Speaking of which, Ryan is joining Sarah Palin, in Trump-mania. Both belong.
A different perspective, Gazette-wise. Trust Trudeau, truth-wise.
UPDATE: With Paul Ryan buying in, it is no longer an insurgency, it is establishment GOP obstructionism, packaged with weird hair. Maybe it was always that. An interesting Jon Stewart session at U.Chicago, with David Axelrod. And still, Gary Trudeau had his finger on a true pulse. Look in detail at Trump University, a sham from day one, where Trump admitted under oath that his thing - his Trump University - was closer to the Home Shopping Network than to the hotel business, or Wharton, a part of an actual and real University, with Wharton the business school from which Trump graduated:
[at p.92 of 129 pages] · · ·Q.· ·But you understand though, generally
12· speaking, one way of expressing dissatisfaction, say
13· with the stay at a hotel, is to request a refund?
14· · · ·A.· ·Yeah.
15· · · ·Q.· ·Okay.· And --
16· · · ·A.· ·And by the way, we did give refunds.
17· · · ·Q.· ·Well, do you know what the percentage was
18· of the refunds --
19· · · ·A.· ·No, I didn't.· I know we gave a lot of
20· refunds, yeah.
21· · · ·Q.· ·But did you know -- hold on, Mr. Trump.
22· Did you know it was over 25 percent?
23· · · ·A.· ·I didn't know what the percentage, but I
24· know we gave them.
25· · · · · · By the way, most people wouldn't give them.
[at p.93 of 129] I viewed that as a lot of times that
17· happens.· You go to the Home Shopping Network,
18· whatever it's called.· The refunds are unbelievable.
19· The people use the product, wear the product, and
20· then they send it back.
21· · · · · · The refunds are massive.· That's their
22· biggest problem is the refunds.
23· · · · · · So you know, when people were asking for
24· their money back, frankly -- and I would have these
25· good reports, but people would ask for their money
[... at p.94] Q.· ·We're here in one of your hotels right now,
·7· right?
·8· · · ·A.· ·Right.
·9· · · ·Q.· ·Would you be satisfied with the performance
10· of this hotel if it had a refund rate of 25 percent?
11· · · ·A.· ·But it's different, though.· It's
12· different.
13· · · ·Q.· ·Would you be satisfied?
14· · · ·A.· ·With Home Shopping Network, if you look,
15· their refunds are tremendous.· They're tremendous.
16· They buy a dress, and you're allowed to give it back.
17· I don't know what they call it.· They send it back.
18· They just send it back.· They give their money back.
19· I don't know if they use the dress, if they don't use
20· the dress.· Probably they do, but it's different.
21· · · · · · And with this one, they take the course,
22· and they'll ask for a refund.
[... at p.95] THE WITNESS:· It doesn't happen.· It
15· doesn't happen.· It's a different business.· It
16· doesn't happen.· With hotels it doesn't happen.
17· BY MR. FORGE:
18· · · ·Q.· ·So you would find that to be unacceptable?
19· · · ·A.· ·No.· People wouldn't come back to the
20· hotel.· They wouldn't ask for a refund because they
21· wouldn't get it.· You wouldn't give a refund on a
22· hotel.· But they won't come back.· And your number
23· would go way up.· Your vacancy number.
[at p.97] It's a different business.· Home Shopping
·3· Network has tremendous percentages of refunds, and
·4· yet it's a very successful enterprise.
·5· · · ·Q.· ·How about Wharton, do you think that the
·6· folks -- where you attended, do you think the folks
·7· at Wharton would be happy, would be satisfied if the
·8· students requested refunds at a 25 percent rate?
·9· · · ·A.· ·Well, again, it's a much different kind of
10· a thing.· It's a school where you go and you go.
11· · · · · · I mean, we had a lot of -- a lot of people
12· started complaining after they heard about the
13· lawsuit because they figured they can get their money
14· back.· That's a natural business instinct.
15· · · ·Q.· ·So Wharton and the hotel is over here, and
16· the Home Shopping Network --
17· · · ·A.· ·I think it's more Home Shopping Network.
18· It's a short-term situation.· You're not staying at
19· the school and living there and everything else.
The ending few pages of that item are Declaration under penalty of perjury from a Trump U. insider, dated 19 Sept. 2012 [starting top of p. 126 of 129 pages]:
I Corinne Sommer, hereby declare and state as follows:
1. I am a resident of New York, New York. If called as a witness, I could and
would competently testify as to all facts within my personal knowledge.
