Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Trump's Shady Character...

Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth

Is it possible, even likely, that Donald J. Trump (Drumpf) has for many years had ties to the mob? Given his real estate empire, specifically his casinos in Vegas and New Jersey a plausible case can certainly be made he did/does. At least one publication is scratching the surface on this possibility.

While such activity should be enough to turn voters away from Trump in November it is unlikely the segment of the voting public already supporting Trump will even care.

Intense deep-dives into Donald Trump’s past have accelerated, and they should make for some very entertaining reading over the next few months. This weekend story from Politico examining Trump’s purported ties to the mob stretching back through most of his career reads like Mario Puzo channeling Jay McInerney.

After graduating in 1968 from the University of Pennsylvania, a rich young man from the outer boroughs of New York City sought his fortune on the island of Manhattan. Within a few years Donald J. Trump had made friends with the city’s most notorious fixer, lawyer Roy Cohn, who had become famous as lead counsel to Senator Joseph McCarthy. Among other things Cohn was now a mob consigliere, with clients including “Fat Tony” Salerno, boss of the Genovese crime family, the most powerful Mafia group in New York, and Paul Castellano, head of what was said to be the second largest family, the Gambinos.

If that doesn’t sound like the synopsis for a PEN/Hemingway Award winner for a debut novel, I don’t know what does.

The story, by journalist David Cay Johnston, who has been writing about Trump for over two decades, dives into a fascinating web of relationships between Trump and a cast of mobsters, criminals, union fixers, and mountebanks the mogul has allegedly leaned on to build his real estate empire in New York and Atlantic City since the 1970s. Though nothing in the story is likely to shock anyone who is familiar with Trump or has ever watched a Sidney Lumet movie.

There are likely a lot more stories out there, some hiding in plain sight, which the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party will roll out over the next few months. Hopefully, they build up an ugly enough picture of Trump as a shady cartoon character to do him some real damage and help him lose the general election. Because the idea of today’s version of a mob boss named “Fat Tony” wrangling an invite to, say, a White House state dinner is just too much to contemplate.

But as far as the specifics of this particular side of Trump’s business is concerned, one has to wonder if anyone outside of politics will really care. I wondered about this last fall when the first incarnations of the #NeverTrump movement were stirring, to wit: Why would anyone be surprised to learn that a guy who has owned casinos in Las Vegas and Atlantic City, to say nothing of his real-estate empire everywhere else, might have greased a few mob-connected palms along the way?

This is part of where the public character of “Donald Trump” that the mogul has played in movies, reality TV and the public eye for decades makes him, if not bulletproof, at least able to take some fire without suffering damage. Over the decades, our culture has come to romanticize mobsters – think Tony Soprano and the enduring love for the character despite the fact that he was a murderous sociopath, even if he had the occasional panic attack over it. Or Michael Corleone and his family. Or the good fellas of “Goodfellas.”


The irony that Trump has now tagged Hillary Clinton with the nickname “Crooked Hillary” cannot be overlooked. But there is a constituency to which Trump can appeal simply by, first, owning his own sleazy associations with shady characters and politicians – but I repeat myself – as he has built his business empire; and second, by reminding everyone of the accusations, so many of which are assumed to be true in the public mind despite any evidence to back them up, that have trailed the Clintons ever since they first became national figures. Look, I’m no different than the sleazy Clintons, he is telling the public. The difference is that I’m open and honest about it.

This tack will likely work with his hardcore fans, who probably wouldn’t abandon him even if he publicly denounced them all as suckers. But the majority of voters will, hopefully, see through him.

It has been said many times and by many people, but it deserves repeating again, Donald J. Trump must be stopped!.

Full story BELOW THE FOLD.


  1. Do you expect this to make a difference in the way people feel about Trump? This is no surprise and any construction project in New York would bring one in to contact with mob figures. Only an idiot like you would be surprised by this. Gee, did you know JFK slept with the mob bosses girlfriend? Did you know the Bush family did business with Hitler? Thanks for proving what an idiot you are and thanks for reading this comment.

    1. Do you expect this to make a difference in the way people feel about Trump?

      No, not with idiots like you.

      This is no surprise and any construction project in New York would bring one in to contact with mob figures. Only an idiot like you would be surprised by this.

      Did I say I was surprised lunkhead?

      Gee, did you know JFK slept with the mob bosses girlfriend?

      Yup lunkhead. The issue is not JFK however.

      Did you know the Bush family did business with Hitler?

      Yup lunkhead. The issue is not GWB.

      Unlike you however I am discussing principle and believe two wrongs a right does not make.

