Emoluments: Trump's profits from private businesses to get hard look from federal appeals courts

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by EvilEyeFleegle, Dec 9, 2019.

  1. EvilEyeFleegle
    Offline

    EvilEyeFleegle Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2017
    Messages:
    5,237
    Thanks Received:
    763
    Trophy Points:
    355
    Ratings:
    +3,745
    So..is this corruption? More to the point..is it illegal? Does it even matter..when the drift appears to be that the President is above the law..absent impeachment?

    Emoluments: Trump's profits from private businesses to get hard look from federal appeals courts


    "An obscure provision of the Constitution that Donald Trump ridiculed as "this phony Emoluments Clause" will be debated in two federal appeals courts this week, representing yet another legal threat to the embattled president.
    Even as impeachment dominates the agenda in Congress and President Trump's personal lawyers ask the Supreme Court to shield his tax returns and financial records from investigators, courts in the District of Columbia and Richmond, Va., will hear arguments that the president routinely receives gifts from foreign and U.S. government officials.
    Those two challenges and a third working its way through federal courts in New York focus on the Trump Organization's financial stake in hotels and restaurants, which cater to customers both foreign and domestic with interests before the government Trump heads.

    The question: Does that violate the Constitution?

    Democrats in Congress, the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia, and some of Trump's competitors in New York City say the answer is yes. When a foreign official stays at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., or U.S. officials stay at a Trump resort in Scotland, they say, the presidential profits are unconstitutional.
    The Justice Department says the answer is no. Its lawyers are telling all three courts that a violation must involve Trump profiting directly from his employment as president, not from "the proceeds of ordinary commercial transactions between foreign governments and businesses."
    On Monday, that debate will come before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The challengers won the first round in federal district court, forcing Trump's appeal.
    On Thursday, the debate will shift to the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, following earlier decisions that gave each side a victory and a defeat."
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. DGS49
    Offline

    DGS49 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2012
    Messages:
    8,091
    Thanks Received:
    1,844
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Ratings:
    +8,347
    Like a lot of T.D.S. work product, this argument/accusation is utterly specious.

    Utilizing Trump properties in the normal course of business is not a "gift" to the President, regardless of whether it is done by a U.S. citizen, a foreign national, a foreign government, or an illegal alien.

    It is no different than if some Saudi bought a copy of O'Bama's dreadful autobiography while he was still in office.

    This is not a matter of opinion. It is an absolute rock-hard certainty that these claims or accusations will be tossed out as soon as they come before a court of adults - if it's the USSC, so be it. This is not a close question.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page