2. I worked for Trump University from May 2007 through October 2007. My title
was Manager of Events Department. I worked at Trump University’s headquarters located at
40 Wall Street, New York, New York, which is also where Trump Organization is located.
My job duties as Manager of the Events Department included the coordination of Trump
University live events, seminars and training.
3. The first Trump University live event took place in Florida in May of 2007, and
the second one took place in Los Angeles, California approximately one month later. Before
these two live events, my understanding is that Trump University “courses” were only offered
online. These two events had approximately 500 attendees each. After that, Trump University
held live seminars nearly every week in different areas of the country.
4. In my experience, the focus of Trump University was on making sales rather
than on providing quality educational services. Trump University would lure consumers into
the initial free course based upon the name and reputation of Donald Trump, and then once
they were there, Trump University personnel would try to up-sell consumers to the next course
using high-pressure sales tactics. Far from providing a “complete real estate education,” as
advertised, Trump University personnel only provided enough information to get students to
sign up for the next seminar or program. I recall instances in which consumers had paid for a
class to learn how to make money investing in real estate, ask for more information, and the
teacher would say, “if you want to get that, you have to buy the next package.” I don’t
remember who said it, but this is the general gist of things.
5. During the time that I was employed at Trump University, many of the
speakers, instructors, and mentors lacked real estate experience. Many of them did not even
own houses, and had no experience buying or selling real estate. For example, I recall that
David Stamper had no real estate experience; he was a jewelry salesman. However, after
[Case 3:10-cv-00940-GPC-WVG Document 462-2 Filed 03/03/16 Page 126 of 129]
working for Trump University for approximately a year on the sales team, he began speaking
as an instructor at seminars.
6. Trump University instructors and mentors were not hand-picked by Donald
Trump. I believe that in many instances Donald Trump had neither met the instructors or
mentors, nor did he know who they were. Instead, I recall that Trump University hired its
speakers and mentors through Mark Dove in New Hampshire who hired and trained a number
of real estate salespeople that he provided to Trump University. These people did not
necessarily have real estate experience, but they were skilled at high-pressure sales. I recall
that Trump University fired two of Mike Dove’s salespeople because they kept trying to get
Trump University students to invest in their own personal businesses.
7. I am aware that instructors were trained to, and witnessed them, asking students
during the $1,500 seminars to call their credit card companies and raise their credit limits two,
three or four times so that they would be able to invest in real estate. They would tell students
to max out their credit card because they would make their money back. They couldn’t raise
their limit and use it the same day.
8. While Trump University’s advertisements claimed it wanted to help consumers
make money in real estate, in fact, based upon my experience, I believe that Trump University
was only interested in selling every person the most expensive seminars they could possibly
buy on credit. I recall that some consumers had showed up who were homeless and could not
afford the seminars, yet I overheard Trump University representatives telling them, “it’s ok;
just max out your credit card.” I also witnessed representatives instructing consumers to
charge the course to multiple credit cards if they lacked a high enough limit on one credit card
to pay for the seminar. In fact, I recall representatives telling consumers to open up as many
credit cards as they could to increase their credit score.
9. Trump University used a standardized PowerPoint presentation and scripts for
all of its seminars, so that the seminars were standardized and substantially the same across the
country regardless of the particular speaker or location. A few speakers had their own, but
those who did not were given presentations.
[Case 3:10-cv-00940-GPC-WVG Document 462-2 Filed 03/03/16 Page 127 of 129]
10. Trump University did not provide one-year of real estate mentoring as promised
to the public. My understanding is that mentors were paid up front on commission before the
student completed their mentorship. Because of the pay structure, mentors had no incentive to
call consumers back or work with them once the consumer signed up and the mentor was paid.
The focus of the mentors seemed to be on getting new sales and new commissions. As a
result, I recall that mentors rarely returned phone calls from students or spent much time
talking with them. I received calls from many angry students telling me that they had been
trying to reach their mentor to no avail.
11. I do not believe that Trump University taught Donald Trump’s investing
“secrets.” Donald Trump came from a wealthy family and had resources at his disposal to
purchase real estate – that is the secret – one that the average consumer could not replicate.
12. At the seminars I attended, Trump University presenters pressured consumers
into purchasing the Elite program because they said that students would make their money
back in the first deal or two. They told students that even though $25,000 or $35,000 for the
Elite program sounded like a lot of money, “Don’t worry, you’ll get your money back right
away in your first deal, or first two deals.”
