s decided to ditch Trump and sold its interest in their joint venture to him for $220m... Still, he wanted more in Atlantic City – specifically, the Taj Mahal, the largest casino complex ever, which Resorts International was building. This made the Casino Control Commission nervous because it could have meant that the financial security of Atlantic City would be riding on the back of one man.
.. his argument went, he was Donald Trump. He would contain costs, he said, because banks would be practically throwing money at him, and at prime rates. He would be on a solid financial foundation because the banks loved him so much, unlike lots of other companies and casinos that used below-investment-grade, high-interest junk bonds for their financing. “I’m talking about banking institutions, not these junk bonds, which are ridiculous,” he testified... But Trump’s braggadocio proved empty. No financial institution gave him anything. Instead, he financed the deal with $675m in junk bonds, agreeing to pay an astonishing 14 percent interest, about 50 percent more than he had projected.
That pushed Trump’s total debt for his three casinos to $1.2bn. For the renamed Trump Taj Mahal to break even, it would have to pull in as much as $1.3m a day in revenue, more than any casino ever.
Disaster hit fast. As had been predicted by some Wall Street analysts, Trump’s voracious appetite cannibalised his other casinos – it was as if Trump had tipped the Atlantic City boardwalk and slid all his customers at the Trump Castle and Trump Plaza down to the Taj. Revenues for the two smaller casinos plummeted a combined $58m that first year... Trump introduced the airline with his usual style – by insulting the competition. At an elegant event at Logan Airport in Boston, Trump took the stage and suggested that the other airline with a northeastern shuttle, Pan Am, flew unsafe planes. Pan Am didn’t have enough cash, he said, and so it couldn’t spend as much as the Trump Shuttle on maintenance. “I’m not criticising Pan Am,” Trump told the assembled crowd. “I’m just speaking facts.” But Trump offered no proof, and others in the airline industry seethed; talking about possible crashes was bad for everyone’s business.
.. He was spending $1m to update each of the planes, which were individually worth only $4m. With those changes, he boasted, he would increase the shuttle’s market share from 55 to 75 percent. But just like with casinos, Trump was in a business he knew nothing about.
.. Customers on a one-hour flight from Washington to New York didn’t want luxury; they wanted reliability and competitive prices. Trump Shuttle never turned a profit. But it didn’t have much of a chance; even as he was preening about his successes, Trump’s businesses were falling apart and would soon bring the shuttle crashing down... At 1:40pm on 10 October, 1989, the four-blade rotor and tail rotor broke off of a helicopter flying above the pine woodlands near Forked River, New Jersey. The craft plunged 2,800 feet to the ground, killing all five passengers. Among them were three of Trump’s top casino executives... With the best managers of his casinos dead, Trump for the first time took responsibility for running the day-to-day operations in Atlantic City. His mercurial and belligerent style made a quick impact – some top executives walked, unwilling to put up with his eccentricities, while Trump booted others. The casinos were struggling so badly that Trump was sweating whether a few big winners might pull him under... executives at the casino were humiliated, since Trump was signalling that he was frightened customers might win... By early 1990, as financial prospects at the casinos worsened, Trump began badmouthing the executives who had died, laying blame on them, although the cause of his problems was the precarious, debt-laden business structure he had built... By June 1990, Trump was on the verge of missing a $43m interest payment to the investors in the Taj’s junk bonds. Facing ruin, he met with his bankers, who had almost no recourse – they had been as reckless as Trump. By lending him billions – with loans for his real estate, his casinos, his airline and other businesses – they could fail if Trump went down. So the banks agreed to lend him tens of millions more in exchange for Trump temporarily ceding control over his multi billion-dollar empire and accepting a budget of $450,000 a month for personal expenditures. In August, New Jersey regulators prepared a report totaling Trump’s debt at $3.4bn, writing that “a complete financial collapse of the Trump Organisation was not out of the question.”.. By December, Trump was on the verge of missing an interest payment on the debt of Trump Castle, and there was no room left to manoeuvre with the banks this time. So, just as he had in the past, Trump turned to Dad for help, according to New Jersey state regulatory records. On December 17, 1990, Fred Trump handed a certified cheque for $3.35m payable to the Trump Castle to his attorney, Howard Snyder. Snyder travelled to the Castle and opened an account in the name of Fred Trump. The cheque was deposited into that account and a blackjack dealer paid out $3.35m to Snyder in gray $5,000 chips. Snyder put the chips in a small case and left; no gambling took place. The next day, a similar “loan” was made – except by wire transfer rather than by cheque – for an additional $150,000. This surreptitious, and unreported, loan allowed Donald Trump to make that interest payment... Trump’s casino empire was doomed. A little more than a year after the opening of the Taj, that casino was in bankruptcy court, and was soon followed there by the Plaza and the Castle. Under the reorganisation, Trump turned over half his interest in the businesses in exchange for lower rates of interest, as well as a deferral of payments and an agreement to wait at least five years before pursuing Trump for the personal guarantees he had made on some of the debt... In 2004, Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts – the new name for Trump’s casino holdings – filed for bankruptcy, and Trump was forced to relinquish his post as chief executive. The name of the company was then changed to Trump Entertainment Resorts; it filed for bankruptcy in 2009, four days after Trump resigned from the board... In his books and public statements, Trump holds up this bankruptcy as yet more proof of his business genius; after all, his logic goes, he climbed out of a hole so deep few others could have done