      Thanks for proving what an idiot you are and thanks for reading this comment.

      You're welcome lunkhead. It is always a pleasure to allow you to periodically expose yourself for the flaming lunkhead you are.

      Now, crawl back into the sewer hole you came out of and have a very stinky day.

    2. TOM submits many of these "you're such an idiot" comments to my blog, although they usually end with him referring to me using a homophobic slur. And he adds "thanks for reading" of course. FYI, you might want to check this out. Apparently there is another TOM (with the same Blogger ID number). But they aren't the same person.

    3. On average I receive 10-14 comments a week from the lunkhead in my comment box. 99% or more which never get posted. They also always end with "thanks for reading" with a homophobic slur tossed in.

      I know there are two TOMS, one which I'm aware had some legitimate health issues which affected his emotional stability. If that is the correct wording to use.

      The TOM above I suspect is a rightwing lunkhead whose sole purpose is to antagonize and put his/her/its idiocy on display.

      Frankly, there isn't enough time in my day to worry about "checking out" the lunk headedness of one who matters not. I simply throw him a be from time to time and proceed to LMAO.

    4. The TOM with "legitimate health issues which affected his emotional stability" is the exact same TOM who trolls your blog (as well as mine, Shaw's, and Octopus'). I was being sarcastic when I said there were 2. He could have created a new Blogger ID, given himself the same name, and it would be plausible that it was a different TOM. But he's using the same ID (and all Blogger ID numbers are unique). The link in my last comment goes to a thread on the Oracular Opinion where he is trying to claim that "you got the wrong Tom, pal".

    5. Yes, both Shaw and (O)CT(O)PUS alerted to that fact some time ago.

      I can only feel sorry for TOM. If pity would do any good I would pity him.But since it doesn't I just occasionally throw him a bone every once in awhile as it seems give him satisfaction judging by the momentary pause in his flow of ridiculous comments.

  2. While it is true you pretty much had to deal with the Family, directly or indirectly, to do construction business in NYC in those days, that doesn't mean you had to be "in" with them or up to no good yourself. Don't want to know something? Just don't ask.

    I don't think there's any scandal that will hurt Trump much, especially with his fans (see a prototypical supporter named Tom), unless they find something criminal. He knows his past was going to be looked into, and he's always been pretty clean, aside from the broads and the bombast. He doesn't drink or smoke either. And he's not even particularly religious. He's just clean that way. People like that usually avoid dangerous criminal activities.


    1. Simply put. I do not trust Donald Trump. Period.

      He has said enough, done enough, lied enough, and bullshitted enough for me to know he is untrustworthy as well as being an assh*le.

  3. His problems with the left go without saying. There is moreover, a distaste from
    bonafide conservatives (M. Malkin,
    C. Krauthammer, L. Kudlow, J. Goldberg, D. D'Sousa, M. Levin, et. al.
    who present valid disqualifications of a President Trump.

    1. Yes. If only more "conservatives" would bother to listen to, and contemplate the validity of, their concerns with a potential "President" Trump.

    2. Hillary's team must have people researching all of this. Trump is starting to show his hand (re the attacks he's going to use). Bill is a rapist and Hillary is an enabler of his raping. Also, Hillary is going to grab your guns (despite the fact that Obama was going to going to gun grab... but didn't).

      These are two I've noticed. I'm sure Donald will drag out ALL the oldies but goodies. WND had an article about the enormous sums of money HRC earned in speaking fees after she left the sec-of-state job. That I do find troubling (commenters identified this money as bribes). Altough, after gwb left the presidency, I recall he said he was going to "replenish the coffers" by giving such speeches. Bribing gwb after he left the presidency surely would be worth less that bribing a potential future president. Still there were many willing to pay him exhorbitant sums for speeches. Perhaps those bribers got some kind of help via his connections?

    3. It should be obvious to all that this nation needs to get the money out of politics. Influencing decisions that affect the public domain ought to be free of the corrupting influence of big money and influence of the wealthy and powerful. Bernie, as well as any others are correct in their position on this.

      As for post office speaking fees. Yeah, post office certainly results in a dilution of influence on decisions. Nevertheless, it makes sense to me to cap even those speaking fees to say 8-10 thousand dollars per speech.

      We need to begin by overturning the Citizens Untied decision. A decision I initially supported, until I thought out all the potential ramifications.


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 3/4/18 Anonymous commenting has been disabled and this site has reverted to comment moderation. This unfortunate action is necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or irrelevant to the post subject.

While we appreciate and encourage all political viewpoints we feel no obligation to post comments that fail to rise to the standards of decency and decorum we have set for Rational Nation USA.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.