Mcdonalds Corporation 2013 Annual Report: Fill & Download for Free

McDonald’s 2016 annual report lists the following for total revenue:$24,622,000,000 (year ending December 31, 2016)Most of this ($15,295,000,000) came from company-owned restaurants. The rest came from franchised locations.This is the third straight year of decline for revenues, which, in 2013, were $28,106,000,000—a decrease of 12.4%. Of note is that the total number of restaurants actually increased over the same time by 4.15%.Whenever I think about diversifying my investment portfolio, this stock has almost always come under consideration, but there’s always something else that seems to be a better investment, so I’ve always purchased something else instead. I’m fairly certain, though, that if I examined the holdings of some of the funds I invest in that McDonald’s is in some of those.

Our boy Trump has spent a lot of time and money in and out of court. The following very long and ongoing list of court cases won and lost, is compliments of Wikipedia:Trump and his businesses have been involved in 3,500 legal cases in U.S. federal courts and state court, an unprecedented number for a U.S. presidential candidate.[1]Of the 3,500 suits, Trump or one of his companies were plaintiffs in 1,900; defendants in 1,450; and bankruptcy, third party, or other in 150.[1]Trump was named in at least 169 suits in federal court.[2]Over 150 other cases were in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida (covering Broward County, Florida) since 1983.[3]In about 500 cases, judges dismissed plaintiffs' claims against Trump. In hundreds more, cases ended with the available public record unclear about the resolution.[1]Where there was a clear resolution, Trump won 451 times, and lost 38.[4]The topics of the legal cases include contract disputes, defamation claims, and allegations of sexual harassment. Trump's companies have been involved in more than 100 tax disputes, and on "at least three dozen" occasions the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance has obtained tax liens against Trump properties for nonpayment of taxes.[1]On a number of occasions, Trump has threatened legal action but did not ultimately follow through.[5]Of Trump's involvement in the lawsuits, his lawyer Alan Garten said in 2015 that this was "a natural part of doing business in [the United States]",[5][6]and in the real estate industry, litigation to enforce contracts and resolve business disputes is indeed common.[5]Trump has, however, been involved in far more litigation than fellow real-estate magnates; the USA Today analysis in 2016 found that Trump had been involved in legal disputes more than Edward J. DeBartolo Jr., Donald Bren, Stephen M. Ross, Sam Zell, and Larry Silverstein combined.[1]The Trump lawsuits[5][6]have attracted criticism from Trump's opponents, who say that this is not a trait that conservatives should support.[5]James Copland, director of legal policy at the conservative-leaning Manhattan Institute, states that "Trump clearly has an affinity for filing lawsuits, partly because he owns a lot of businesses" and has sometimes used litigation as a "bullying tactic".[5]Although Trump has said that he "never" settles legal claims, Trump and his businesses have settled with plaintiffs in at least 100 cases (mostly involving personal injury claims arising from injuries at Trump properties), with settlements ranging as high as hundreds of thousands of U.S. dollars[1]and recently as high as tens of millions of dollars.[7]Among the most well-known Trump legal cases was the Trump University litigation. Three legal actions were brought alleging fraud, one by the New York State Attorney General and the others by class action plaintiffs.[8]In November 2016, Trump agreed to pay $25 million to settle the litigation.[7]In 1985, New York City brought a lawsuit against Trump for allegedly using tactics to force out tenants of 100 Central Park South,[17]which he intended to demolish together with the building next door. After ten years in court, the two sides negotiated a deal allowing the building to stand as condominiums.[18]In 1988, the Justice Department sued Trump for violating procedures related to public notifications when buying voting stock in a company related to his attempted takeovers of Holiday Corporation and Bally Manufacturing Corporation in 1986. On April 5, 1988, Trump agreed to pay $750,000 to settle the civil penalties of the antitrust lawsuit.[19]In late 1990, Trump was sued for $2 million by a business analyst for defamation, and Trump settled out of court.[20]Briefly before Trump's Taj Mahal opened in April 1990, the analyst had said that the project would fail by the end of that year. Trump threatened to sue the analyst's firm unless the analyst recanted or was fired. The analyst refused to retract the statements, and his firm fired him for ostensibly unrelated reasons.[21]Trump Taj Mahal declared bankruptcy in November 1990, the first of several such bankruptcies.[22]After, the NYSE ordered the firm to compensate the analyst $750,000; the analyst did not release the details of his settlement with Trump.[23]In 1991, Trump sued the manufacturers of a helicopter that crashed in 1989, killing three executives of his New Jersey hotel casino business.[24]The helicopter fell 2,800 feet after the main four-blade rotor and tail rotor broke off the craft, killing Jonathan Benanav, an executive of Trump Plaza, and two others: Mark Grossinger Etess, president of Trump Taj Mahal, and Stephen F. Hyde, chief executive of the Atlantic City casinos.[25][26][27]One of the defendants was owned by the Italian government, providing a basis for removing it to federal court, where the case was dismissed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the dismissal in 1992, and the Supreme Court denied Trump's petition to hear the case in the same year.[28]In 1991, Trump Plaza was fined $200,000 by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission for moving African American and female employees from craps tables in order to accommodate high roller Robert LiButti, a mob figure and alleged John Gotti associate, who was said to fly into fits of racist rage when he was on losing streaks.[29]There is no indication that Trump was ever questioned in that investigation, he was not held personally liable, and Trump denies even knowing what LiButti looked like.[29]In 1991, one of Trump's casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey, was found guilty of circumventing state regulations about casino financing when Donald Trump's father bought $3.5 million in chips that he had no plans to gamble. Trump Castle was forced to pay a $30,000 fine under the settlement, according to New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement Director Jack Sweeney. Trump was not disciplined for the illegal advance on his inheritance, which was not confiscated.[30]In 1993, Donald Trump sued Jay Pritzker, a Chicago financier and Trump's business partner since 1979 on the Grand Hyatt hotel. Trump alleged that Pritzker overstated earnings in order to collect excessive management fees.[31]In 1994, Pritzker sued Trump for violating their agreement by, among other ways, failing to remain solvent.[32]The two parties ended the feud in 1995 in a sealed settlement, in which Trump retained some control of the hotel and Pritzker would receive reduced management fees and pay Trump's legal expenses.[33]In 1993, Vera Coking sued Trump and his demolition contractor for damage to her home during construction of the Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino.[34]In 1997, she dropped the suit against Trump and settled with his contractor for $90,000.[35]Coking had refused to sell her home to Trump and ultimately won a 1998 Supreme Court decision that prevented Atlantic City from using eminent domain to condemn her property.[36][37]In 1996, Trump was sued by more than 20 African-American residents of Indiana who charged that Trump reneged on promises to hire 70% of his work force from the minority community for his riverboat casino on Lake Michigan. The suit also charged that he hadn't honored his commitments to steer sufficient contracts to minority-owned businesses in Gary, Indiana. The suit was eventually dismissed due to procedural and jurisdiction issues.[38][39]In the late 1990s, Donald Trump and rival Atlantic City casino owner Stephen Wynn engaged in an extended legal conflict during the planning phase of new casinos Wynn had proposed to build. Both owners filed lawsuits against one another and other parties, including the State of New Jersey, beginning with Wynn's antitrust accusation against Trump.[40][41]After two years in court, Wynn's Mirage casino sued Trump in 1999 alleging that his company had engaged in a conspiracy to harm Mirage and steal proprietary information, primarily lists of wealthy Korean gamblers. In response, Trump's attorneys claimed that Trump's private investigator dishonored his contract by working as a "double agent" for the Mirage casino by secretly taping conversations with Trump. All the cases were settled at the same time on the planned day of an evidentiary hearing in court in February 2000, which was never held.[42]Personal and sexualIn 1992, Trump sued ex-wife Ivana Trump for not honoring a gag clause in their divorce agreement by disclosing facts about him in her best-selling book. Trump won the gag order.[43][44][45]The divorce was granted on grounds that Ivana claimed Donald Trump's treatment of her was "cruel and inhuman treatment".[46][47]Years later, Ivana said that she and Donald "are the best of friends".[48]A sexual assault claim from 1994 for child rape was filed against Trump on October 14, 2016,[49]a case that was dropped and refiled, remaining in suspension as of November 4, 2016.[50]In April 1997, Jill Harth Houraney filed a $125,000,000 lawsuit against Trump for sexual harassment in 1993, claiming he "'groped' her under her dress and told her he wanted to make her his 'sex slave'". Harth voluntarily withdrew the suit when her husband settled a parallel case. Trump has called the allegations "meritless".[51][52]Lawsuits 2000–2009[edit]In 2000, Donald Trump paid $250,000 to settle fines related to charges brought by New York State Lobbying Commission director David Grandeau. Trump was charged with circumventing state law to spend $150,000 lobbying against government approval of plans to construct an Indian-run casino in the Catskills, which would have diminished casino traffic to Trump's casinos in Atlantic City.[53][54]From 2000 on, Trump tried to partner with a German venture in building a "Trump Tower Europe" in Germany. The company founded for this, "TD Trump Deutschland AG" was dissolved in 2003, several lawsuits following in the years thereafter.[55]In 2001, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission brought a financial-reporting case against Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc., alleging that the company had committed several "misleading statements in the company's third-quarter 1999 earnings release". Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc. consented to the Commission's cease-and-desist order, said the culprit had been dismissed, and that Trump had personally been unaware of the matter.[56][57][58]Trump sued Leona Helmsley,[59]and Helmsley counter-sued Trump[60]due to contentions regarding ownership and operation of the Empire State Building. In 2002, Trump announced that he and his Japanese business partners, were selling the Empire State Building to partners of his rival Leona Helmsley.[61][62]In 2003, the city of Stuttgart denied TD Trump Deutschland AG, a Trump Organization subsidiary, the permission to build a planned tower due to questions over its financing. Trump Deutschland sued the city of Stuttgart, and lost. In 2004 Trump's German corporate partner brought suit against the Trump Organization for failure to pay back a EUR 200 million pre-payment as promised. In 2005, the German state attorney prosecuted Trump Deutschland and its partners for accounting fraud.[63][64][65]In 2004, Donald Trump sued Richard T. Fields in Broward County Circuit Court (in Florida); Fields was once Trump's business partner in the casino business, but had recently become a successful casino developer in Florida apart from Trump. Fields counter-sued Trump in Florida court. Trump alleged that Fields misled other parties into believing he still consulted for Trump, and Fields alleged improprieties in Trump's business.[66]The two businessmen agreed in 2008 to drop the lawsuits when Fields agreed to buy Trump Marina in Atlantic City, New Jersey, for $316 million,[67]but the deal was unsettled again in 2009 because Trump resigned his leadership of Trump Entertainment after Fields lowered his bid.[68]Fields never bought the company, which went into bankruptcy about the same time and was sold for $38 million.[69][70]Trump's lawsuit was dismissed after a hearing in 2010.[71]In 2004, the Trump Organization partnered with Bayrock Group on a $200 million hotel and condo project in Fort Lauderdale Beach, to be called Trump International Hotel & Tower. After proceeding for five years, real estate market devaluation stymied the project in 2009 and Trump dissolved his licensing deal, demanding that his name be removed from the building. Soon after this, the project defaulted on a $139 million loan in 2010.[72]Investors later sued the developers for fraud. Trump petitioned to have his name removed from the suit, saying he had only lent his name to the project. However his request was refused since he had participated in advertising for it.[73]The insolvent building project spawned over 10 lawsuits, some of which were still not settled in early 2016.[74]In 2006, the Town of Palm Beach began fining Trump $250 per day for ordinance violations related to his erection of an 80-foot-tall (24 m) flagpole flying a 15 by 25 feet (4.6 by 7.6 m) American flag on his property. Trump sued the town for $25 million, saying that they abridged his free speech, also disputing an ordinance that local businesses be "town-serving". The two parties settled as part of a court-ordered mediation, in which Trump was required to donate $100,000 to veterans' charities. At the same time, the town ordinance was modified allowing Trump to enroll out-of-town members in his Mar-a-Lago social club.[75]Trump International Hotel and Tower in ChicagoAfter the 2008 housing-market collapse, Deutsche Bank attempted to collect $40 million that Donald Trump personally guaranteed against their $640 million loan for Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago. Rather than paying the debt, Trump sued Deutsche Bank for $3 billion for undermining the project and damage to his reputation.[76]Deutsche Bank then filed suit to obtain the $40 million. The two parties settled in 2010 with Deutsche Bank extending the loan term by five years.[77]In 2008, Trump filed a $100 million lawsuit for alleged fraud and civil rights violations[78]against the California city of Rancho Palos Verdes, over thwarted luxury home development and expansion plans upon part of a landslide-prone golf course in the area, which was purchased by Trump in 2002 for $27 million.[78]Trump had previously sued a local school district over land leased from them in the re-branded Trump National Golf Club, and had further angered some local residents by renaming a thoroughfare after himself.[78]The $100 million suit was ultimately withdrawn in 2012 with Trump and the city agreeing to modified geological surveys and permit extensions for some 20 proposed luxury homes (in addition to 36 homes previously approved).[79][80]Trump ultimately opted for a permanent conservation easement instead of expanded housing development on the course's driving range.[81]In 2009, Donald Trump sued a law firm he had used, Morrison Cohen, for $5 million for mentioning his name and providing links to related news articles on its website. This lawsuit followed a lawsuit by Trump alleging overcharging by the law firm, and a countersuit by Morrison Cohen seeking unpaid legal fees.[82]The suit was dismissed in a 15-page ruling by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Eileen Bransten, who ruled that the links to news articles concerned "matters of public interest."[83]In 2009, Trump was sued by investors who had made deposits for condos in the canceled Trump Ocean Resort Baja Mexico.[84]The investors said that Trump misrepresented his role in the project, stating after its failure that he had been little more than a spokesperson for the entire venture, disavowing any financial responsibility for the debacle.[85]Investors were informed that their investments would not be returned due to the cancellation of construction.[84]In 2013, Trump settled the lawsuit with more than one hundred prospective condo owners for an undisclosed amount.[86]Lawsuits 2010–presentConstruction and property law matters[edit]In 2011, Donald Trump sued Scotland, alleging that it built the Aberdeen Bay Wind Farm after assuring him it would not be built. He had recently built a golf course there and planned to build an adjacent hotel. Trump lost his suit, with the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom unanimously ruling in favor of the Scottish government in 2015.[87][88]In 2013, 87-year-old Jacqueline Goldberg alleged that Trump cheated her in a condominium sale by bait-and-switch when she was purchasing properties at the Trump International Hotel and Tower.[89]In 2015, Trump initiated a $100 million lawsuit against Palm Beach County claiming that officials, in a "deliberate and malicious" act, pressured the FAA to direct air traffic to the Palm Beach International Airport over his Mar-a-Lago estate, because he said the airplanes damaged the building and disrupted its ambiance.[90]Trump had previously sued the county twice over airport noise; the first lawsuit, in 1995, ended with an agreement between Trump and the county; Trump's second lawsuit, in 2010, was dismissed.[90]Trump is suing the town of Ossining, New York, over the property tax valuation on his 147-acre (59 ha) Trump National Golf Club Westchester, located in Briarcliff Manor's portion of the town, which Trump purchased for around $8 million at a foreclosure sale in the 1990s and to which he claimed, at the club's opening, to have added $45 million in facility improvements.[91]Although Trump stated in his 2015 FEC filing that the property was worth at least $50 million, his lawsuit seeks a $1.4 million valuation on the property, which includes a 75,000-square-foot clubhouse, five overnight suites, and permission to build 71 condominium units,[91]in an effort to shave $424,176 from his annual local property tax obligations.(91A) Trump had to pay nearly $300,000 in attorney’s fees in Doral painter’s lawsuit related to unpaid bills brought by a local paint store against the Trump National Doral Miami golf resort, ordered the billionaire politician’s company to pay the Doral-based mom-and-pop shop nearly $300,000 in attorney’s fees. All because, according to the lawsuit, Trump allegedly tried to stiff The Paint Spot on its last payment of $34,863 on a $200,000 contract for paint used in the renovation of the home of golf’s famed Blue Monster two years prior.[92]Trump filed the action after separately being sued by Briarcliff Manor for "intentional and illegal modifications" to a drainage system that caused more than $238,000 in damage to the village's library, public pool, and park facilities during a 2011 storm.[92]In October 2016, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that Trump, together with two principals of a connected developer, could be sued for various claims, including oppression, collusion and breach of fiduciary duties, in relation to his role in the marketing of units in the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Toronto, Canada.[93]A subsequent application for leave to appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Canada in March 2017.[94]Also in October 2016, JCF Capital ULC (a private firm that had bought the construction loan on the building) announced that it was seeking court approval under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to have the building sold in order to recoup its debt, which then totaled $301 million.[95]The court allowed for its auction[96]which took place in March 2017, but no bidders, apart from one stalking horse offer, took part.[97]Defamation mattersAlso in 2011, an appellate court upheld a New Jersey Superior Court judge's decision dismissing Trump's $5 billion defamation lawsuit against author Timothy L. O'Brien, who had reported in his book, TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald (2005), that Trump's true net worth was really between $150 and $250 million. Trump had reportedly told O'Brien he was worth billions and, in 2005, had publicly stated such.[98]Trump said that the author's alleged underestimation of his net worth was motivated by malice and had cost him business deals and damage to his reputation.[99]The appellate court, however, ruled against Trump, citing the consistency of O'Brien's three confidential sources.[100]In 2014, the former Miss Pennsylvania Sheena Monnin ultimately settled a $5 million arbitration judgment against her, having been sued by Trump after alleging that the Miss USA 2012 pageant results were rigged. Monnin wrote on her Facebook page that another contestant told her during a rehearsal that she had seen a list of the top five finalists, and when those names were called in their precise order, Monnin realized the pageant election process was suspect, compelling Monnin to resign her Miss Pennsylvania title. The Trump Organization's lawyer said that Monnin's allegations had cost the pageant a lucrative British Petroleum sponsorship deal and threatened to discourage women from entering Miss USA contests in the future.