13. In the time that I worked for Trump University, I only met Donald Trump once.
He was not an active presence there; though he occasionally went over numbers with Michael
Sexton. Based upon my interaction with Donald Trump, he seemed only concerned with
Trump University’s revenues and profits.
14. In my experience, many students were dissatisfied with Trump University.
When consumers first signed up and took the course, they were hyped up due to the high-
drama atmospherics of the seminars, and they tended to give positive reviews as they were
asked for them. But, after purchasing the Elite Program, I saw many students who realized
they did not get what they were promised, and they were unable to get through to their mentor,
and then they became more and more dissatisfied over time.
[Case 3:10-cv-00940-GPC-WVG Document 462-2 Filed 03/03/16 Page 128 of 129]
[closing attestation and signature page]
[Case 3:10-cv-00940-GPC-WVG Document 462-2 Filed 03/03/16 Page 129 of 129]
Anyone stooping to such a no-class sucker born every minute con game such as Trump U. deserves scorn. The man's wealth was sufficient that he had no burning need for the additional money. But greed spoke, he listened.
Not that Clinton speeches for big money are excused by the other candidate's grotesque machinations.
But the combination of defective merchandise, each side, augers that we will have a campaign in the gutter between gutter dwellers; one a pompous narcissistic fraud and the other apparently bought property of Wall Street. (Pompous enough, herself. Narcissistic enough too.)
Three candidates remain. One genuine, two others. The genuine one is having his party turn its back on him; leader of that shunning mood and the consequent tilting of the playing field being Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
And superdelegates are a separate abuse. It will be an easy election to pass up, except for good down ticket options apart from the top of the ballot.
Yet, if the Ryan warming to Trump presages anything, it suggests a relatively greater cause to lean toward Clinton, warts and all, as Trump settles into mean spirited obstructionist Republican normalcy with the settling that way represented by Mr. Trump's edging day by day closer to Mr. Ryan from Wisconsin.
Mr. Ryan, who is like Mr. Bush from Florida. Or Mr. Cruz from Texas. Establishment grounding day by day displacing prior hints of a fresh air insurgency. This is no different. This is same old, same old. Trump showing the true colors of being straight out of the NYC business elite among whom Ms. Clinton sold speeches. That brand is not going to make anything "great again." Mediocrity does not make greatness.
FURTHER UPDATE: Do you believe any of this video, or should you do a bit of web searching to see what is half truth, or bluster? Does the video ring for you the Gary Trudeau cartoon bell from the start of this post? The web is full of Trump University content, so have at it, since your vote is being sought and your informed vote is an ideal.
FURTHER UPDATE: Is Time biased, Mexicans on staff, whatever Trump would say?
FURTHER UPDATE: To highlight a conundrum this election cycle [Bernie IS still present] AP, here, an interesting item but early on stating:
The strategies that Donald Trump's now-defunct educational company used to woo customers have plenty of echoes of the presumptive Republican nominee's current pitch to voters, based on newly disclosed court documents about Trump University. Hillary Clinton leapt on the parallels Wednesday, using them to cast Trump as a "fraud" who peddles false promises to Americans but cares only about his personal gain.
"He is trying to scam America the way he scammed all those people at Trump U," Clinton said during a campaign stop in Newark, New Jersey. "It's important that we recognize what he has done because that's usually a pretty good indicator of what he will do."
Bernie can say such things, but, the Clintons? Believing it from them would require a selective willing suspension of disbelief. They took the money. Each did, even daughter Chelsea. Speeches in a series with each speech pulling in more cash than Crabgrass readers get for a year's labor. Does Clinton speechifying suggest much besides one who "cares only about personal gain?" If we recognize what the Clintons have done, taking the money, can one credibly say it is not "usually a pretty good indicator of what they will do?"
Each, Trump, the Clintons, was moved by greed and with free money on the table, look at what each did.
Honorable people?
That's your call. All that Berns me greatly.
FURTHER UPDATE: Add Abigale Whelan to the Trudeau cartoon's shoe-fits wear-it list. She has no empathy. She has no excuse. Whelan and Limmer are poking sticks into hornets nests with the apparent sole purpose of getting the hornets stinging mad but with no chance in hell of getting their way. A sad excuse for being a legislator. Roads and bridges and budgets and bonding, lady. Not screwing around with others unncessarily and divisively, for political hay-making. It is low. It is Limmer-like.