Trump take over of golf course and give away of Carter Barron

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the point is that the golf courses have been public courses run by the DC government.

They aren't run by the DC government as I understand it.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, DC has had a role in the running of the golf courses even if it outsourced day to day operations. This makes sense given that most of the visitors with be DMV residents. It is is impossible for regular folks to negotiate with the Federal government, which means that local residents have no say in decisions that impact them directly.

[Anonymous]

And, the shortened time line for the development of the tennis Cours, ensures that DMV residents have absolutely no input in the process. In just over a week, the bidding process will close. It was started just before the holidays as a way to ensure a non-competitive bidding process.

Apparently, DC is going to try and get the bidding process extended. And, the petition at least has raised awareness of the problems. If you care, please contact your Council member or state representatives if you are in MD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, DC has had a role in the running of the golf courses even if it outsourced day to day operations. This makes sense given that most of the visitors with be DMV residents. It is is impossible for regular folks to negotiate with the Federal government, which means that local residents have no say in decisions that impact them directly.

Explain to me how "DC" has had a role in running the golf courses? The NLT was chosen by the NPS to run the courses. The NLT is a 501(c)3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They aren't run by the DC government as I understand it.

The golf courses are operated by a contractor, selected by the feds.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

[Anonymous]

Everything pedo piggy touches dies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

[b]
Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

[url]

Exactly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

Neither will restricting access to recreational resources that have long been available to the community as a public good — including one of the few golf courses where Black Americans were, historically, able to play. Hmm. “Black” and “segregation “ are on Trump’s banned words list, so substitute “African Americans “ for “Black Americans” and assume that most are educated enough to understand that “historically “ points to the long history of racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

Neither will restricting access to recreational resources that have long been available to the community as a public good — including one of the few golf courses where Black Americans were, historically, able to play. Hmm. “Black” and “segregation “ are on Trump’s banned words list, so substitute “African Americans “ for “Black Americans” and assume that most are educated enough to understand that “historically “ points to the long history of racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in DC.

There's no evidence of this happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

Neither will restricting access to recreational resources that have long been available to the community as a public good — including one of the few golf courses where Black Americans were, historically, able to play. Hmm. “Black” and “segregation “ are on Trump’s banned words list, so substitute “African Americans “ for “Black Americans” and assume that most are educated enough to understand that “historically “ points to the long history of racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in DC.

There's no evidence of this happening.

No? So you have some special spidey sense that the Langston course will be left as it is? Or you just like to make: “There’s no evidence of this happening” posts without providing any clarifying information ?


https://www.eenews.net/articles/it-was-ours-trump-interest-shakes-historic-black-golf-course-in-dc/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

Neither will restricting access to recreational resources that have long been available to the community as a public good — including one of the few golf courses where Black Americans were, historically, able to play. Hmm. “Black” and “segregation “ are on Trump’s banned words list, so substitute “African Americans “ for “Black Americans” and assume that most are educated enough to understand that “historically “ points to the long history of racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in DC.

There's no evidence of this happening.

No? So you have some special spidey sense that the Langston course will be left as it is? Or you just like to make: “There’s no evidence of this happening” posts without providing any clarifying information ?


https://www.eenews.net/articles/it-was-ours-trump-interest-shakes-historic-black-golf-course-in-dc/

Why is the burden of proof on me to prove things won't happen? So far, you have not shown any evidence to support your claims of racism and racial segregation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

Neither will restricting access to recreational resources that have long been available to the community as a public good — including one of the few golf courses where Black Americans were, historically, able to play. Hmm. “Black” and “segregation “ are on Trump’s banned words list, so substitute “African Americans “ for “Black Americans” and assume that most are educated enough to understand that “historically “ points to the long history of racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in DC.

There's no evidence of this happening.

No? So you have some special spidey sense that the Langston course will be left as it is? Or you just like to make: “There’s no evidence of this happening” posts without providing any clarifying information ?


https://www.eenews.net/articles/it-was-ours-trump-interest-shakes-historic-black-golf-course-in-dc/

Why is the burden of proof on me to prove things won't happen? So far, you have not shown any evidence to support your claims of racism and racial segregation.

The burden is on you to support your own assertions— if you want anyone else to take them seriously. As to the rest, if you so little understanding of the history of racial segregation in DC and the historical importance of the Langston golf course to Black golfers — and you couldn’t be bothered to read the link that I posted, nothing that I can say here is likely to educate you in a meaningful way. Enjoy your bliss — as they say. Peace out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Suing over the spirit of an agreement isn't going to go well.

Neither will restricting access to recreational resources that have long been available to the community as a public good — including one of the few golf courses where Black Americans were, historically, able to play. Hmm. “Black” and “segregation “ are on Trump’s banned words list, so substitute “African Americans “ for “Black Americans” and assume that most are educated enough to understand that “historically “ points to the long history of racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in DC.

There's no evidence of this happening.

No? So you have some special spidey sense that the Langston course will be left as it is? Or you just like to make: “There’s no evidence of this happening” posts without providing any clarifying information ?


https://www.eenews.net/articles/it-was-ours-trump-interest-shakes-historic-black-golf-course-in-dc/

Why is the burden of proof on me to prove things won't happen? So far, you have not shown any evidence to support your claims of racism and racial segregation.

The burden is on you to support your own assertions— if you want anyone else to take them seriously. As to the rest, if you so little understanding of the history of racial segregation in DC and the historical importance of the Langston golf course to Black golfers — and you couldn’t be bothered to read the link that I posted, nothing that I can say here is likely to educate you in a meaningful way. Enjoy your bliss — as they say. Peace out.

To date, there is no evidence of Trump reviving racial segregation for the federal golf courses. In fact, none of Trump's private golf courses have racial segregation policies. Mar-a-lago was opened to Blacks and Jews after Trump purchased it.