[101]According to Monnin, testimony from the Miss Universe Organization and Ernst & Young revealed that the top 15 finalists were selected by pageant directors regardless of preliminary judges' scores.[102]As part of the settlement, Monnin was not required to retract her original statements.[101]On January 17, 2017, Summer Zervos, represented by attorney Gloria Allred, filed a defamation suit against President-Elect Donald Trump for claiming that she had lied in her public sexual assault allegations against him.[103]Financial mattersIn July 2011, New York firm ALM Unlimited filed a lawsuit against Trump, who ended payments to the company in 2008 after nearly three years. ALM was hired in 2003 to seek offers from clothing companies for a Trump fashion line, and had arranged a meeting between Trump and PVH, which licensed the Trump name for dress shirts and neckwear. ALM, which had received over $300,000, alleged in the lawsuit that Trump's discontinuation of payments was against their initial agreement. In pre-trial depositions, Trump and two of his business officials – attorney George H. Ross and executive vice president of global licensing Cathy Glosser – gave contradictory statements regarding whether ALM was entitled to payments. Trump, who felt that ALM had only a limited role in the deal between him and PVH, said "I have thousands of checks that I sign a week, and I don't look at very many of the checks; and eventually I did look, and when I saw them (ALM) I stopped paying them because I knew it was a mistake or somebody made a mistake."[104]In January 2013, a judge ordered that the case go to trial, after Trump and ALM failed to settle the lawsuit.[105]During the trial in April 2013, Trump said that ALM's role in the PVH agreement was insubstantial, stating that Regis Philbin was the one who recommended PVH to him. Trump's attorney, Alan Garten, said ALM was not legally entitled to any money.[105][106][107]The judge ruled in favor of Trump later that month because a valid contract between him and ALM was never created.[107]Trump University litigationMain article: Trump University § Allegations of impropriety and lawsuitsIn 2013, in a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, Trump was accused of defrauding more than 5,000 people of $40 million for the opportunity to learn Trump's real estate investment techniques in a for-profit training program, Trump University, which operated from 2005 to 2011.[108][109][110]Trump ultimately stopped using the term "University" following a 2010 order from New York regulators, who called Trump's use of the word "misleading and even illegal"; the state had previously warned Trump in 2005 to drop the term or not offer seminars in New York.[111][112][113]Although Trump has claimed a 98% approval rating on course evaluations, former students recounted high-pressure tactics from instructors seeking the highest possible ratings, including threats of withholding graduation certificates,[114]and more than 2,000 students had sought and received course refunds before the end of their paid seminars.[114]In a separate class action civil suit against Trump University in mid-February 2014, a San Diego federal judge allowed claimants in California, Florida, and New York to proceed;[115]a Trump counterclaim, alleging that the state Attorney General's investigation was accompanied by a campaign donation shakedown, was investigated by a New York ethics board and dismissed in August 2015.[116]Trump filed a $1 million defamation suit against former Trump University student Tarla Makaeff, who had spent about $37,000 on seminars, after she joined the class action lawsuit and publicized her classroom experiences on social media.[85]Trump University was later ordered by a U.S. District Judge in April 2015 to pay Makaeff and her lawyers $798,774.24 in legal fees and costs.[85][117]Breach of contract matters2013]In 2013 Trump sued comedian Bill Maher for $5 million for breach of contract.[118]Maher had appeared on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno and had offered to pay $5 million to a charity if Trump produced his birth certificate to prove that Trump's mother had not mated with an orangutan. This was said by Maher in response to Trump having previously challenged Obama to produce his birth certificate, and offering $5 million payable to a charity of Obama's choice, if Obama produced his college applications, transcripts, and passport records.[119][120]Trump produced his birth certificate and filed a lawsuit after Maher was not forthcoming, claiming that Maher's $5 million offer was legally binding. "I don't think he was joking," Trump said. "He said it with venom."[119]Trump withdrew his lawsuit against the comedian after eight weeks.[121]2014[edit]In 2014, model Alexia Palmer filed a civil suit against Trump Model Management for promising a $75,000 annual salary but paying only $3,380.75 for three years' work. Palmer, who came to the US at age 17 from Jamaica under the H-1B visa program in 2011,[122]claimed to be owed more than $200,000. Palmer contended that Trump Model Management charged, in addition to a management fee, "obscure expenses" from postage to limousine rides that consumed the remainder of her compensation. Palmer alleged that Trump Model Management promised to withhold only 20% of her net pay as agency expenses, but after charging her for those "obscure expenses", ended up taking 80%.[123]Trump attorney Alan Garten claimed the lawsuit is "bogus and completely frivolous".[124][125]Palmer filed a class-action lawsuit against the modeling agency with similar allegations.[126]The case was dismissed from U.S. federal court in March 2016, in part because Palmer's immigration status, via H1-B visa sponsored by Trump, required labor complaints to be filed through a separate process.[123][127]2015[edit]In 2015, Trump sued Univision, demanding $500 million for breach of contract and defamation when they dropped their planned broadcast of the Miss USA pageant. The network said that the decision was made because of Trump's "insulting remarks about Mexican immigrants".[128]Trump settled the lawsuit with Univision CEO Randy Falco out of court.[129]In July 2015, Trump filed a $10 million lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court for breach of contract against Spanish celebrity chef José Andrés, claiming that he backed out of a deal to open the flagship restaurant at Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.[130][131]Andrés replied that Trump's lawsuit was "both unsurprising and without merit"[132]and filed an $8 million counterclaim against a Trump Organization subsidiary.[131][133]Also in July 2015, Chef Geoffrey Zakarian also withdrew from the Washington, D.C., project with Andrés in the wake of Trump's comments on Mexican illegal immigrants, and is expected to lose his own $500,000 restaurant lease deposit as a result.[132]Trump denounced and then sued Zakarian in August 2015 for a sum "in excess of $10 million" for lost rent and other damages.[134]Trump's lawsuit called Zakarian's offense at his remarks "curious in light of the fact that Mr. Trump's publicly shared views on immigration have remained consistent for many years, and Mr. Trump's willingness to frankly share his opinions is widely known".[134][135]Disputes with both chefs were eventually settled in April 2017.[136]In 2015, restaurant workers at Trump SoHo filed a lawsuit that from 2009 to at least the time of the filing, gratuities added to customers' checks were illegally withheld from employees. The Trump Organization has responded that the dispute is between the employees and their employer, a third-party contractor. Donald Trump has been scheduled to testify in court on September 1, 2016.[137][138]2018[edit]In 2018, Noel Cintron, the personal driver for Donald Trump before he became the President of the United States, filed a lawsuit Cintron v Trump Organization LLC with the Supreme Court of the State of New York (Manhattan). The lawsuit claims that during his 25-year employment by Trump, he was not compensated for overtime and the second time his salary was raised he was induced to surrender his health insurance, an action which saved Trump approximately $17,866 per year.[139]The lawsuit seeks $178,200 of overtime back pay, plus $5,000 in penalties that are seen under the New York State Labor Law.[140]Assault claims[edit]In September 2015, five men who had demonstrated outside of a Trump presidential campaign event at Trump Tower in New York City sued Donald Trump, alleging that Trump's security staff punched one of them. They also allege that Trump's security guards had been advised by city police that they were permitted to protest there. Several people videotaped the incident.[141][142]In June 2015, the Culinary Workers Union filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), alleging that the owners of Trump Hotel Las Vegas "violated the federally protected rights of workers to participate in union activities" and engaged in "incidents of alleged physical assault, verbal abuse, intimidation, and threats by management".[143]In October 2015, the Trump Ruffin Commercial and Trump Ruffin Tower I, the owners of Trump Hotel Las Vegas, sued the Culinary Workers Union and another union, alleging that they had knowingly distributed flyers that falsely stated that Donald Trump had stayed at a rival unionized hotel, rather than his own non-unionized hotel, during a trip to Las Vegas.[5][143]Poll watching controversy[edit]On October 31, 2016, a New Jersey federal judge, John Michael Vazquez, ordered the Republican National Committee (RNC) to hand over all communications with the Trump campaign related to poll watching and voter fraud. He asked for testimony and documents relating to Kellyanne Conway, RNC officials Ronna Romney McDaniel of Michigan, and Rob Gleason from Pennsylvania.[144]It is claimed Gleason, McDaniel, and Roger Stone recruited poll watchers to check for voter fraud. The state Democratic parties of Nevada, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Ohio filed lawsuits against Trump for encouraging illegal voter intimidation. The states' Democratic parties are also suing their respective Republican party counterparts, along with Roger Stone, who is allegedly recruiting poll watchers and organizing ballot security efforts in a number of states. Stone runs the group "Stop the Steal." It claims Trump supporters yelled at voters outside Las Vegas area polling places when they said they weren't voting for the Republican nominee, and that Stone is asking supporters to conduct an illegitimate "exit polling" initiative aimed at intimidating voters of color.Pat McDonald, the director of Cuyahoga County Board of Elections in Ohio, reported that "Trump supporters have already visited the county elections board identifying themselves as poll observers, even though they did not appear to be credentialed as poll observers as required under Ohio law." Election officials have expressed concern about "instability on Election Day," one lawsuit claims, and discussed the possibility of bringing police to polling sites to address conflicts. In Clark County of Nevada, a lawsuit claims: "A Trump supporter harassed and intimidated multiple voters outside of the Albertson's supermarket early voting location on Lake Mead Boulevard, repeatedly asking voters for whom they were voting, and then yelling at them belligerently and attempting to keep them from entering the voting location when they stated they were not voting for Donald Trump." When poll staffers told the Trump supporters to stop harassing voters, "the Trump supporter told poll workers that he had 'a right to say anything he wanted to the voters.'" Poll staffers called police, and the Trump supporter left. The lawsuit also claims similar incidents took place in neighboring Nye County as well. In Pennsylvania, Murrysville City Councilman Josh Lorenz supposedly posted instructions for the way Clinton supporters could vote online, even though there is no online voting in Pennsylvania. Eight registered electors, mostly from the Philadelphia area, challenged the portion of the state Election Code that prevents poll watchers from observing elections outside of the counties where they live.