Hunter Biden fathered son while

Post Reply New Topic

I notice you removed the "kids" part of this...Do you have anything to support THIS claim? After the difficulty in getting you to realize your claims about his stealing from a "kids cancer charity" were false (or, in common terms, lies), seeing a similar claim being made without evidence does give rise to the possibility it may hold an equal lack of factual basis\truth...

Not at all. I assumed everyone knew by now which cancer charity that Trump had stolen from. And with my dying breath, I will proclaim: TRUMP STOLE FROM A CHILDREN'S CANCER CHARITY!! !

Being that we have already confirmed (above) that he did not, in fact, steal from a "kids charity cancer", including through evidence you supplied, it would be objectively reasonable to assume your determination to continue with these false claims also reflects on the level of truth behind any other claims made against this person by yourself. Of course, I'd be happy to revise this opinion should factual evidence to support the claims be produced...Anonymous sources\claims, however, are of no evidentary value.

Were Trump family members banned from running charities in New York?

In June 2018, then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood sued the president, his son Eric and daughter, Ivanka, along with the Donald J. Trump Foundation charity. Underwood wrote that:

“For more than a decade, the Donald J. Trump Foundation has operated in persistent violation of state and federal law governing New York State charities. This pattern of illegal conduct by the Foundation and its board members includes improper and extensive political activity, repeated and willful self-dealing transactions, and failure to follow basic fiduciary obligations or to implement even elementary corporate formalities required by law.”

As a result, Underwood asked the New York State Supreme Court to “dissolve the Foundation for its persistently illegal conduct, enjoin its board members from future service as a director of any not-for-profit authorized by New York law, to obtain restitution and penalties, and to direct the Foundation to cooperate with the Attorney General in the lawful distribution of its remaining assets to qualified charitable entities.”

Specifically, the attorney general asked the court to bar the president from running any New York-based charities for 10 years, and the other directors for one year.

In December 2018, the attorney general and the defendants reached an agreement to dissolve the Trump Foundation and distribute its assets to a list of agreed charities. However, that agreement did not include Underwood’s request that President Trump, along with Eric and Ivanka, be barred from operating a New York-based non-profit organization in the future, for varying periods of time.

In January 2019, Letitia James took over as New York attorney general and continued the state’s case against the Trumps. On Nov. 7, the state’s Supreme Court published a final resolution of the case, one which did not bar either President Trump or his children Eric and Ivanka, from running charities in the state of New York.

However, President Trump was forced to agree to certain stipulations involving governance, leadership structure and record-keeping, in the event that he wishes to become a non-profit director or board member within the state, in future. As part of the final settlement, Eric and Ivanka Trump were required to undergo (and have already undergone) “an in-person, interactive board training session pertaining to charitable organizations and the fiduciary responsibilities of those organizations’ directors and officers.”

The final resolution of the case, published on Nov. 7, made it clear that the New York Supreme Court had not barred members of the Trump family from operating or running charities within the state, and so this element of the claim contained in Amato’s viral tweet was false. However, it should be emphasized that at the time Amato posted his tweet (Oct. 5), that final resolution had not yet been published, and it was released only after this fact check was published.

When Amato made his claims, a realistic possibility still existed that the court might indeed accept the Attorney General’s request to bar the family members outright from running charities in the state, for various time periods. On that basis, we originally issued a rating of “Mostly False.” However, the case was subsequently resolved without those outright bans being implemented, and therefore we have change the rating to “False.”

The fact that Trump and his litter are now forbidden to conduct any further charities in New York says different. Show me evidence that the Trump crime family can operate a charity in New York state.

The final resolution of the case, published on Nov. 7, made it clear that the New York Supreme Court had not barred members of the Trump family from operating or running charities within the state

I admittedly was depending on older information. That said, Trump and his litter were obviously up to no good in that they have to take training and provide records to prove that they're on the up and up.

And that is a legitimate reason for someone to dislike them. It's when additional details that aren't accurate are used that it becomes a potential problem.

It would be interesting to see the actual documents\judgement related to the case, to see "who did what" with regards to what happened in the charity(s)...Sometimes the accidental use of an incorrect word ("proceeds" rather than "profits" to go to a certain entity\target, for example) can be enough to cause issues, after all -Not saying this happened, not having the records to see, just indicating that it could be a factor in part.

Smear campaigns like this one have the hallmarks of being both ugly and desperate innuendo laced with mischievous intent:

https://arcdigital.media/revealed-new-d ... 8567ed4fff

Is there no bottom?

Unfortunately, far too many people believe the smears against Hunter Biden, and will in their flawed logic assume it reflects on his father.

When I was referring to something being true earlier in the thread, I was only referring to the claim the Hunter had a child with some women in Arkansas. Even CNN reported on it.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/27/politics/hunter-biden-paternity-case-child-support/index.html
https://www.businessinsider.com/hunter-biden-agrees-pay-child-support-mother-of-lovechild-roberts-2020-1

Hunter and Joe aren't the same person so it doesn't really factor into my opinion of Joe.

If personal smears against politicians are bad, and Donald Trump is a politician, where have the moderators been for the last year?