The Controversial Business Practices of Donald Trump

Recent allegations suggest that Donald Trump and his associates have repeatedly failed to honor contracts and lawsuits after work was completed. This article explores whether such behavior is truly uncommon or if it aligns with a specific standard operating procedure adopted by those within his inner circle. We will delve into the details of unpaid contractors, legal disputes, and the broader implications of these practices.

A Closer Look at Unpaid Contractors

There have been serious allegations that Donald Trump and his children did not consistently pay contractors for their work. Far from being an isolated incident, this behavior is apparently part of a broader pattern of financial mismanagement and ethical lapses that have been documented in numerous instances. These practices extend to several cities where security costs for his rallies went unpaid. This raises questions about the integrity of the individuals involved and the overall ethics of the construction business.

The Use of Paid Attendees and Community Policing

Further investigation has revealed that the attendee base for many of Trump's rallies is not as authentic as it appears. Many individuals have been found to be paid for their attendance, either through various gig platforms or through the Department of Justice's "Community Stalking" program, which was allegedly repackaged under the guise of "Community Policing." This involves the manipulation of public support and the exploitation of people for political gain, which is another concerning aspect of the broader picture.

Legal Disputes and the Trump Standard Operating Procedure

According to firsthand accounts from within the Trump administration, this unethical practice of refusing to pay contractors extends to staff and various business dealings. For instance, nearly 40 of his smaller contractors have faced similar issues. Trump's business model often involves deliberately selecting smaller contractors with limited resources, knowing that they will likely fold under the pressure of prolonged legal battles. In many cases, these contractors are left with insufficient funds to pursue legal action effectively, resulting in settlement agreements that they cannot afford. In some instances, contractors receiving work in Atlantic City faced additional threats from the South Philadelphia mafia to settle their disputes.

The Allegations of Mafia Involvement

In the documentary produced by Netflix, it is noted that Trump's business practices are deeply intertwined with those of organized crime. As the daughter of the notorious Don from the South Philadelphia mafia, Kellyanne Conway is just one of many influential figures in the Trump administration who have connections to criminal organizations. This suggests a deeper level of corruption that extends well beyond the realm of business into law enforcement and government operations.

The Trump Standard Operating Procedure

A closer examination of these practices reveals a specific set of rules that guide Trump's business dealings. These rules, collectively referred to as the "Golden Rules of Good Business," highlight the approach he and his associates adopt. The rules include:

Never Pay for Anything in Full in Advance

Rule 1 states, "Never pay for anything in full in advance." This rule emphasizes the importance of not agreeing to the terms set by others. Trump and his associates aim to claim the upper hand in negotiations by making others believe they are paying more than necessary.

Negotiate a Better Deal if an Advance Is Necessary

Rule 2 advises to negotiate a better deal when an advance payment is required. By refusing to pay the full amount requested, they often force suppliers to agree to terms that are less favorable to them.

Do Not Pay for Completed Work if You Can Get Them to Retract Their Demand

Rule 3 suggests attempting to avoid payment by convincing the supplier/service provider to retract their demand for payment. By using legal strategies, time, and other means, they can delay payment indefinitely until the supplier gives up.

A lawsuit can be considered another rule that’s called upon if you somehow cannot get the supplier/service provider to walk away

In cases where they can't avoid the non-payment through negotiations, Rule 4 instructs them to use legal actions to gather funds or force the supplier into a settlement. The ultimate goal is to recoup as much of the money as possible, and if that fails, to cause as much pain and financial loss to the supplier/service provider as possible.

Conclusion

These controversial business practices not only raise concerns about ethics and legality but also suggest a broader pattern of corruption that extends to the highest levels of government. The documentation of these issues provides compelling evidence of a system that prioritizes personal gain over public trust and accountability. Whether these practices are considered standard operating procedure or unethical corruption, they have significant implications for the future of ethical business practices and the integrity of public and private institutions.