7
7
0
Anyone on earth who raised that kind of cash for veteran programs would be shouting it from the rafters as a major accomplishment. The benefactors would also be out in force telling the media how great it was to finally see support, and how they plan to see the donations spent. In his case, he can't even get his staff to say the same lie. Six million raised, falls to 4.5 without Trump giving his million. Then the 4.5 million turns to be only 800k actually given to "veteran orgs". Then when the heat is turned up some more, in the middle of the night a "vet org" gets a massive donation. The press is not your problem Donald. YOU and your lack of true leadership is. There would be no way your staff would come out with a number different that what you mentioned from your own mouth if it wasn't true what they're saying.
Trump launches all-out attack on the press
Posted from cnn.com
Election 2016
Donald Trump
Integrity
Office of the President (POTUS)
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
4
4
0
SFC (Join to see)
Lol another American getting duped. You might as well enroll in Trump University if you really think he donated that money when he said he did, BEFORE this article and the media forced him too
(1)
(0)
CPO Frank Coluccio
LTC (Join to see) - Prove that more than half didn't get their funds until AFTER the WAPO article, or are you just deflecting because your 'queen' hell-ary is three more steps closer to being indicted.
(0)
(0)
CPO Frank Coluccio
SFC (Join to see) - Prove he didn't, otherwise you are just make specious remarks to cover your idol sliding ever closer to indictment.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
CPO Frank Coluccio - how about Trump release copies of the checks and we can all see the dates together. He has the means to put the matter to rest, should he chose to. And he's a buffoon standing up there at the press conference claiming he didn't want any publicity for his giving to veterans when in fact he held a very public televised press conference bragging about the money he was giving and how little one million dollars was to him because he is so rich. That was in January. But the vet organization he gave the million to confirmed they just got it in May.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
Forget about how much he donates. What he does, if he becomes President, will be more important then any amount of money he donates. I watched the press conference and what I like about Trump is that he calls out the press when he sees bad reporting.
(4)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
Ok Chief....did you use some magical WO power to just pop in, and you're about to pop out? Not many 5's on here, and it's kinda rare to see one speak.
(0)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
Also Sir, how is it bad reporting when it's against him? If they're saying anything bad about anyone else, he's jumps on the bandwagon and chimes in. So he thinks one standard for him, and another for everyone else? It's important to note what he donated. Not so much the dollar value, but who says what. He clearly stated it was six million dollars raised. It was taken at face value and not questioned until folks checked in and only 800k was actually given out. Then Lewindowsaki comes and says 4.5 million and Donald didn't put his million in. Why would one of your most senior campaign staffers say something that goes against the grain. They should easily have a unified front, but they don't. If he cannot lead now, IF he was elected, he'd have a bunch of individuals out for their own agendas not really supporting him unless it benefits them.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
CW5 Andrew J. Foreman - Chief Warrant; It's good to see you posting. However, I have some difficulty in deciphering what Mr. Trump's definition of "bad reporting" is other than "stuff I don't like hearing".
(3)
(0)
SFC(P) John McLaughlin
He called an ABC reporter at his press conference today a scumbag for giving out wrong information.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
I don't agree. He has come out and explained this. He is vetting the organizations because they are so corrupt, most only use 10% of the money raised. There are three sides to every story... The truth is in the middle on this one...
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google