[145][146][147]In Pompano Beach, Florida, police asked two poll watchers to leave a polling site. Two precinct clerks were also fired for not adhering to policy and training. No arrests were made. No other incidents were reported in South Florida.[148][149]Nevada early voting Latino turnout controversy[edit]On November 8, 2016, Trump filed a lawsuit claiming early voting polling places in Clark County, Nevada, were kept open too late. These precincts had high turnout of Latino voters. Nevada state law explicitly states that polls are to stay open to accommodate eligible voters in line at closing time. Hillary Clinton campaign advisor Neera Tanden says the Trump campaign is trying to suppress Latino voter turnout. A political analyst from Nevada, Jon Ralston tweeted that the Trump lawsuit is "insane" in a state that clearly allows the polls to remains open until everyone in line has voted. Former Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller, posted the statute that states "voting must continue until those voters have voted". Miller said: "If there are people in line waiting to vote at 7 pm, voting must continue until everyone votes.... We still live in America, right?"[150]A Nevada judge denied Trump's request to separate early voting ballots. Judge Gloria Sturman, of the District Court for Clark County Nevada, ruled that County Registrar of Voters Joe P. Gloria was already obligated by state law to maintain the records that the Trump campaign is seeking. Sturman said: "That is offensive to me because it seems to go against the very principle that a vote is secret."[151][152]Diana Orrock, the Republican National Committeewoman for Nevada and a vocal Trump ally, said she was unaware of the lawsuit before Politico contacted her. "I know that the [Clark County] registrar was on TV this morning saying that anybody who's in line was allowed to participate in the voting process until all of them came through," she said. "If that's what they did, I don't have a problem with that ... I don't know that filing a suit's going to accomplish anything." Orrock doubts the lawsuit will have any impact.[153]Lawsuit for inciting violence at March 2016 campaign rally[edit]During a campaign rally on March 1, 2016 in Louisville, Kentucky, Trump repeatedly said "get 'em out of here" while pointing at anti-Trump protesters as they were forcibly escorted out by his supporters. Three protesters say they were repeatedly shoved and punched while Trump pointed at them from the podium, citing widely shared video evidence of the events. They also cited previous statements by Trump about paying the legal bills of supporters who got violent, or suggesting a demonstrator deserved to be "roughed up."[154][155][156][157]The lawsuit accuses Donald Trump of inciting violence against protesters in Louisville, Kentucky. The plaintiffs are Kashiya Nwanguma (21), Molly Shah (36) and Henry Brousseau (17). The suit is against Trump, his campaign, and three Trump supporters (Matthew Heimbach, Alvin Bamberger and an unnamed defendant). One defendant, Bamburger, who was wearing a Veteran's uniform in the video, apologized to the Korean War Veterans Association immediately after the event, writing that he "physically pushed a young woman down the aisle toward the exit" after "Trump kept saying 'get them out, get them out."[154]Trump's attorneys requested to get the case dismissed, arguing he was protected by free speech laws, and wasn't trying to get his supporters to resort to violence.[156][158]They also stated that Trump had no duty to the protesters, and they had assumed the personal risk of injury by deciding to protest at the rally.[154]On Friday, April 1, 2017, Judge David J. Hale in Louisville ruled against the dismissal of a lawsuit, stating there was ample evidence to support that the injuries of the protesters were a "direct and proximate result" of Trump's words and actions. Hale wrote, "It is plausible that Trump's direction to 'get 'em out of here' advocated the use of force," and, "It was an order, an instruction, a command." Hale wrote that the Supreme Court has ruled out some protections for free speech when used to incite violence.[159]Defendant Heimbach requested to dismiss the discussion in the lawsuit about his association with a white nationalist group, and also requested to dismiss discussion of statements he made about how a President Trump would advance the interests of the group. The request was declined, with the judge saying the information could be important for determining punitive damages because they add context.[154]Hale also declined to remove the allegation that Plaintiff Nwanguma, who is African-American, was victim to ethnic, racial and sexist slurs at the rally from the crowd. The judge stated that this context may support claims by the plaintiffs' of incitement and negligence by Trump and the Trump campaign. The judge wrote, "While the words themselves are repulsive, they are relevant to show the atmosphere in which the alleged events occurred."[154]The judge stated that all people have a duty to use care to prevent foreseeable injury. "In sum, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that their harm was foreseeable and that the Trump Defendants had a duty to prevent it." The case was referred a federal magistrate, Judge H. Brent Brennenstuhl, who will handle preliminary litigation, discovery and settlement efforts.[160]Heimbach filed a separate counterclaim in April 2017, arguing that Trump was "responsible for any injuries" he [Heimbach] "might have inflicted because Mr. Trump directed him and others to take action". Heimbach, "a self-employed landscaper", and a member of the Traditionalist Youth Network, "which advocates separate American 'ethno states', "spends much of his time" online writing "against Jews, gays and immigrants and urging whites to stand up for their race." He wrote his own lawsuit which requested that Trump pay Heimbach's "legal fees, citing a promise Mr. Trump made at an earlier rally to pay legal costs of anyone who removed protesters."[161]Heimbach's "counterclaim" against Trump has "probed the limits of free speech and public protest while confronting the courts with a unique legal argument".[161]On May 5, Trump's lawyers submitted legal filings that argue that Heimbach's "indemnity claim should be dismissed on the same grounds". According to a University of Virginia law professor, Leslie Kendrick, this indemnity or "impleader" case is "highly unusual."[161]New York University's Samuel Issacharoff, a professor of constitutional law, argued that care must be taken to not allow speech, in the "context of a political rally" to be "turned into something that is legally sanctionable."[161]Payments related to alleged affairs[edit]See also: Stormy Daniels–Donald Trump scandal and Karen McDougal § Alleged affair with Donald TrumpAdult film actress Stormy Daniels has alleged that she and Trump had an extramarital affair in 2006, months after the birth of his youngest child.[162]Just before the 2016 presidential election Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, was paid $130,000 by Trump's attorney Michael Cohen as part of a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), through an LLC set up by Cohen; he says he used his own money for the payment.[163]In February 2018, Daniels filed suit against the LLC asking to be released from the agreement so that she can tell her story. Cohen filed a private arbitration proceeding and obtained a restraining order to keep her from discussing the case.[164]According to White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Trump has denied the allegations.[165]On March 6, 2018, Daniels sued Trump in California Superior Court, claiming among other things that the NDA never came into effect because Trump did not sign it personally.[166]On March 16 Cohen, with Trump's approval, asked for Daniels' suit to be moved from state to federal court, based on the criteria that the parties live in different places and the amount at stake is more than $75,000; Cohen asserted that Daniels could owe $20 million in liquidated damages for breaching the agreement.[167]The filing marked the first time that Trump himself, through his personal attorney, had taken part in the Daniels litigation.[168]In early April 2018, Trump said that he did not know about Cohen paying Daniels, why Cohen had made the payment or where Cohen got the money from.[169]On April 30, Daniels further sued Trump for defamation.[170]In May 2018, Trump's annual financial disclosure revealed that he reimbursed Cohen in 2017 for expenditures related to the Daniels case.[171]In August 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to breaking campaign finance laws, admitting paying hush money of $130,000 and $150,000 "at the direction of a candidate for federal office", to two women who alleged affairs with that candidate, "with the purpose of influencing the election". The figures match sums of payments made to Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal.[172][173]American Media, Inc. had reportedly in 2016 bought for $150,000 the rights to a story by McDougal alleging an affair with a married Trump from 2006 which lasted between nine months to a year.[174][175][176]David Pecker (AMI CEO/Chairman and friend of Trump), Dylan Howard (AMI chief content officer) and Allen Weisselberg (chief financial officer of The Trump Organization) were reportedly granted witness immunity in exchange for their testimony regarding the illegal payments.[177][178]In response, Trump said that he only knew about the payments "later on"; Trump also said regarding the payments: "They didn't come out of the campaign, they came from me."[179]The Wall Street Journal reported on November 9, 2018 that federal prosecutors have evidence of Trump’s "central role" in payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal that violated campaign-finance laws.