Lol. You may want to look up the definition of money laundering as this ain't how it works.
I do find it funny that any organization thinks he is actually religious. If he is, shit I'm glad I became an atheist.
this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
1522 points (100.0% liked)
196
16436 readers
1599 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
For real. Trump is an idiot, a grifter, and a piece of shit, but this isn't even sidestepping campaign donation law.
He's not a political candidate getting funds from churches, he's a parasite capitalist selling bibles to his fans, and he's a political candidate -- 2 separate things. The bible money isn't going to his campaign, it's just going to his pocket.
This take assumes that he's selling bibles, funneling the money from their sales to his campaign, then funneling it back out to pay for his disgorgements. This take thinks he's intentionally making is harder for himself, just to make it illegal.
He's just a guy selling shit.
"Money laundering is a financial transaction where criminals try to hide the source, nature, or proceeds of their illegal activities. This process is also known as converting "dirty money" into "clean money". Money laundering can lead to serious criminal offenses and threaten the integrity of the financial system. "
Idk. It kinda works in this case. The money would be illegally gotten if coming as donations from churches. But because churches have a legitimate reason to want to buy bulk bibles, this "hides" the illegality of the activity. So maybe not true textbook definition, but the spirit is there for sure.
It's not illegal to sell bibles. I'm sure there are loads of churches that will fill their pews with them, but they're not sending money to the campaign, they're sending it to Trump. Why would he make this harder for himself, he can just take the money and put it in his pocket, there's no reason to get the campaign involved.
The problem is that's literally just money laundering?
They are using a shell corporation and bullshit liscencing fee to cover over the fact that this transaction is and should be illegal.
Like, the idea here is that the church is not allowed to donate to a political figure, so they've set up a shell corp in the middle. The church pays $60 to the shell corp, who sends back 30 cents worth of paper, and then passes on 59.70 to Trump as a "licencing fee", which is obviously just going to be spent on his campaign.
The Bibles have nothing to do with his campaign. In the context of the Bibles, he's just a dude selling bibles, he's not a representative of his campaign, the money isn't going to his campaign, and it's not being spent on his campaign.
To be specific, there's no law against a church giving money to a political figure; there are laws against donations to political causes -- and political campaigns are political causes. Trump the person can sell whatever he wants and use that money however he wants, or, in this case, license his name to whatever, etc.
There's no reason a person can't pay for their own campaign, and there's no reason someone with more money than sense can't just give another person free money with no strings. We don't tend to this because we don't tend to have candidates that could believably get money from people for reasons unrelated to their campaign -- with any career politician, it would be a transparent pretense. But not with Trump, he legitimately can get people to buy whatever, because it's him they like, not just him-as-president. The shoes, the Bible, the steaks -- they're proof of that fact.
The money he's getting from the Bibles is not political money and he's not spending it on his campaign. There's just no there there.
Trump's debts are not "political," especially the fraud verdict (the $400m one) which is his biggest problem rn. There's no reason a person can't sell a Bible and use it to pay for the judgement against him for fraud. Like, that's a weird sentence, but it's true.
His campaign is definitely short on money, but, financially, his main concern right now is the fraud judgement, and after that the rape/defamation judgement, then maybe the lawyers next? Tho he probably doesn't plan on paying them. So, yeah, Trump's going to need some money for his campaign, but he needs to keep the Trump in Trump Tower or he's completely fucked -- legally, financially, and even politically.
Look, I hate him too, but this is just not money laundering.
After reading a bit more you find this.
The Bible’s website states the product “is not political and has nothing to do with any political campaign.”
“GodBlessTheUSABible.com is not owned, managed or controlled by Donald J. Trump, The Trump Organization, CIC Ventures LLC or any of their respective principals or affiliates,” it says.
Instead, it says, “GodBlessTheUSABible.com uses Donald J. Trump’s name, likeness and image under paid license from CIC Ventures LLC, which license may be terminated or revoked according to its terms.”
While the internal logic of the original post makes sense if you know nothing but the headline, this really is just more grift. It's like he's not even trying to campaign.
This makes sense to me. Clearly it can lead to money laundering and it would be hard to prove otherwise.
Lol are churches only allowed to buy Bibles or something.
No. But they are prohibited from political action including financial supoort of a governmental candidate. This is just a way for them to overpay on bibles in order to financially support him with some level of plausible deniability.
That's uhhhhh not what money laundering is.
In so far as it's being used as described it would be a highly inefficient way to do that so I think the much simpler explanation (Trump just wants money so he put his name on some random garbage for a cut of the profits just like Trump Steaks, Trump University, Trump Airlines, etc) makes more sense.
Trump desperately needs money to pay off his mounting legal bills.
I would say we start the rumor that his Bible literally doesn't match any others and contains Satanic verses, but that would probably increase sales. I wonder whose Bible he plagiarized.
I wish he would die of sepsis from an infected hemorrhoid already.
I wonder whose Bible he plagiarized.
King James, who has been dead for almost 400 years. (Also, it's public domain, so there's that.)
It isn't plagiarism unless he takes credit for it.
So you might be right.
This is the best book ever written. It's tremendous. All the pastors tell me my writing style is the best. Number one seller of all time!
Just quote some "woke" passages and claim it's not in the "real" bible and tell them that they should check themselves as that seems to make them believe basically anything.
Religion was probably invented by some starving person telling a story to get some food for free.
I'm pretty sure it was invented as a series of fairytales to get kids (and slaves) to shut up and obey their masters, with the threat that asking too many questions would get them tortured by a spooky ghost.
And then it got WAY out of hand
..... ya know, this theory feels like it may actually hold water. In an ancient society, it seems very feasible that a starving vagrant would employ stories about an omnipotent being that rewards acts of kindness with eternal heavenly glory.
Is religion possibly the result of a diogenes persuading unemphatic peers into acting selflessly as a means of improving their quality of life?
Not a Diogenes for certain. He was a shit stirrer not a person trying to trick people into being good.
But we do have a fair amount of realistic stories about the founding of one major religion that don’t require miracles to explain: Buddhism. And from the sounds of it Siddhartha Gautama was a member of the familial elite born to a life of luxury who was still not happy, he attempted asceticism as a means to fill the hole in his heart but found it too to be unfulfilling. Then he began developing a philosophical framework and set of techniques which sought to resolve the issue as he came to understand it, and when it helped he spread it. I believe he knowingly used metaphor that would’ve been understood by many of the people of his time and place as well as placing it within the religious framework of the Hindu society in which he lived.
That doesn’t explain the earliest religions but for those I look to animism which just kinda makes a lot of sense to many people. It’s a natural consequence of applying empathy to all things. But Buddhism does explain how religion evolves from a framework with which to understand the world into a framework with which to understand oneself and to tell people how to act. We could also look at early Judaism which seems to be more rules for social harmony and for survival in a less than hospitable location.
Buddhism also explains animism. Things aren't separate from the mind that perceives them. The mind is alive. Thus, all perceived things are alive. This also explains non-violence and dana (selfless acts of giving). Being aggressive towards anything in our field of perception is to be aggressive to ourselves. To be giving to anything in our field of perception is to give to ourselves.
Took Buddhism plus DMT to actually grok that, though.
view more: next ›