• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

President Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
I kind of feel sorry for Mrs. Pence, who seems overwhelmed with it all.

I also noticed he was not wearing an American flag lapel pin. Where's the outrage, Fox News??
 
Last edited:
Another day another giant lie exposed.

At a news conference last week, now-President Donald Trump said he and his daughter, Ivanka, had signed paperwork relinquishing control of all Trump-branded companies. Next to him were stacks of papers in manila envelopes — documents he said transferred “complete and total control” of his businesses to his two sons and another longtime employee.

Sheri Dillon, the Trump attorney who presented the plan, said that*Trump “has relinquished leadership and management of the Trump Organization.” Everything would be placed in a family trust by Jan. 20, she said.

That hasn’t happened.

To transfer ownership of his biggest companies, Trump has to file a long list of documents in Florida, Delaware and New York. We asked officials in each of those states whether they have received the paperwork. As of 3:15 p.m. today, the officials said they have not.

Trump and his associates “are not doing what they said they would do,” said Richard Painter, the chief ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush. “And even that was completely inadequate.”
Click to expand...

He's officially in violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution.
 
Stacko said:
.....
He's officially in violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and he's standing in front of his hotel thinking "So who's gonna do anything about it?" He's incredibly lucky the Democrats couldn't take back the Senate.
 
Meadmaker said:
Well, he is officially lying, but that's nothing new.

As for the latter part, I doubt you would find many constitutional scholars who would agree with you.
Click to expand...

I don't think you know how the new world works. Trump announces he will do something and that's it done.

At least in Trumpland.
 
Meadmaker said:
Well, he is officially lying, but that's nothing new.

As for the latter part, I doubt you would find many constitutional scholars who would agree with you.
Click to expand...


Not so fast.
“The idea behind the clause is pretty intuitive,” Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman notes at Bloomberg View. “If federal officials can be compensated by foreign governments, they can be bought.” He adds: “It’s pretty clear that the clause was intended to stop foreign governments from currying favor with federal officials through gifts.”
Click to expand...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-emoluments-clause_us_58794852e4b09281d0eaf212
http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-11-21/trump-s-hotel-lodges-a-constitutional-problem
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...es-the-oath-of-office/?utm_term=.a38cf5e82e68
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trumps-ethics-train-wreck/513446/
 
Last edited:
Trump hasn't given up anything:
Sheri Dillon, the Trump attorney who presented the plan, said that Trump “has relinquished leadership and management of the Trump Organization.” Everything would be placed in a family trust by Jan. 20, she said.

That hasn’t happened.

To transfer ownership of his biggest companies, Trump has to file a long list of documents in Florida, Delaware and New York. We asked officials in each of those states whether they have received the paperwork. As of 3:15 p.m. today, the officials said they have not.
Click to expand...
http://www.propublica.org/article/t...-from-his-companies-but-no-record-hes-done-so
 
Bob001 said:
Not so fast.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-emoluments-clause_us_58794852e4b09281d0eaf212
http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-11-21/trump-s-hotel-lodges-a-constitutional-problem
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...es-the-oath-of-office/?utm_term=.a38cf5e82e68
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trumps-ethics-train-wreck/513446/
Click to expand...

If you could find a quote from a Harvard Law professor who said that his business holdings violate the emoluments clause, that would be one thing. You might be able to do that, but you haven't so far. When you conduct business with a customer that happens to be a foreign government, you aren't receiving gifts.

Mind you, I think you could find near unanimity among scholars that his business holdings create potential ethical conflict and are almost guaranteed to create an "appearance of impropriety" at some point.

My only problem with this whole line of attack against Trump is that it would almost prohibit any successful businessman from ever becoming president, and I think that goes too far.

For what it's worth, I'm confident that before the year is out, Donald Trump will commit at least one violation that is significantly more egregious than simply continuing to do business.
 
While references to climate change, LGBT rights, and employment for the disabled have been deleted, the White House website is now promoting Melania jewelry line.

One of the more bizarre changes to the whitehouse.gov website can be found on First Lady Melania Trump’s biography, which also functions as a modeling resume and advertisement for her jewelry.