it. He even brags now about how deep that hole was. Trump falsely claimed in two of his books that he owed $9.2bn, rather than the actual number, $3.4bn, making his recovery seem far more impressive... When challenged on the misrepresentation during a 2007 deposition, Trump blamed the error on Meredith McIver, a longtime employee who helped write that book. Trump testified that he recognised the mistake shortly after the first book mentioning it was published; he never explained why he allowed it to appear again in the paperback edition and even in his next book. McIver went on to garner some national recognition as a Trump scapegoat – nine years later, when Trump’s wife, Melania, delivered a speech at the Republican National Convention that was partially plagiarised from Michelle Obama, the campaign blamed McIver. But despite all this supposed sloppiness, Trump has never directed his trademark phrase “You’re fired!” at this loyal employee... In 2008, he defaulted on a $640m construction loan for Trump International Hotel & Tower in Chicago, and the primary lender, Deutsche Bank, sued him. Trump counter-sued, howling that the bank had damaged his reputation... Trump has also based huge projects on temporary business trends. For example, for a few years during the George W Bush administration, wealthy expatriates from around the Middle East flocked to Dubai. In response, Trump launched work on a 62-story luxury hotel and apartment complex on an artificial island shaped like a palm tree. But, as was predictable from the start, there were only so many rich people willing to travel to the United Arab Emirates, so the flood of wealthy foreigners into the country slowed. The Trump Organisation was forced to walk away from the project, flushing its investments in it.Beginning in 2006, Trump decided to take a new direction and basically cut back on building in favour of selling his name. This led to what might be called his nonsense deals, with Trump slapping his name on everything but the sidewalk, hoping people would buy products just because of his brand... Trump hosted a glitzy event in 2006 touting Trump Mortgage, then proclaimed he had nothing to do with managing the firm when it collapsed 18 months later. He tried again, rechristening the failed entity as Trump Financial. It also failed.That same year, he opened GoTrump.com, an online travel service that never amounted to more than a vanity site; the URL now sends searchers straight to the Trump campaign website... Also in 2006, Trump unveiled Trump Vodka, predicting that the T&T (Trump and Tonic) would become the most requested drink in America (he also marketed it to his friends in Russia, land of some of the world’s greatest vodkas); within a few years, the company closed because of poor sales... In 2007, Trump Steaks arrived. After two months of being primarily available for sale at Sharper Image, that endeavour ended; the head of Sharper Image said barely any steaks sold... Amusing as those fiascoes are for those of us who didn’t lose money on them, the most painful debacles to witness were many involving licensing agreements Trump sold to people in fields related to real estate. There is the now-infamous Trump University, where students who paid hefty fees were supposed to learn how to make fortunes in that industry by being trained by experts handpicked by Trump; many students have sued, saying the enterprise was a scam in which Trump allowed his name to be used but had nothing else to do with it, despite his claims to the contrary in the marketing for the “school”... Particularly damning was the testimony of former employee Ronald Schnackenberg, who recalled being chastised by Trump University officials for failing to push a near-destitute couple into paying $35,000 for classes by using their disability income and a home equity loan.Around the country, buyers were led to believe they were purchasing apartments in buildings overseen by Trump, although his only involvement in many cases was getting paid for the use of his brand... In 2010, lenders foreclosed on the $355m project. Even though Trump’s name was listed on the condominium’s website as the developer, he immediately distanced himself, saying he had only licensed his name... A similarly sordid tale unfolded for Trump Ocean Resort Baja Mexico, a 525-unit luxury vacation home complex that Trump proclaimed was going to be “very, very special”. His name and image were all over the property, and he even personally appeared in the marketing video discussing how investors would be “following” him if they bought into the building. Scores of buyers ponied up deposits in 2006, but by 2009 the project was still just a hole in the ground. That year, the developers notified condo buyers their $32m in deposits had been spent, no bank financing could be obtained, and they were walking away from the project. Scores of lawsuits claimed the buyers were deceived into believing Trump was the developer. Trump walked away from the deal, saying that if the condo buyers had any questions, they needed to contact the developer – and that wasn’t him, contrary to what the marketing material implied... The same story has played out again and again. In Fort Lauderdale, Florida, people who thought they were buying into a Trump property lost their deposits of at least $100,000, with Trump saying it was not his responsibility because he had only licensed his name.. Investors in another failed Floridian property, Trump Tower Tampa, put up millions in the project in 2005 believing the building was being constructed by him. Instead, they discovered it was all a sham in 2007, inadvertently from Trump, when he sued the builder for failing to pay his license fees. The investors lost their money, and finally got to hear Trump respond to allegations that he had defrauded them when they sued him. In a deposition, lawyers for the Tampa buyers asked him if he would be responsible for any shoddy construction; Trump responded that he had “no liability” because it was only a name-licensing deal. As for the investors, some of whom surrendered their life savings for what they thought was a chance to live in a Trump property, Trump said they at least dodged the collapse of the real estate market by not buying the apartments earlier.
“They were better off losing their deposit,” he said.
So said the man who now proclaims that Americans can trust him, that he cares only about their needs and their country, that he is on the side of the little guy.