[180][181]Special Counsel investigation[edit]Main article: Special Counsel investigation (2017–present)The Special Counsel investigation is a United States law enforcement investigation of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and any Russian (or other foreign) interference in the election, including exploring any possible links or coordination between Trump's campaign and the Russian government, "and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."[182]Since May 2017, the investigation has been led by a United States Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, a former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI). Mueller's investigation took over several FBI investigations including those involving former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.It has been noted that Trump has experienced a high turnover with respect to the attorneys handling this matter, as well as a large number of prominent lawyers and law firms publicly declining offers to join Trump's legal team.[183][184]Attorneys known to have been approached include Robert S. Bennett of Hogan Lovells,[185]Paul Clement and Mark Filip, both with Kirkland & Ellis,[186][186]Robert Giuffra Jr. of Sullivan & Cromwell,[185]Theodore B. Olson of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher,[187]and Brendan V. Sullivan Jr. of Williams & Connolly.[186]Other firms with attorneys who have decided not to represent Trump include Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan,[188]Steptoe & Johnson,[188]and Winston & Strawn.[citation needed]Former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova and his wife Victoria Toensing were briefly slated to join Trump's legal team, but withdrew their services from Trump in March 2018, citing conflicts of interest.[189]In an article describing the "unique circumstance" of Rudy Giuliani's unpaid leave of absence from Greenberg Traurig while representing Trump, possibly because of "potential conflicts", Christine Simmons said some other law firms may have turned down representing Trump in the Russia case due to "public relations headaches or business and recruitment concerns".[190]Trump has called such views a "Fake News narrative".[191][192]In a National Law Journal article, Ryan Lovelace described how white-collar lawyers must weigh the "risks" and "stigma" of joining the Trump team. He quoted a prominent defense attorney's concerns about "the constant shuffle of attorneys in and out of the president's legal team", and the possibility that an attorney could invest resources and reputation in such representation "only to find yourself on the sidelines a short time later because the president saw someone he liked better on Fox News".[192]The quoted attorney also noted "a stigma to being linked to this president" that might impact business with other clients.[192]A list of other reasons for not wanting to represent Trump is provided by Jill Abramson for The Guardian:The problem for the white-collar defense bar's crème de la crème is that Donald Trump is so blatantly the client from hell. He won't listen. He won't obey instructions. He is headstrong. He is a bully. Sometimes, he doesn't pay his bills. Most of all, it's possible that he isn't capable of discerning fact from fiction. This last foible could get any lawyer who represents him into very deep legal hot water. No one wants to get disbarred for the fame and fortune of representing President Trump. Then there's the justifiable concern over all the unforced legal errors that the defense side, led by Trump himself, has already committed.[193]An Above the Law article states that some law firms have refused to represent the President of the United States because "Donald Trump has somehow turned POTUS into a dog of a client self-respecting lawyers do not want to touch", expressing concern that "[i]f all the good attorneys — the ones with reputations to preserve and ethics to uphold — refuse to represent the president, what's left are the 'bad' attorneys. The ones who don't have the slightest idea what a moral and ethical principle is".[194]Allegations of business links to organized crime[edit]Journalists David Cay Johnston and Wayne Barrett, the latter of whom wrote an unauthorized 1992 Trump biography, have claimed that Trump and his companies did business with New York and Philadelphia families linked to the Italian-American Mafia.[195][196]A reporter for The Washington Post writes, "he was never accused of illegality, and observers of the time say that working with the mob-related figures and politicos came with the territory."[197]Trump helped a financier for the Scarfo family get a casino license, and constructed a casino using firms controlled by Nicodemo Scarfo.[198]Trump also bought real estate from Philadelphia crime family member Salvatore Testa, and bought concrete from companies associated with the Genovese crime family and the Gambino crime family.[195][196][197]Trump Plaza paid a $450,000 fine leveled by the Casino Gaming Commission for giving $1.6 million in rare automobiles to Robert LiButti, the acquaintance of John Gotti already mentioned.[29]Starting in 2003, the Trump Organization worked with Felix Sater, who had a 1998 racketeering conviction for a $40 million Mafia-linked stock fraud scheme, and who had then become an informant against the mafia.[199]Trump's attorney has said that Sater worked with Trump scouting real estate opportunities, but was never formally employed.[200]Use of bankruptcy laws[edit]Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy, but hotel and casino businesses of his have been declared bankrupt four times between 1991 and 2009 to re-negotiate debt with banks and owners of stock and bonds.[201][202]Because the businesses used Chapter 11 bankruptcy, they were allowed to operate while negotiations proceeded. Trump was quoted by Newsweek in 2011 saying, "I do play with the bankruptcy laws – they're very good for me" as a tool for trimming debt.[82][203]According to a report by Forbes in 2011, the four bankruptcies were the result of over-leveraged hotel and casino businesses in Atlantic City: Trump's Taj Mahal (1991), Trump Plaza Hotel (1992), Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts (2004), and Trump Entertainment Resorts (2009).[204][205]Trump said "I've used the laws of this country to pare debt.... We'll have the company. We'll throw it into a chapter. We'll negotiate with the banks. We'll make a fantastic deal. You know, it's like on The Apprentice. It's not personal. It's just business."[206]He indicated that many "great entrepreneurs" do the same.[204]1991[edit]In 1991, Trump Taj Mahal was unable to service its debt and filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy.[206]Forbes indicated that this first bankruptcy was the only one where Trump's personal financial resources were involved. Time, however, maintains that $72 million of his personal money was also involved in a later 2004 bankruptcy.[207]1992[edit]On November 2, 1992, the Trump Plaza Hotel filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and Trump lost his 49 percent stake in the luxury hotel to Citibank and five other lenders.[208]In return Trump received more favorable terms on the remaining $550+ million owed to the lenders, and retain his position as chief executive, though he would not be paid and would not have a role in day-to-day operations.[209]1994[edit]Trump Plaza Hotel and Casinoclosed in 2014By 1994, Trump had eliminated a large portion of his $900 million personal debt through sales of his Trump Taj Mahal and Trump Plazaassets,[210]and significantly reduced his nearly $3.5 billion in business debt. Although he lost the Trump Princess yacht and the Trump Shuttle (which he had bought in 1989), he did retain Trump Tower in New York City and control of three casinos in Atlantic City, including Trump's Castle. Trump sold his ownership of West Side Yards (now Riverside South, Manhattan) to Chinese developers including Hong Kong's New World Development, receiving a premium price in exchange for the use and display of the name "Trump" on the buildings.[211]2004[edit]Donald Trump's third corporate bankruptcy was on October 21, 2004, involving Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, the publicly-traded holding company for his three Atlantic City casinos and some others.[212]Trump lost over half of his 56% ownership and gave bondholders stock in exchange for surrendering part of the debt. No longer CEO, Trump retained a role as chairman of the board. In May 2005[213]the company emerged from bankruptcy as Trump Entertainment Resorts Holdings.[214]In his 2007 book, Think BIG and Kick Ass in Business and Life, Trump wrote: "I figured it was the bank's problem, not mine. What the hell did I care? I actually told one bank, 'I told you you shouldn't have loaned me that money. I told you the goddamn deal was no good.'"[215]2009[edit]Trump's fourth corporate bankruptcy occurred in 2009, when Trump and his daughter Ivanka resigned from the board of Trump Entertainment Resorts; four days later the company, which owed investors $1.74 billion against its $2.06 billion of assets, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. At that time, Trump Entertainment Resorts had three properties in Atlantic City: Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino (closed in 2014), and Trump Marina (formerly Trump's Castle, sold in 2011). Trump and some investors bought the company back that same year for $225 million. As part of the agreement, Trump withdrew a $100 million lawsuit he had filed against the casino's owners alleging damage to the Trump brand. Trump re-negotiated the debt, reducing by over $1 billion the repayments required to bondholders.[216][217]In 2014, Trump sued his former company to remove his name from the buildings since he no longer ran the company, having no more than a 10% stake; he lost the suit.[218]Trump Entertainment Resorts filed again for bankruptcy in 2014[219]and was purchased by billionaire philanthropist Carl Icahn in 2016, who acquired Trump Taj Mahal in the deal.[220]Campaign contributions[edit]According to a New York state report, Trump circumvented corporate and personal campaign donation limits in the 1980s – although he did not break any laws – by donating money to candidates from 18 different business subsidiaries, rather than giving primarily in his own name.[197][221]Trump told investigators he did so on the advice of his lawyers. He also said the contributions were not to curry favor with business-friendly candidates, but simply to satisfy requests from friends.[197][222]Donald J. Trump Foundation[edit]During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, media began reporting in detail on how the Donald J. Trump Foundation was funded and how Donald Trump used its funds. The Washington Post in particular reported several cases of possible mis-use, self-dealing and possible tax evasion.