HAS STURGEON BEEN PROTECTING TRUMP'S TURNBERRY "MONEY-LAUNDERING" OPERATION?

From Errshurr

Trump visits "the laundromat"

Ayrshire folk will have mixed feelings about this, but it's best to know the truth. While it's great that someone, out of the blue, decided to pump or dump "hundreds of millions of dollars" into a humble Ayrshire golf course, the possibility that this was done for dubious reasons has to be considered. In fact, the suspicion refuses to go away. When Donald Trump bought Turnberry in 2014 and then reportedly spent a fortune developing it, questions were raised about where the giant wedge of cash to do this came from.

Strangest of all, however, is the evidence that Scottish First Minister -- and Ayrshire lass -- Nicola Sturgeon seems to have been playing defence for Trump, all the more surprising because Sturgeon is someone who claims to despise Donald Trump. 

Right, let's look at the nitty gritty. 

The reported price paid by Trump for Turnberry is usually reported as $60 million. Trump then claims to have spent $200 million renovating the course, resort, and its facilities. This is not impossible, but it seems way too high from what I saw when I last visited the resort. 

The BBC has reported on what the money had been spent on:

The spokesman said work had included "transforming" the Ailsa golf course, introducing a grand ballroom, refurbishing the 103-bedroom Turnberry hotel and adding a two-bedroom luxury suite and halfway house to the Turnberry Lighthouse.

Still doesn't sound like $200 million to me.  

But that aside, how is this massive "investment" paying out? It looks like the golf resort has never made a profit since Trump took over. 

Here is Forbes dishing some of the stats:

"Business has been even worse at Turnberry, which Trump bought in 2014 for $65 million. Despite investing an additional $75 million or so to fix up the property from 2014 to 2018, the place piled up losses of $58 million, according to an analysis of financial reports. The 2019 figures, first reported by the Scotsman, bring Turnberry’s total losses to $61 million since 2014."

In fact, it seems to operate regularly at a loss, and simply doesn't make sense as a normal business. So, what's really going on? What is the real business model here?

If Trump really did spend the sums claimed, the question arises where did he get the money from. It's not like it's just lying around as gold coins in his safe, like Scrooge McDuck.

No, Trump has to get it from somewhere or someone else as "loans." This raises the following questions: 

• Who lent him this money?
• Do they want it back?
• What do they get in return?

These are the kind of questions that Green Party leader Patrick Harvie wanted answered in 2021 when he called for an "unexplained wealth order" (UWO) to look into the financing of Turnberry.

As reported by the BBC:

The Scottish Green Party first called for an unexplained wealth order amid questions about how Mr Trump had managed to finance the purchases of the courses at Turnberry in 2014 and at Menie in Aberdeenshire, in 2006.

The UK government introduced the orders to help investigations into money laundering and other criminal financial activity.

Patrick Harvie, the Greens co-leader, has said Trump's unusual pattern of spending and the ongoing civil and criminal cases in the US provided Scottish authorities with the grounds to investigate the businessman.

Oddly the unexplained wealth order did not happen. In other words, there was a cover-up. 

So, how did this happen?

Firstly, then first Minister Nicola Sturgeon passed the buck, claiming that responsibility for UWO investigations lay with the  Crown Office's Civil Recovery Unit, an organisation independent from the government. Humza Yousaf, then Justice Secretary, disagreed, stating that the law did allow for the Scottish government to launch an unexplained wealth order investigation. Interesting difference of opinion there. No doubt Nicola had to get Humza in a locked room to see her point of view -- proverbial fly on the wall stuff. 

A case brought by AVAAZ, an international activist group, to the Court of Session, Scotland's most senior civil court, then looked at the question, with the government arguing that it didn't have the power to do UWOs. This was apparently decided by a single judge, Lord Sandison, who found in the government's favour. 

So, in short, Nicola Sturgeon's SNP government, which has always tried to gain additional powers, argued in this case against having the power to look into The Donald's finances. Smell a rat?

One other interesting detail. Who nominated Lord Sandison to sit on the Court of Session? Oh, yes, Nicola Sturgeon.

This has led many to speculate that Turnberry is, in reality, a money laundering operation. In a November 2021 article The Independent ran with a story: "Trump could still face money laundering investigation over Scottish golf course after judge rules courts should decide." But of course he didn't. It seems that in Scotland, Trump is too well protected.

Or is he?