Type to search

Trump Jr. Interview Shut Down By Aide When Questioned About Trump Foundation

Campaign 2016 Elections Headlines National News Politics

Trump Jr. Interview Shut Down By Aide When Questioned About Trump Foundation

Share
privilege

Donald Trump Jr. was participating in an interview with a local Pennsylvania television station when an aide abruptly ended a line of questioning about Trump Sr. spending money from the Trump Foundation to buy a $20,000 portrait of himself.

The Washington Post ran a story yesterday stating that Trump bought a 6-foot-tall portrait of himself with charity money. A reporter from local news station WTAE asked Trump Jr. about it: “You’re a director of the Trump Foundation charity, did you sign off on charity money for a portrait?”

Trump Jr. managed to respond that he didn’t know “anything about that,” before an off-camera voice abruptly shuts down the questions.

“Alright, that’s it –, ” the voice says. “We have to move on to the next one.”

Photo via Screengrab/WTAE

Tags:

27 Comments

  1. Oddworld September 15, 2016

    That’s it? What was the point of this very short, very vague article. Forget it, I know the reason why, it’s about Trump! My advice to the author would be to not write anything until there is actually something substantive to write about. “Boo” to the author and the article.

    Reply
    1. FireBaron September 16, 2016

      So Teflon Donnie Junior interview being shut down because a reporter had the audacity to ask a member of the Board of Directors of the Donald J. Trump Foundation a question about some questionable spending is not substantive?

      Reply
      1. CrankyToo September 16, 2016

        I agreed with Oddworld. It’s not substantive. There’s nothing substantial in this piece. It’s an insinuatiion lacking substantiation.

        Look, no one despises these people and all they represent more than I. But, for all we know, the voice off-camera may belong to someone who just pooped his/her Pampers, or otherwise needs to get somewhere else for some other reason. I’ll allow that the optics are suspicious, but if we get into excoriating these dirtbags for reasons “optical”, then we’re guilty of the kind of behavior we despise them for. Let’s claim the moral high ground for ourselves.

        Reply
        1. chino49p September 16, 2016

          You didn’t pay attention to what was said. The voice said, alright,thats it, we have to move on to the next one. No insinuation there. They didn’t want him even trying to answer that serious question.

          Reply
          1. CrankyToo September 16, 2016

            Your first sentence is not supported by your second.

            Grab both ears, yank your head out and try again. I’m still listening…

            Reply
          2. chino49p September 16, 2016

            You have a reading comprehension problem. The voice did not say we have to leave now, we have to go somewhere else, or any of that crap. The question was to HARD for little drump so the voice said “alright. thats it, we have to move on to the NEXT ONE”. That seems to be too hard for your infantile brain to understand.

            Reply
          3. CrankyToo September 16, 2016

            Unlike you, I have excellent communicative skills. For example, if I’d written what you just did, I’d have expressed myself thusly:

            The voice did not say, “We have to leave now, we have to go somewhere else.”

            And I’d have written, “The question was too HARD…”

            If you’re going to criticize someone’s command of the language, you ought to make sure your own sh!t is tightly wrapped. (Here’s a hint: yours isn’t.)

            Now that I’ve corrected your grammar, let’s turn our attention to your context…

            I understand what the voice said. I read it in the article, and now twice more in your inane fuck!ing posts. And the fact remains, you are concluding from the off-camera remark something which isn’t supported in the article. Let me try to make it more simple for you: the off-camera comment does not NECESSARILY lead one to your conclusion. I’ve already allowed that it LOOKS that way, but optics are often unsupported by reality – as they are in this case. The author throws it out there for your to infer, but as Oddworld asserted in his/her original post, does not substantiate it with a FACT.

            Lastly, my brain may be pushing senility, but at 64 years, infantility is not a problem for me.

            Reply
          4. chino49p September 16, 2016

            You may be 64, but you are still a raving foul mouthed lunatic. Fly back to your cuckoo’s nest.

            Reply
          5. CrankyToo September 16, 2016

            Oh, now you’ve really hurt my feelings…

            Reply
          6. chino49p September 16, 2016

            Stop lying and take your meds.