[18] [19] [20]Regarding the various irregularities in the Trump Foundation, former head of the Internal Revenue Service's Office of Exempt Organizations Division Marc Owens told The Washington Post: "This is so bizarre, this laundry list of issues.... It's the first time I've ever seen this, and I've been doing this for 25 years in the IRS, and 40 years total.[21]When interviewed for the Post's article, Trump spokesperson Boris Epshtein said that Trump did not knowingly violate any tax laws.[18]The office of New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman investigated the foundation "to make sure it's complying with the laws governing charities in New York."[22]Controversy over tax returns[edit]In October 2016, The New York Times published some tax documents from 1995. These documents indicate that Trump might have evaded paying taxes on as much as 916 million dollars in income at one time. Trump likely gave some of his creditors shares of his failing businesses to avoid taxes on hundreds of millions of dollars he was given in debt relief, which is illegal. Legal scholar Edward Kleinbard of the University of Southern California believes Trump forged tax documents. Trump claimed on his tax returns that he lost money, but did not recognize it in the form of canceled debts. He likely avoided paying 425 million dollars in taxes, says Steven M. Rosenthal, an attorney at the Tax Policy Center. Rosenthal claims he "borrowed other people's money and spent it in spectacular fashion." Trump might have performed a stock-for-debt swap. This would have allowed Trump to avoid paying income taxes for at least 18 years. An audit of Trump's tax returns for 2002 through 2008 was "closed administratively by agreement with the I.R.S. without assessment or payment, on a net basis, of any deficiency." Tax attorneys believe the government may have reduced what Trump was able to claim as a loss without requiring him to pay any additional taxes.[223][224]It is unknown whether the I.R.S. challenged Trump's use of the swaps because he has not released his tax returns. Trump's lawyers advised against Trump using the equity for debt swap, as they believed it to be potentially illegal.[225]Marc Kasowitz, name partner of the Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman firm, wrote a letter threatening The New York Times over publication of the 1995 documents. Kasowitz's action drew attention to the fact that the biglaw firm had done extensive legal work for Donald Trump and his businesses since at least 2001 including also bankrupt casino restructuring.[226]In early 2017, firm member and former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman introduced Pres.-elect Trump's nominee for Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos to the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension committee.[227]Destruction of documents[edit]In June 2016, a USA Today article reported that Donald Trump and his companies have been deleting emails and other documents on a large scale,[228]including evidence in lawsuits, sometimes in defiance of court orders and under subpoena since as early as 1973.[229][230][231]In October 2016, Kurt Eichenwald published new research findings in Newsweek. The findings were first published by Paul Singer[232]on June 13, 2016[233]and gained larger attention[234][235]after a new report in Newsweek on October 31, 2016. According to Newsweek, Trump and his companies "hid or destroyed thousands of documents" involving several court cases from as early as 1973."Over the course of decades, Donald Trump's companies have systematically destroyed or hidden thousands of emails, digital records and paper documents demanded in official proceedings, often in defiance of court orders.... In each instance, Trump and entities he controlled also erected numerous hurdles that made lawsuits drag on for years, forcing courtroom opponents to spend huge sums of money in legal fees as they struggled—sometimes in vain—to obtain records."— Kurt Eichenwald, Donald Trump's Companies Destroyed Emails in Defiance of Court Orders Newsweek, October 31, 2016In 1973 Trump, his father and their company were in court for civil charges for refusing to rent apartments to African Americans. After their lawyers had delayed court requests for documents for several months, Trump, then being under subpoena, said his company had destroyed corporate records of the past six months "for saving space". In a court case beginning in 2005 against Power Plant Entertainment, LLC, an affiliate of real estate developer Cordish Cos., it was revealed that Trump's companies had deleted the data requested by court.[236]Cordish Cos. had built two American Indian[237]casinos in Florida under the Hard Rock brand and Donald Trump accused them of cheating him out of that deal. Nonetheless, Trump's lawyers had refused to instruct workers to keep all records related to the case during litigation.[229]Trump had established a procedure to delete all data from their employees' computers every year at least since 2003,[234]despite knowing at least since 2001 that he might want to file a lawsuit. Even after the lawsuit was filed, Trump Hotelsdisposed of a computer of a key witness without having made a backup of the data. A former general counsel of the Trump casino unit confirmed that all data were deleted from nearly all companies' computers annually. Trump and his lawyers claimed they were not keeping records and digital data although it was revealed that Trump had launched his own high-speed internet provider in 1998 and an IBM Domino server had been installed for emails and digital files in 1999.[229][235]

Skipping to the end:Yes. The tax money that we all are required to pay to the Federal Government should be spent on programs whereby a bunch of educated intellectuals try to tell everyone else what they ought to think and how they ought to think. I say it this way specifically since I wish to address common criticisms on their own terms in this answer and not speak past them.The general concept of "public broadcasting" and the rationale supporting it is a very good one.On the children's education front, I have first-hand insight into the level of scrutiny that PBS-distributed children's programs are subjected to in terms of proving that they are effective at achieving pedagogical goals and in demonstrating positive impact. The bar is far higher than anything I've encountered in the private sector. They set the standard.There are certain "inefficiencies" (to put it mildly and politely) in the broadcast paradigm. That's true in for-profit television as well, but when cash is coming from government grants, foundation grants, and donations from "viewers like you," certain excesses are much less palatable. Although it will take awhile longer before anything matches the reach of broadcast television & radio, technological progress is leading us to better and more cost-efficient models of content distrubtion.I love many of the programs that are distributed by PBS (public TV) and Public Radio – and there are several where I get tears in my eyes. I've had to work really hard to keep this answer clean and not resort to appeal to emotion in lieu of making an argument. My "top ten" list is at the end.Now let's start at the beginning:I offered an answer to Obama-Romney Presidential Debates (October 2012): Is cutting federal funding to PBS an important spending cut? I addressed the question at a general level of American History and Politics of the United States of America – there are people who are still furious about the Barry Goldwater loss to Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and despite the fact that CPB funding is a drop in the ocean when it comes to the Federal Budget, the fact that it's a highly visible Great Society initiative makes an attractive target. I didn't, however, say much about what I personally think. Then Rahul Shankar had to go and call me out. So here we are.In the context of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election, I'm not at all beyond using pictures of sad-looking Sesame Street (creative franchise) characters to engage in blatant appeals to emotion to rhetorically club Mitt Romney (politician). Such things are completely within bounds of the "Pirate Code" for political discussion.http://www.quora.com/soapbox/319777http://www.quora.com/soapbox/A-Summary-of-the-Debate-for-Emily-Smith-Who-Didnt-WatchThat, however, is not what we're here to talk about. This is a policy conversation that needs to be had independent of that.We need to define a few things:Public Broadcasting: Television, radio, and other electronic media outlets whose primary mission is public service. It's a general concept.The Corporation for Public Broadcasting: A private corporation in the United States that is Congressionally chartered to distribute Federally budgeted funds to further public broadcasting. The CPB does not own stations and does not produce programs.PBS (public TV) - The Public Broadcasting Service: A non-profit American public broadcasting television network with 354 member TV stations in the United States which hold collective ownership over the network. PBS is a network that distributes content to its affiliates. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBSNPR (public radio) (National Public Radio), APM (American Public Media) and PRI (Public Radio International): Three networks of public radio stations that all produce and distribute public radio content to those stations. NPR is the largest network with 900 members, but prominent programs are distributed by the others. For example, This American Life is distributed by PRI and A Prairie Home Companion (radio) is distributed by APM.Affiliate: A local member of one of the networks that serves a specific market.Producer: Whoever it is that makes the content that gets distributed by the networks and broadcast by the affiliates. Sometimes the producer is one of the affiliate stations, sometimes it is the network, and sometimes it is an independent company – like Sesame Workshop (formerly known as the Children's Television Workshop), which is the producer of Sesame Street (creative franchise).We also need to address the elephant in the room...or whatever it is that Mr. Snuffleupagus is. THE PRODUCTION OF SESAME STREET IS SELF-SUPPORTING AND HAS BEEN SINCE 1978. The Federal Government DOES NOT pay for the production of Sesame Street. Big Bird is a red herring – except that he is yellow and not a fish. If you want to get technical, a small amount does flow from CPB via PBS to Sesame Workshop to cover content acquisition, but it is very little.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesame_Street#Fundinghttp://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/04/sesame-workshop-big-bird-lives-on-we-receive-very-little-funding-from-pbs/http://www.forbes.com/sites/larissafaw/2012/10/04/romney-may-like-big-bird-too-bad-he-doesnt-know-sesame-doesnt-receive-pbs-funding/As a matter of fact, Sesame Street started airing in 1969. PBS did not start broadcasting until 1970. Sesame Street came first. Not every show is Sesame Street, though, and not every Producer is Sesame Workshop.