http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/22/the-...nka-trump/

Saw some headlines on this attacking Ivanka, but figured it was overblown so I didn't read it. I didn't realize it was like something some on this board would post, just totally fake news. They claimed Ivanka got money from Arab governments for "her" women's entrepreneur fund, when the facts are she merely had the idea. The World Bank manages it. And they tried to compare that to Hillary's numerous bribes.

yea, some dipsh*ts on here were trying to equate what Ivanka did to the Clinton Foundation.

So no chance at all that these Muslim countries, that normally marginalize women, gave money to this fund to curry favor with Trump regardless of who actually manages the money?

(05-22-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no chance at all that these Muslim countries, that normally marginalize women, gave money to this fund to curry favor with Trump regardless of who actually manages the money?

none

(05-22-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no chance at all that these Muslim countries, that normally marginalize women, gave money to this fund to curry favor with Trump regardless of who actually manages the money?

Those muslim countries did purchase Chelsea a damned fine wedding dress though.

(05-22-2017 04:16 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no chance at all that these Muslim countries, that normally marginalize women, gave money to this fund to curry favor with Trump regardless of who actually manages the money?

Those muslim countries did purchase Chelsea a damned fine wedding dress though.

(05-22-2017 03:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  yea, some dipsh*ts on here were trying to equate what Ivanka did to the Clinton Foundation.

(05-22-2017 05:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 04:16 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no chance at all that these Muslim countries, that normally marginalize women, gave money to this fund to curry favor with Trump regardless of who actually manages the money?

Those muslim countries did purchase Chelsea a damned fine wedding dress though.

(05-22-2017 03:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  yea, some dipsh*ts on here were trying to equate what Ivanka did to the Clinton Foundation.

(05-22-2017 05:09 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 04:16 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no chance at all that these Muslim countries, that normally marginalize women, gave money to this fund to curry favor with Trump regardless of who actually manages the money?

Those muslim countries did purchase Chelsea a damned fine wedding dress though.

(05-22-2017 03:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  yea, some dipsh*ts on here were trying to equate what Ivanka did to the Clinton Foundation.

I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

(05-22-2017 06:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

Try reading my post. Tell then just **** off.

Seriously, you mention comprehension then post this blathering nothing to what I posted.

(05-22-2017 06:54 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 06:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

Try reading my post. Tell then just **** off.

Seriously, you mention comprehension then post this blathering nothing to what I posted.

You got a real strange fascination for Kasich going on there boy.

Maybe have a doctor look at that.

I know who Ivanka is..

(05-22-2017 06:54 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 06:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

Try reading my post. Tell then just **** off.

Seriously, you mention comprehension then post this blathering nothing to what I posted.

I understood your point. You are just seem too filled with TDS to use your mind and understand anyone else.

(05-22-2017 06:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

willful ignorance.

(05-22-2017 06:54 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 06:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

Try reading my post. Tell then just **** off.

Seriously, you mention comprehension then post this blathering nothing to what I posted.

Reading "mis-comprehension" must be contagious because I wondered the same thing bullet did about your statement. You appear to be the one with comprehension issues. Or maybe you just wish it wasn't so and you've created this alternate realty for yourself.

(05-23-2017 07:45 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 06:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

willful ignorance.

You should read my post. Go on. Read it. Now, did you find any of the drivel bullet wrote in it? Hum?

Respond to MY post if you like. Just don't twist it with a bunch of **** added that ain't there.

(05-23-2017 07:48 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 06:54 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 06:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  I suppose we can just wait till Trump is out of office and see if unlikely donors to a fund Ivanka promotes continue giving.

What seems to difficult for you to comprehend is that, unlike the Clinton Foundation, she gets no benefit and no control over the funds. Her kids aren't working for the World Bank. She isn't hiring the consultants who work with the group. She isn't directing who benefits.

I don't see why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

Try reading my post. Tell then just **** off.

Seriously, you mention comprehension then post this blathering nothing to what I posted.

Reading "mis-comprehension" must be contagious because I wondered the same thing bullet did about your statement. You appear to be the one with comprehension issues. Or maybe you just wish it wasn't so and you've created this alternate realty for yourself.

Never mind my above post. I see you done went and decided to go with what isn't in my post too. Oh well.

Sigh. It really is quite a simple, reasonable, level headed post. Shame so many want to leap off buildings and reply to phantoms.

(05-22-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no chance at all that these Muslim countries, that normally marginalize women, gave money to this fund to curry favor with Trump regardless of who actually manages the money?

Let's assume, for the moment, that they did to it to "curry favor"....

Regimes have been doing things to curry favor with powerful nations since the dawn of time. Sometimes it's money, sometimes it's fighting their little wars, sometimes it's endorsements ....

Are you going to go with the idea that none of the Obama worship overseas was done in order to curry favor with him?

The fact of the matter is that the best way the Saudi's saw to "curry favor" was to donate millions to a fund dedicated to help women which does not put a penny anywhere near the trumps.

This is unlike when they were currying favor with Hillary by putting money into the Clinton foundation....