they were separated at Birth!

you all might have done better in '08,if you had elected this Guy!

Donald Trump reportedly paid actors $50 to cheer for him at his 2016 announcement

Real-estate mogul Donald Trump is being accused of hiring actors to cheer for him at his 2016 presidential-campaign announcement in New York City on Tuesday.

The allegations first surfaced in a post by anti-Trump activist and liberal blogger Angelo Carusone that was published on Medium shortly after Trump's event.

On Wednesday, The Hollywood Reporter said it obtained an email that came from a casting company named Extra Mile offering actors $50 to attend the announcement and pose as Trump supporters.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the email was sent Friday.

"We are looking to cast people for the event to wear T-shirts and carry signs and help cheer him in support of his announcement," the email said. "We understand this is not a traditional 'background job,' but we believe acting comes in all forms and this is inclusive of that school of thought."

Business Insider called Extra Mile about the accusation. The woman who answered the phone hung up after we asked our question. Subsequent calls to the company reached an answering machine.

Trump and his campaign representative did not respond to requests for comment. In a statement to The Hollywood Reporter, Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski denied hiring actors and said he had never heard of Extra Mile Casting.

"Mr. Trump draws record crowds at almost every venue at which he is a featured speaker," Lewandowski said. "The crowds are large, often record-setting, and enthusiastic, often with standing ovations. Mr. Trump's message is, 'Make America great again.'"

Business Insider attended Trump's announcement and spoke with some of the people who were there cheering him on. They said they were not paid by the campaign.

As he began his speech, Trump remarked that there were "thousands" at the event. In our estimate the crowd was much smaller. A Trump representative, however, said the audience included many people in his headquarters, Trump Tower, who may not have been visible to the press in front of the podium.

"There were a lot of people probably that you couldn't see," the representative said.


o yea lpdon, best candidate BY FAR! has to pay people just to show up and clap for him.

http://www.businessinsider.com/paid-actors-at-donald-trump-announcement-2015-6

Donald Trump's team 'unequivocally' denies paying actors to cheer at his announcement

Hunter Walker Jun. 18, 2015, 5:56 PM

Business Insider attended Trump's announcement on Tuesday and spoke to a handful of supporters who said they were not paid to attend. At the event, Trump boasted that the crowd included "thousands" of people. In our estimate, it was far smaller.

Following the announcement, Trump hit the campaign trail with appearances in early primary states. Lewandowski said these events have attracted very large crowds.

"When Donald Trump goes somewhere, he gets the biggest crowds, he gets the largest ovations," Lewandowski said. "You can't deny that."

tomato posted >>>
of course they deny it, they probably didnt get paid till afterwards. and if they admittedly said they got paid for it, the donald prolly woulda stiffed em.

Oh, they most likely got paid...but it was probably in 20 of these >>>

I don't know the protocol.
But I gather, any candidate that stays in the race long enough has to disclose financial details.
I'm guessing if Trump isn't already out by then, that will bump him out.

I don't know the protocol.
But I gather, any candidate that stays in the race long enough has to disclose financial details.
I'm guessing if Trump isn't already out by then, that will bump him out.

LTme stated >>>
I don't know the protocol.
But I gather, any candidate that stays in the race long enough has to disclose financial details.
I'm guessing if Trump isn't already out by then, that will bump him out.

LTme asked >>>
I don't know the protocol.
But I gather, any candidate that stays in the race long enough has to disclose financial details.
I'm guessing if Trump isn't already out by then, that will bump him out.

Disclose Act
The Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections Act, commonly known as the DISCLOSE Act and also known as H.R. 5175 (S.3628-Senate), was a bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) on April 29, 2010 and in the U.S. Senate by Charles Schumer (D-New York) on July 21, 2010.

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit foreign influence in Federal elections, to prohibit government contractors from making expenditures with respect to such elections, and to establish additional disclosure requirements with respect to spending in such elections, and for other purposes.

After a cloture vote failed 59–39 on September 23, 2010, the bill was essentially defeated.

On March 29, 2012, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) introduced the "Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections Act of 2012" (S.3369).[2] It was referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.[3] This bill has been called the "DISCLOSE Act 2.0" by Democratic sponsors

Background
In response to the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, members of both chambers of Congress introduced the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act of 2010 (DISCLOSE Act).

The bill, as introduced, included banning U.S. corporations with 20 percent or more foreign ownership from influencing election outcomes through the use of campaign contributions; preventing Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) recipients from making political contributions; giving shareholders, organization members, and the general public access to information regarding corporate and interest group campaign expenditures; and requiring disclosure of membership information by organizations with more than 500,000 members that made political ads.

Finding out what monetary savings/ready cash {piggy bank} our elected officials have on hand to finance their own elections process vs how much their party affiliation will be out of pocket...is the necessary evil about the technique and methods that our lobbyist and foreign money have made a mockery of our election process! IMHO



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DISCLOSE_Act

mightymoe stated >>>

that makes sense, but it seems like the public bases a candidate on how much money they have.. maybe it's just me though...

We often joke that the GOP field is like a clown car, but with 28 candidates and growing, even the best clownery won’t fit all the mostly white men into one car.

Why would so many people who hate the government run for President? Don'��t they know that most don’t stand even a remote chance? Sure they do. Running for President these days has little to do with wanting to win the highest office in the United States – it’s about making money or getting publicity while pretending to run to serve the country.

When you or I donate to a presidential campaign, we have strict limits. We can donate $2,700 (as individuals) to a primary campaign and the same amount to a general election campaign. We can also donate up to $33,400 a year to a national party. For most people struggling to scrape by, this is a lot of money, but it’s still dwarfed by what can be donated to PACs (political action committees) and SuperPACs, much of which can be kept by the candidate, win or lose.

November 8, 2016 will be the last day anyone will run for the next presidential term, but that doesn’t mean candidates have to stop running, nor does it mean that money has to be returned to donors or even spent. A candidate can run in perpetuity and their PAC can stay alive just as long.

If they do decide to shut down their campaign and their PAC, there are somewhat strict limits on how the money can be spent. They can’t spend the money on personal use, but they can payoff campaign debts, transfer the money to another candidate, or give it to a political party.

That'��s just the tip of the iceberg. There is another level of PAC called a leadership PAC. As Open Secrets says about Leadership PACs:

'��A leadership PAC is a political action committee that can be established by current and former members of Congress as well as other prominent political figures. Leadership PACs are designed for two things: to make money and to make friends. In the rough and tumble political game, elected officials know that money and friends in high places are very important to winning elections and leadership positions.'��

Leadership PACs, like standard donations, have limits of $5,000 per year. The money can'��t go toward formal campaigns but they can pay for less direct things like travel, fundraising, polling, consulting, etc. They can also spend it just to support a lavish lifestyle for the candidate, the candidate’s family and whomever, while campaigning or even after.

On FOX News Sunday (FNS) heavyweight Republican Karl Rove said Trump is not a serious candidate.

I take Rove seriously.
But he said some fairly bizarre things about Trump, like that Trump says he'll negotiate with ISIL, etc.

I've not heard Trump say that.

I don't know the protocol.
But I gather, any candidate that stays in the race long enough has to disclose financial details.
I'm guessing if Trump isn't already out by then, that will bump him out.