(Amended 3/16/2017: In 2015, Sesame Workshop made a deal with HBO to have HBO fund all of its production and then provide to PBS at no charge after a nine month exclusivity window. See Sesame Street’ to Air First on HBO for Next 5 Seasons)Back to the core matter at hand: you want to know why public broadcasting should be funded by the Federal Government? Here's how the 90th Congress of the United States of America explained it:http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title47/html/USCODE-2011-title47-chap5-subchapIII-partIV-subpartd-sec396.htm47 U.S.C. §396. Corporation for Public BroadcastingThe Congress hereby finds and declares thatit is in the public interest to encourage the growth and development of public radio and television broadcasting, including the use of such media for instructional, educational, and cultural purposes;it is in the public interest to encourage the growth and development of nonbroadcast telecommunications technologies for the delivery of public telecommunications services;expansion and development of public telecommunications and of diversity of its programming depend on freedom, imagination, and initiative on both local and national levels;the encouragement and support of public telecommunications, while matters of importance for private and local development, are also of appropriate and important concern to the Federal Government;it furthers the general welfare to encourage public telecommunications services which will be responsive to the interests of people both in particular localities and throughout the United States, which will constitute an expression of diversity and excellence, and which will constitute a source of alternative telecommunications services for all the citizens of the Nation;it is in the public interest to encourage the development of programming that involves creative risks and that addresses the needs of unserved and underserved audiences, particularly children and minorities;it is necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to complement, assist, and support a national policy that will most effectively make public telecommunications services available to all citizens of the United States;public television and radio stations and public telecommunications services constitute valuable local community resources for utilizing electronic media to address national concerns and solve local problems through community programs and outreach programs;it is in the public interest for the Federal Government to ensure that all citizens of the United States have access to public telecommunications services through all appropriate available telecommunications distribution technologies; anda private corporation should be created to facilitate the development of public telecommunications and to afford maximum protection from extraneous interference and control.Our common interest – as manifested by 47 U.S.C. §396 – isn't about television or broadcasting. It's about education, and making educational and cultural materials accessible. Easy access to education, information, and instruction is both an imperative for employment & GDP growth and makes for a better society. Both capitalistic free markets and democratic governance break when people are ignorant and uninformed. Education is a matter of national importance and critical infrastructure that supports the economy. The American Dream is a hollow vision when U.S. Citizens aren't equipped to compete.(Frankly, if you spend any time at all on Quora and I have to convince you that you personally benefit from other people being educated, then what are you doing here?)People often raise issues on of the amount that government in the U.S. spends on Education proportional to other things. I have issues with the proportion we spend too:http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/piechart_2012_US_totalA total of 15% of Government spending – when you factor in all levels – is directed to education. That's more then we spend on defense and second only to what we spend on health care. (Go ahead and read that again – especially my very good friends who lean left. We do invest more into education than we do on bombs.)We spend a total of $910.2 billion annually on Education and we're getting inadequate results out of just about everything...except Public Broadcasting. I have first-hand insight into the level of scrutiny and rigor that PBS' educational programming put through and that $445 million is an amazing deal when so much else isn't working. We're getting tremendous of reach and a lot of educational bang for the buck out of the five hundreths of a percent of all of the Education spending we do.Education is a topic I'm very passionate about and I could go on and on here. I've got another post I'm planning to write at some point, but the point I want to reinforce before I digress too far is that – despite rumors to the contrary – we throw a lot of money at this problem, and public broadcasting actually delivers. My argument is NOT that it's only whatever tiny percent of the Federal budget; my argument is that it's a tiny percent of what we collectively spend on Education and we get great value compared to the rest of what we're doing.I'll have a lot more to say on the general issue of education policy in the future, but now back to our regularly scheduled programming.The next piece we need to talk about is access.As I said before, Sesame Street will be fine – but that doesn't matter if people are unable to get to Sesame Street.Some people point to educational Cable channels (like those run by Discovery Inc. (Mass media company)) and to an emerging array of options on the Internet.Regarding cable:http://www.mediacenteronline.com/attatch/Cable10.indd.pdfRegarding the Internet:http://www.census.gov/hhes/computer/publications/2010.htmlUnlike either cable or Internet, Broadcast television has near universal penetration into American households. Over the course of a year, according to Nielsen (company), 91% of all U.S. television households - and 236 million people - watch PBS. The demographic breakdown of PBS' full-day audience reflects the overall U.S. population with respect to race/ethnicity, education and income. http://www.pbs.org/about/background/Via the PBS and Public Radio networks of broadcasters, that investment in educational (and informational and cultural) programming actually gets out there and makes it available.We need to address the perfectly valid questions about private foundations and individual donors filling the void.There's a bit of history that has mostly gotten overlooked in this debate over the years: the private sector actually created non-commercial public broadcasting when the Ford Foundation created the Educational Television and Radio Center (ETRC) in November 1952. That became the National Educational Television and Radio Center in 1958, and simply National Educational Television in 1963. In 1966, Ford Foundation began to withdraw its support. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Educational_Television.As that began to happen, the Carnegie Corporation of New York sponsored a 15 member panel to investigate the future of educational television. That panel – which included corporate leaders – recommended legislative action. http://www.current.org/wp-content/themes/current/archive-site/pbpb/carnegie/CarnegieISummary.html , http://cspcs.sanford.duke.edu/sites/default/files/descriptive/public_broadcasting.pdfPrivate foundations - e.g., Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Gates Foundation, Doris Duke, Melville Charitable Trust, and countless others – are often willing to offer varying degrees of support year over year, but being relied upon as a bedrock restricts them from undertaking other activities. It's not their cup of tea.(Besides, I can hear the conspiratorial complaints now about how a handfuls of private foundations are trying to influence our youth without any transparency or public accountability. We'll wind up having Congressional hearings over it all anyway.)As for individuals.... <sigh>We now head straight towards the heart of one of the core philosophical debates about American governance.236 million people watch PBS in a given year. The CPB appropriation for FY 2013 is $445 million. If that money were cut, every one of those people would have to contribute $1.88 annually to make up the shortfall.WAIT – WHAT??? THAT'S IT???That's correct. One dollar and eighty eight cents per person. Per year. (On top of what regular donors are already giving) If every viewer donated the amount of spare change that they might find lying in the street to their local PBS and Public Radio affiliate, the Federal funding issue goes away.There are two things though:They (we) do this.They (we) don't do this.91% of the 97.5% of U.S. households with television – or 88.75% of American households – watch PBS. And those households pay taxes to the Federal Government. (Go right ahead; I dare you to say "47%" to me.) The government takes a portion of those taxes and appropriates it to the CPB. The 12.5% of households that never ever watch PBS may be a bit irked by that. However, $10.8 billion has been put towards the Corporation for Public Broadcasting over the 43 years since 1969 and that has bought a lot of kids learning ABCs & 123s, a lot of people getting inspired about the Universe through shows like Cosmos & NOVA, a lot of people learning about America through Ken Burns (documentary filmmaker) specials, a lot of people appreciating fine cooking though Julia Child (TV personality), and lots and lots of happy little Bob Ross (artist) clouds. Let me know when the F-35 Lightning II – estimated lifetime cost = $1000 billion (otherwise known as $1 trillion) – finally goes into production and then we'll talk about how the Federal budget process works. That's a program we've been pouring money into and haven't seen anything out of it.Flipping to the next point: do you think all those pledge drives would be necessary if everyone who watched or listened was willing to chip in two bucks? People don't do it. People should but people don't.So do we pull the plug?.....Well?Here we begin to tread a bunch of slippery slope arguments. Some will say that if we expect everyone to simply do the things that they ought to do then we'll never live in a civilized society and we might as well give up on the whole grand experiment of American democracy. Others will say that by protecting people from the consequences of their actions or inactions that we're already on a slippery slope that jeopardizes our civilized society so we might as well give up on the whole experiment of American democracy.I don't want to go to either of those places. How then do we move forward when many of our great debates can be reduced to