            Reply
          7. CrankyToo September 16, 2016

            Ouch! Good one…

            Reply
          8. TZToronto September 26, 2016

            With any luck, tonight The Orange One will use the word you tried so lamely to hide, the one that begins with f and has a totally stupid ! in the middle. That’ll win him some converts, I’m sure. . . . I wonder if they have the debate on a 10-second delay so they can bleep his profanities.

            Reply
          9. Oddworld September 16, 2016

            Cranky Too read the article and got the same thing from it that I did, nothing! It could also be insinuated that the abrupt voice was simply trying to remind Jr. that they are pressed for time so they better move on. Obviously I know better but it could be spun any way a person wants and I’d rather see Trump beaten with facts because facts are absolutely undeniable.

            Reply
          10. chino49p September 16, 2016

            Facts don’t mean anything to drump or his evil spawn or his supporters. It was move on to the NEXT one. That response was to drump trying to respond to the LAST one, which was about him being in charge of the foundation and spending foundation money for an expensive painting of his daddy.

            Reply
          11. Oddworld September 16, 2016

            You’re right, facts don’t mean anything to Trump but neither does it seem to mean anything to anyone especially when it pertains to politics. If this story is true (I believe it is) then there must be a paper trail somewhere so why report it before it’s found. If we are going to beat Trump we will need more than speculations and rumors.

            Reply
          12. chino49p September 16, 2016

            There is a paper trail. It has already been exposed that foundation money was used (it think it was $20,000) to buy the portrait of drump. Investigators have just began to dive into the dark matter of the drump foundation which is being revealed as a slush fund for drump himself and to funnel charitable money to political cronies.

            Reply
          13. Oddworld September 16, 2016

            Excellent, now you’ll understand why I was so critical of the article. You provided me with far much more information than the author did and believe me, I do appreciate it.

            Reply
      2. Oddworld September 16, 2016

        I want to see Trump fail as much as you do but there is nothing differentiating this piece of poor journalism from the accusations leveled at Hillary. There was nothing Trump Jr. was going to say that would damage his daddy’s chances of being elected. The Washington Post may have ran the story but this is the same paper that has reported Hillary’s alleged transgressions as well so I’m taking it with a grain of salt. If I’m going to bash Trump, I want to do it with irrefutable facts, not rumors.

        Reply
  2. Jennifer336 September 15, 2016

    I usually gain around $6000-$8000 /month on the internet. So if you are eager to finish easy online tasks for 2-5 hrs each day from your home and gain valuable income for doing it… Test this task http://2.gp/G8zm

    dsfdgghf

    Reply
  3. PrecipitousDrop September 15, 2016

    Donald Jr., sits on the board of directors of the Trump Foundation?
    Perhaps a subpoena is in order — from New Your Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.
    Let’s find out who else oversees this slush fund. CarrotTop? Scott Baio?

    Reply
    1. FireBaron September 16, 2016

      Oh, it’s the triumvirate of Donald, Jr., Ivanka and Eric. From what the reports show, there is only one member of the executive board who is not a member of Trump’s immediate family.

      Reply
      1. Aaron_of_Portsmouth September 16, 2016

        Nepotism at its worst.

        Reply
      2. PrecipitousDrop September 16, 2016

        Hmmm. Only one member of the board isn’t a Trump, FireBaron?
        That would be who? David Hasselhoff? Julianne Hough? Some other Dancing With The Stars alum?

        Reply
  4. Mixa Klimment September 16, 2016

    Go see the new movie: ” Hillary”. It’s an eye-opener.
    The DNC is a CRIME FAMILY against America!

    Reply
    1. FireBaron September 16, 2016

      And I am willing to bet you believe everything you hear from Brietbart and company, too.

      Reply
    2. Aaron_of_Portsmouth September 16, 2016

      You shouldn’t waste you time watching fairy tales by Breitbart. Have you nothing better to do in a life than frittering away what little time you have remaining on this earthly plane?

      “…Seize thy chance, for it will come to thee no more”, Mixa.

      Reply
  5. Aaron_of_Portsmouth September 16, 2016

    Just the revelation that Trump Sr. would commission a $20,000.00 portrait of himself just adds to the legendary narcissism of Donald. What a portfolio he’ll have to present when entering the next world.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.