While the first few sentences feature the typical biographical info, the site also specifically plugs her jewelry line: “In April 2010, Melania Trump launched her own jewelry collection, “Melania™ Timepieces & Jewelry”, on QVC.”
Click to expand...
 
Armitage72 said:
While references to climate change, LGBT rights, and employment for the disabled have been deleted, the White House website is now promoting Melania jewelry line.
Click to expand...

I just went to whitehouse.gov and the text has apparently been changed.

In the article linked, the name of the jewelry line was mentioned. Now, it simply says, "Melania launched her own jewelry line".

These guys don't seem to good about that whole "appearance of impropriety" thing.
 
acbytesla said:
Yeah, like God is omni-benevolent. :rolleyes: He loves us all, but performed mass genocide with the flood. Dismembered 42 children because they teased Elijah. Allowed Jeptha to sacrifice his daughter and that is just a taste of that horror book. Out of curiosity, why did he spare Abraham's son but allowed Jeptha to kill his daughter? And Christians think the new testament is better where God decides that non-believers should be tortured for eternity.
Click to expand...

And, he seems to like sticking it to libs, ripping the reigns of power away from you! Lol
 
Bob001 said:
Yeah, and he's standing in front of his hotel thinking "So who's gonna do anything about it?" He's incredibly lucky the Democrats couldn't take back the Senate.
Click to expand...

If he's halfway successful, wait till 2018. Are you going to be able to handle even more losses?
 
logger said:
If he's halfway successful, wait till 2018. Are you going to be able to handle even more losses?
Click to expand...

Contrary to what you think, Trump isn't appointed for life, and neither has the GOP become the State Party.
In a democracy, majorities will change, it's just a matter of time.
 
logger said:
If he's halfway successful, wait till 2018. Are you going to be able to handle even more losses?
Click to expand...

I would refer you to the laconic reply of the Spartans to Phillip of Macedon.

(With thanks to Bill Bennett, in whose book I first read the tale.)
 
Meadmaker said:
If you could find a quote from a Harvard Law professor who said that his business holdings violate the emoluments clause, that would be one thing. You might be able to do that, but you haven't so far. When you conduct business with a customer that happens to be a foreign government, you aren't receiving gifts.
Click to expand...


And who said it's restricted to gifts?
The Emoluments Clause appears in Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. It bars any “person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States from accepting any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state” “without the consent of the Congress.” The word “emolument” comes from the Latin emolumentum, meaning profit or gain.
Click to expand...
https://www.propublica.org/article/...itution-if-he-continues-to-own-his-businesses

The President shouldn't be conducting any kind of personal business at all while in office. If anyone -- let alone a foreign power -- chooses a Trump business over his competitors, how do you know it's not favoritism? And conflicts aren't necessarily immediately financial. If a Trump project abroad needs government approval or cooperation, as they often do, how do you know that it won't be traded for some U.S. concession?

Meadmaker said:
Mind you, I think you could find near unanimity among scholars that his business holdings create potential ethical conflict and are almost guaranteed to create an "appearance of impropriety" at some point.

My only problem with this whole line of attack against Trump is that it would almost prohibit any successful businessman from ever becoming president, and I think that goes too far.
....
Click to expand...

That's just not true. There's no reason why the President couldn't -- or shouldn't -- be required to conform to the standards that apply to the cabinet. That means putting holdings into a true blind trust that the trustee is free to buy, sell and trade in. Trump's billionaire cabinet nominees have sold their holdings into blind trusts or otherwise separated themselves. Jimmy Carter ran a family peanut business that he put into a blind trust. VP Nelson Rockefeller's -- that's Rockefeller -- family holdings were closely scrutinized. Obama did not use a blind trust, but he put his money into broad-based funds that anybody could examine. And what compounds it all is that Trump refuses to release his tax returns, so we don't know where his money is coming from or how much there is or how much he owes to whom. And what's worst is that he's thumbing his nose at us, saying nobody cares and he can do what he wants. This just smells like a toxic waste dump, and we're living in the middle of it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennife...decessors-did-with-their-assets/#3dd7e1b17915
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/17/o...o-to-eliminate-his-conflicts-of-interest.html
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom