Trump will not ask donors to repay nearly $50 mil in campaign loans

“I have absolutely no intention of paying myself back for the nearly $50 million I have loaned to the campaign,” - Donald J. Trump

Republicans have an answer for Mr. Trump, but, let's let George Will sumarize . . .

"Longtime conservative columnist George Will says he has left the Republican Party because of Donald Trump."

"This is not my party," he said during a Friday speech to the Federalist Society, according to the conservative-leaning outlet PJ Media.

source: George Will leaves GOP: 'This is not my party' - The Hill - Saturday, June 25, 2016

How many loyal Republicans see Trump as George Will does, a cheap charlatan buffoon claiming dictatorial rights as privilege of power. Then again, . . .

Trump's donation identities are going to be must reads of the summer. Who's buying Trump? Read all about it!

Reading Trump's quote above: poor guy.

Someone gypped Trump out of fifty million on a fraud Campaign designed for taking bums to the cleaners. Another "Trump University" schooling.

"all the little right wingers here"

Your condescension - as always - is much appreciated.

I am so confident in my belief that USS Trump is to be decommissioned before launch that I offer the following challenge to all the little right wingers here:

I bet Clinton beats the living crap out of Trump. I bet Clinton does better against Trump in both the popular vote, and the electoral college that Obama did when he clobbered McCain back in '08.

What do I bet? The only thing we have here on JT: our presence. At stakes is our ability to post here for six months. I win, you go away. You win, I go away. For six months. No sock puppets. No new handles.

Just go away.

'Cause I am that confident.

Are you? Or do you lack the courage of your convictions. Are you all talk or what?

This is what a sinking ship looks like. The USS Trump is going down, and it hasn't even gotten out of the docks,

More proof of it:

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) is now running against Trump.

If you don't know who he is, then you know nothing, John Snow. And you're rushing straight into an envelopment.

Kirk was among the first sitting senators to endorse Donald Trump. Then, facing a difficult re-election battle in deep blue Illinois, he walked that back quite a bit. And now, he is running a commercial lambasting The Donald, declaring him unfit to be commander-in-chief.

The ad does not solely focus on the evils of Trump. It also notes Kirk's efforts to try to persuade Senate Republicans to vote on SCOTUS nominee Merrick Garland. And it highlights Kirk's pro-choice record. In other words, the Senator appears to be running for re-election as a Democrat. It remains to be seen if Illinois voters will prefer a Republican in Democratic clothing, or an actual Democrat (Rep. Tammy Duckworth). At the moment, the polls suggest the latter, which may explain the dramatic change in strategy

Trump's son Eric's Fox News "We need need to put America first" interview is very interesting.

Politifact has been both praised and criticized by conservatives and liberals alike. That's a sign that they're doing their job right.

Which conservatives are we talking about here?

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2013/05/28/study-finds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans

http://www.newsmax.com/Reagan/PolitiFact-Fact-Checkers-Bias/2015/03/20/id/631565/

Poll? State? Jesus... Clearly you've never even visited the site (or read SuperLib's comment).

I did, I have to actually.

And you work in media... Those percentages aren't poll numbers... Politifact fact-checks statements made by politicians. Those percentages represent the number of statements that fall under each category of truthfulness.

They do, what their organization is about and what it stands for is not the issue. The real issue is: a big portion of their staff are liberally bias overwhelmingly. That's the problem that I have with them or are you saying, liberals are not to be questioned or scrutinized?

That's weird. $50M is a lot of money, so a few days ago, why was Trump even pleading for

"Trump campaign calls for $100K in donations by the end of the day"

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/284004-trump-campaign-wants-100000-in-donations-by-end-of-day

"Right now we're facing an emergency goal of $100,000 to help get our ads on the air," the email said. "We need your contribution by 11:59 P.M. Tonight."

If he's as rich as he says he is, and he says he's self-funding, and he needs the money ASAP - then $100k should be chump change for him and he shouldn't be asking donors to fund that in a day.

Mark G:

" Where does Hillary's money come from? How much of her personal wealth has she contributed? Has she ever given any free commencement speaches at any college or university? Na, just gimme, gimme, gimme! "

We do know that a large part of Clintons campaign is funded by Saudi Arabia, the Wahabi kingdom where women are beaten and homosexuals hanged. But hey, that is A-OK. Hillary is the champ for modernity, and we are too busy bashing Trump, LOL

Read my hair. No new money.

bassfunk,

So now you want to quote a site that predominately employs liberals?

Politifact has been both praised and criticized by conservatives and liberals alike. That's a sign that they're doing their job right.

How many people did they poll? Which state?

Poll? State? Jesus... Clearly you've never even visited the site (or read SuperLib's comment). And you work in media... Those percentages aren't poll numbers... Politifact fact-checks statements made by politicians. Those percentages represent the number of statements that fall under each category of truthfulness.

@CrazyJoe,

Oh yeah They are out to get him. Lib leadership. What do you expect? No investigation into Clinton though eh?

@MrBum,

You have to prove your accusation. We already know it to be true with Clinton. Still voting for her though eh? Ah...the liberal double standards.

And, in more news related to Trump's highly suspicious business practices, the Labor Department has just begun a wage theft investigation into underpayment of workers on Trump's redevelopment project at the Old Post Office on Pennsylvania Avenue in DC. What a sleaze.

Only about 9% of Trumps statements checked by politifact.com are rated as TRUE or MOSTLY TRUE. About 61% of the statements checked were marked as FALSE or PANTS ON FIRE.

So now you want to quote a site that predominately employs liberals? Well, that changes everything.

Clinton is at 51% TRUE or MOSTLY TRUE and 12% FALSE or PANTS ON FIRE, with the latter making up about 1%.

Uh-huh....

I know Trump fans don't really care, but others might find it interesting.

How many people did they poll? Which state? Not that we don't care, but Politifact came under fire a couple of times for being not so factual. Also, they don't have a lot of conservatives working there, so you tell me.....

Correct me if I'm wrong, but:

“I have absolutely no intention of paying myself back **for the nearly $50 million I have loaned to the campaign,”**

ain't the same as:

I have absolutely no intention of paying myself back the nearly $50 million I have loaned to the campaign

is it now merely interest-free?

pointofview,

I dont think hes worried about having less money.

Then why the announcement?

She`s basically proving her corruption by accepting those big donations from Wall Street and insurance companies.

Who do you think those donors Trump is courting now are? Grass roots? And the funds raised with the Republican Party? Double standards indeed... We left wingers complain about Clinton's dealings with special interests all the time. It's her biggest flaw, in my opinion.

Trump refuses to release his tax returns:

There’s nothing to learn from them

Then agrees to do so, but with a major caveat:

In interview I told @AP that my taxes are under routine audit and I would release my tax returns when audit is complete, not after election!

So when he says:

I have absolutely no intention of paying myself back for the nearly $50 million I have loaned to the campaign.

you absolutely need to take that with a huge grain of salt.

Clinton has more money because she needs more. She has to spend much more to get results. Trump is a businessman and spends smart. I dont think hes worried about having less money. She`s basically proving her corruption by accepting those big donations from Wall Street and insurance companies. All you left wingers going on about the 1% being to powerful sure have some double standards.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that a total of 101,000,000 people currently participate in at least one of the 15 food programs offered by the agency, at a cost of $114 billion in fiscal year 2012. That means the number of Americans receiving food assistance has surpassed the number of full-time private sector workers in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), there were 97,180,000 full-time private sector workers in 2012. The population of the U.S. is 316.2 million people, meaning nearly a third of Americans receive food aid from the government.

=There are more people on EBT than people in the private sector job market.

-Trump has already steamrolled Hillary and really doesn't need the money to win. If the Lib media continues the negative attack ads people will just turn away and vote anti-Hillary. TRUMP can win with only a dollar now. The corrupt side of the Republican Party wants the money, but the Trumpers don't really need it or will use their own money. Hardened Libs just don't see it, don't want to see it, or can't stand anti-corruption party unity. Lieing Hillary will go down just like Lieing Ted Cruz and his "pathetic alliance".

You're right. They do exploit and overuse unnecessarily at the cost of taxpayers. Ive seen it, prob done it too.

But I strongly feel that I contribute way-way more to society than the average lazy EBT collecters.

The ones with drugs in their system, so when they apply for a job, they fail the urine test. . . . then its bck to liquor store for more zig-zags and malt liquor-courtesy of EBT.

The contractors are providing legitimate goods and services

I have no doubt that many do. I'm talking about the fat. I know first hand there are many federal contractors and direct federal employees, even in the military, who take up space and provide dis-benefits to the taxpaying public because of all the 'free stuff' they are entitled to and overuse. Many of these federal contractors even bad-mouth the USA; just read JT posts.

In your 'they', are you including the wide range of military and other federal contractors, many of whom live more comfortable lives than their fellow citizens

The contractors are providing legitimate goods and services. Plus they pay taxes. Our men/women in uniform are (or should be) proudly serving their country.

The EBT people bad-mouth the USA, chain-smoke menthols and walk down to the corner liquor store daily. . . enjoying, loving "free stuff."

They LOVE "free stuff."

In your 'they', are you including the wide range of military and other federal contractors, many of whom live more comfortable lives than their fellow citizens - at their fellow citizen's taxpaying expense? I have to believe there is excessive fat in the military and in all federal agencies that needs to be trimmed. I'd love to see the trimmed fat have to work in the private sector. Remember, stuff that those individuals and their families who are funded by the feds get 'free' was paid for by taxpayers. Your fellow Republicans will tell you that.

Trump will not ask donors to repay nearly $50 mil in campaign loans

Neither will Hillary ask her voters to repay EBT. They LOVE "free stuff." No news here people, move along.

Only about 9% of Trumps statements checked by politifact.com are rated as TRUE or MOSTLY TRUE. About 61% of the statements checked were marked as FALSE or PANTS ON FIRE.

Clinton is at 51% TRUE or MOSTLY TRUE and 12% FALSE or PANTS ON FIRE, with the latter making up about 1%.

I know Trump fans don't really care, but others might find it interesting.

Where does Hillary's money come from? How much of her personal wealth has she contributed? Has she ever given any free commencement speaches at any college or university? Na, just gimme, gimme, gimme!

Northernlife

Ha! Too funny.

I read an article a few weeks back. I can't remember where or by who. EIther Salon, or the New Yorker. Anyway, the author made a persuasive point:

Donald flips and flops about many many things. Two things about him, however, have been pretty much down the line, going back decades. They are:

He's a nationalist A women's value is inextricably intertwined with her attractiveness -- as measured by traditional expectations.

I think as far as those two things goes, Trump is honest.

Trump has benefited from extensive media coverage but could be buried in attack ads if he lacks the funds to push his own message.

Trump's own message?

Wasn't that, "Let Trump Be Trump" got the last guy dumped?

Trump is running a scam. He knows it. We know it. The rich Republicans know it.

Only the rubes don't.

Suckers. Being played.

Trump said he would forgive, just like he said he would donate to the veterans' charities. Wake me when his check actually clears.

He can string donors along in limbo with his "will forgive" until July 20th, when the next FEC filing is scheduled. The middle of the convention.

Anybody fool enough to donate money to a "multi-billionaire" deserves to see their money go bye-bye, with those of us who know better laughing.

“I have absolutely no intention of paying myself back for the nearly $50 million I have loaned to the campaign,” the presumptive Republican nominee said in a statement.

So Trump takes a flyer, spends fifty million, sure he did, and then, out of "generosity," says he doesn't need to pay himself back for spending his own money on a failed Campaign to 'Make America Hate Again!'

Wow. Are those New York values? Or just Trump's?