this elemental question?The best answer I have – which will be unsatisfying to those who crave certainty – is by taking it one step at a time. There are lines and boundaries that we all have to balance individually and all have to balance together. I understand that pragmatism can be really frustrating to people who are looking for ideological clarity and yearn to be in a perfect world that we don't live in. (If you take issue with that stance, please reread Oh, the Places You'll Go! before getting on my case.)In the world we live in, I think we need to spend collective funds trying to persuade individuals to eat more fruits & vegetables, to exercise more, and to embrace education – and part of that is making those "good" things more accessible and available to everyone. How do we determine what is good? There are people who spend time studying things that have positive effects and things that have adverse effects and we drag them before peer-review panels and Congressional subcommittees and we make them defend their conclusions. And then we put those studies out there and put them into action.There are two other things to consider here in terms of individual action:Big MacsThe murder of Kitty GenoveseFor the first of the two above items, I'm of course alluding to America's 30+% obesity rate. With all due respect to the fine folks at McDonald's (fast food chain) who are perfectly welcome to offer and promote their array of fast food products, there are plenty of examples where people don't choose what is "best" for them of their own accord and it has broader consequences for the rest of us. (It also doesn't help that moderation went out of style in this country in the early 1980s.) These individual choices – all combined – are a major contributor to skyrocketing health care costs in this country. It is not too different with education, thinking, and general media consumption. Absent active encouragement from social institutions of more constructive behaviors, a non-trivial percentage of the population will opt for the "lowest energy required at the lowest price presented" offering available to them. The Public Broadcasters are such institutions. As for "lowest energy required" offerings that come out of the private sector, I have two words: Jersey Shore. There may be 57 million channels these days, but there is still nothing on.An aside: I'd like to observe that churches can be great social institutions for encouraging more constructive behaviors; unfortunately, though, some churches and religious denominations are constructed on questionable foundations, too resistant to change, and/or are otherwise dangerously rigid. Some of those even have their own television networks. That's a conversation for another day, though.That brings me to my second point about individual action: there is a well-documented sociopsychological phenomenon known as Diffusion of Responsibility. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility Individuals tend to assume that either others are responsible for taking action or have already done so. The phenomenon tends to occur in groups of people above a certain critical size and when responsibility is not explicitly assigned – and is more likely to occur in conditions of anonymity. One of the most famous examples of this phenomenon was the 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese; the crime had 38 witnesses and no one called the police because everyone assumed that someone else was taking care of it. When you expand that pool to a broadcast television audience and the level of urgency is that of a pledge drive, it's easy and low energy to think, "someone else has got it covered."If your reaction is, "if people won't pay then we shouldn't offer it," then please loop back to the bolded, "So do we pull the plug?" above.Moving on.You may be wondering about perceived bias.Which bias? The accusations of liberal bias or the accusations of conservative bias?http://mediamatters.org/research/2005/06/16/noonan-claimed-everyone-knows-pbs-has-liberal-b/133349http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/050623/23cpb.htmhttp://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2671The Public Broadcasters get hit from both sides of the political aisle, which I take as a sign of doing something right. The content that gets put out there is subject to the scrutiny of a partisan Congress – and for all of the threats, CPB funding keeps increasing over time – even through the early 2000s where the ostensibly conservative Republican Party controlled both houses of Congress and the White House. http://www.cpb.org/appropriation/history.html If you consider the fact of PBS' receiving tax dollars via the CPB an affront to Conservatism, there's not much I can do for you if you don't buy the case I've made thus far.I strongly believe that the benefits are well worth the costs, but...Read Marco North's answer. I come out in a different place in my conclusions, but I don't dispute his observations. The benefit of the broadcast medium is wide audience access and nearly 100% household reach. The downsides are high barriers to entry, high capital costs to maintain, and lots of middlemen in the operating and production structures.Yes. I am obliquely stating that there are some places where money hemmor - OH MY GOODNESS! Look overhead! Is that an F-35??? No - my bad. Just a pigeon. We still don't have any F-35's.The future heralds something different, though. When Internet household penetration gets to 95+% and approaches the reach of broadcast, the benefit of the expensive broadcast infrastructure goes away and we can focus entirely on promoting quality content which is being made in abundance online for a tiny fraction of the production cost. The future is Khan Academy, Coursera, MITx, Udacity, iTunes U, Podcasts, random how-to videos that individuals upload to YouTube, and expansive conversations about politics and public affairs on Q&A Websites.It is technically possible for many of the people reading this to shoot & edit a video on their smartphone and then post that video for public consumption. Once we get to the point where everyone has the ability to do that and access to what everyone else is doing, it's a whole different ballgame. We're not there yet (http://www.internetworldstats.com/am/us.htm), but the day is coming.CODA(If you don't know what that is, you should probably listen to a classical music program – perhaps on a public radio station.)This answer went through more drafts and course adjustments then pretty much anything else I've written here. Somewhat ironically, the biggest reasons that it was challenging for me to approach this subject in a balanced and reasonable fashion are a host of balanced and reasonable people that have entered my life via public broadcasting. Here's my top ten:#1: Fred Rogers (Mr. Rogers)I count Fred Rogers as a personal hero. I LOVED Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood as a child and his attitude to creativity, make believe, and imagination. I went to college in Pittsburgh, PA – in Mr. Rogers REAL neighborhood. WQED Pittsburgh, where the show was filmed and produced, was between my apartment and the Carnegie Mellon campus. The School of Drama did the annual "Television Project" over at the station, and the set for King Friday's castle was along the wall. These days, I have a wooden "Neighborhood Trolley" sitting on my window sill as a constant reminder of that model of amazing human decency and sincere commitment to bettering the lives of the young.#2: LeVar BurtonSome people hold that LeVar Burton's most important cultural contribution is his role as Kunta Kinte in the Roots TV miniseries. Others will say that it was as Geordi LaForge in Star Trek: The Next Generation (TV series). Without a doubt in my mind, the most important work that Burton has done has been on Reading Rainbow (Children's Television Show). The show featured great books for children to read and children themselves reporting on their favorite books. (A child reporting on Gila Monsters Meet You at the Airport is etched in my own childhood memory.) These days he's continuing the work in the form of an iPad app: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/reading-rainbow/id512350210?mt=8#3 Jim HensonC'mon. You KNEW he was going to be on this list.#4: Neil deGrasse Tyson (astronomer)And you had to guess that he was going to be on this list too. Following in the footsteps of people like, Don "Mr. Wizard" Herbert, Bill Nye, and most importantly his mentor Carl Sagan, Tyson is currently America's foremost voice for Science. And he makes it AWESOME.#5: Sylvia Poggioli#6: Lourdes Garcia-NavarroI'm pairing #5 and #6 together. I listen to NPR most of the time when I'm driving and part of the reason for that is because actual Journalism occurs. The foreign correspondents on NPR – most notably Poggioli and Garcia-Navarro – provide what I hold to be the best coverage and insight into what's going on in the broader world. I'm incredibly grateful for their work and the stories they bring home.#7: Terry GrossFresh Air is what an interview show ought to be. Terry can sit for an hour with just about anyone and plumb the depths of their life story, interests, and opinions. Interview "segments" almost anywhere else usually deliver little except talking points or a plug for a new book or movie. Terry Gross gets their story told. Amongst my personal favorites are her two interviews of Tom Waits – where she's practically giddy: http://www.npr.org/2011/03/04/134236977/tom-waits-a-raspy-voice-heads-to-the-hall-of-fame , http://www.npr.org/2011/10/31/141657227/tom-waits-the-fresh-air-interview#8: Louis RukeyserMy appreciation of Rukeyser is mostly nostalgic, and a large reason that he makes this list now is because of the current ridiculous state of what passes for financial reporting. Remember when this person, who exuded sober discipline and responsibility – at least in the mind of an elementary school kid who left the TV on after kids programming was over – was a public face of Wall Street and Investing?#9: Kai RyssdalWith my #8 in mind, amongst the people still doing a good job with making business and financial news both insightful and interesting is American Public Media's Ryssdal. When I'm working on site somewhere, Marketplace is usually what I listen to during my evening commute. Ryssdal does a great job with feature stories and connecting the dots of the day's events to market responses.#10: Tom & Ray Magliozzi (Click & Clack, the Car Talk (talk show) guys)I close my personal top ten with two guys who would probably take offense at being called "balanced and reasonable." They're retiring now after 35 years on the radio. C'mon – admit it. You know you love 'em. And you know you've learned from 'em too.Honorable mentions: Ira Glass (who I imagine is way up on other people's lists), Peter Sagal & The "Wait! Wait! Don't Tell Me!" Cast, The Radiolab Team, and Garrison Keillor.And that, as they say, is a wrap.