They don’t say “consult with your attorney to see that you can …” but “consult with your attorney to see how you can …”. They’re implying that there are different ways to structure this and you need the expertise of your tax attorney to see how to do it.
I do agree that there’s some fakery involved, but not that they’re not expecting these guys to consult an attorney. Rather, that after consulting an attorney the vast majority of these people are going to find out that it’s not really practical to use their retirement money to fund real estate investments. So the fakery is - in keeping with the spirit of the entire course - in pretending that it’s easier to make a fortune in real estate than it actually is. But I don’t think they’re expecting people to just yank their retirement money out, as you suggest.
How laughable? Thousands of people get scammed every day by people on in the internet who can barely speak English. Trump U employed professional salesmen and armed them with glitzy locations, a famous figurehead, and sales techniques couched in solid psychology.
35k sounds like a lot (and it is), but it’s in reach for plenty of folks coming up on the end of their careers if you can convince them to pillage their retirement. It’s in reach for plenty of folks who have spent years building good credit if you can convince them to max out just a few credit cards. Remember, these guys didn’t care about results. All they wanted to do was make the sale, and they’d already profiled and targeted their “clients” based on income and savings potential.
I mean sure, you have to be a certain flavor of gullible to fall for this sort of thing, but is it really so shocking?
If you haven’t read the unsealed documents, I suggest you do so. It’s really compelling stuff.
To be clear, CNN Money breaks down the costs to attend Trump’s wealth seminar: [INDENT][INDENT]Trump University would “upsell” students in its initial free seminar to buy a $1,495 “one year apprenticeship” – which was effectively a three-day seminar, the Cohen suit asserts. And if they bought that, teachers would upsell them again to buy “mentorships” at a cost of $10,000 and up. The most expensive, the Gold Elite program, cost $35,000. [/INDENT][/INDENT]
[QUOTE=John Mace]
Is there anyone here who can honestly say they might give Trump thousands of dollars to take a class at his University? It’s laughable.
[/QUOTE]
Well, we are the smartest and the hippest…
Is there anybody here who would send poor Hampshire to a Donald Trump success seminar? One that was basically a headline attraction for a set of get rich quick schemes? Anybody here who would vote in the GOP primary for one of the Outsiders, for a President with no political background or proven inability? (A: Yes)
Sadly the answer might be, “Yeah, if our facilities were in old age decline.” Though plenty of the marks were in their 40s.
GOP SoS Colin Powell also had a private email account. This has been known for over a year.
I doubt whether this practice by either Secretary of State was a substantial threat to national security. There certainly isn’t any, you know, documented evidence for any non-retroactive security breeches.
What struck me about the deposition in the quoted link was how totally unprepared he was. His lawyers must’ve had a clue on the direction it would take and it seems like a reasonable person would’ve studied a list of the names of Trump U instructors
( for those that didn’t read the link, he is given a long list of names, one at a time, and asked if he knew the person and whether the person was a Trump U instructor, student, or neither) He didn’t get ONE name right - he didn’t even seem to make an effort- and blew off every single one with a remark about how that was a long time ago ). I’m pretty sure the list included some of the complainers, which makes it even stranger that he didn’t recognize one name.
He didn’t give a single responsive answer that I saw ( I admit that I didn’t read the whole thing ) and if he was in a courtroom he would’ve been skating close to contempt several times. His attitude towards the whole proceeding seemed to me to be arrogant and disrespectful. It’s scary to think that this guy might be the ultimate representative of our country.
Are you of the opinion that the only way Clinton communicated was through email? Do you think that she had no access to secure diplomatic cables?
[QUOTE=Ann Hedonia]
What struck me about the deposition in the quoted link was how totally unprepared he was. His lawyers must’ve had a clue on the direction it would take and it seems like a reasonable person would’ve studied a list of the names of Trump U instructors
( for those that didn’t read the link, he is given a long list of names, one at a time, and asked if he knew the person and whether the person was a Trump U instructor, student, or neither) He didn’t get ONE name right - he didn’t even seem to make an effort- and blew off every single one with a remark about how that was a long time ago ). I’m pretty sure the list included some of the complainers, which makes it even stranger that he didn’t recognize one name.
He didn’t give a single responsive answer that I saw ( I admit that I didn’t read the whole thing ) and if he was in a courtroom he would’ve been skating close to contempt several times. His attitude towards the whole proceeding seemed to me to be arrogant and disrespectful. It’s scary to think that this guy might be the ultimate representative of our country.
[/QUOTE]
If you accept the premise that Trump wasn’t involved with the selection of teachers, then the other side presumably has him dead to rights if he admits he doesn’t know who is a professor. But if he answers that he doesn’t remember (i.e. it’s been “too many years”) he has the plausible argument that, yes, he was involved with setting up the school. He just doesn’t recall the specific time and manner in which he did…notice how when he actually does give a definitive answer, they immediately go off the record (i.e. lawyer to Trump - “Don’t say it like that”)
[QUOTE=Depo, Page 19 of 129, line 19-21]
Q. Do you recognize any of them?
A. I don’t, no.
(Discussion off the record.)
[/QUOTE]
His answers may be sleazy as hell, but it’s a way to avoid admitting the extent (or lack thereof) of his involvement.
AP is reporting that Greg Abbott recieved a $35k donation a year after the then-TX Attorney General mysteriously dropped his departments $5.4 million impending lawsuit againsy Trump U.
Your link says “a few years later”. The Houston paper this morning says 3 years later. And it’s not that mysterious - Trump University agreed to quit operationg in Texas and they dropped the suit.
First, Trump said the judge was Mexican. Wrong. Now, the judge has a conflict because he’s of “Mexican heritage”.
But the Hispanics love Trump!
I thought the psychics and other frauds were masters of “heads I win, tails you lose.” Trump beats 'em all. The system is rigged against him, yet he wins.
It’s impossible for me to believe that people actually take Trump seriously. Yet the evidence is undeniable. They do take him seriously. I guess I’m just too openminded, and not racist enough to vote for him.
Please America. Don’t let Trump win the presidency. Please. I beg you.
What could have been a turning-point election ceased to have anything to do with issues, change, problems, solutions and progress about a month ago, and is now a single-item vote on whether America deserves to live or not.
