Trump poised to violate Constitution his first day in office, George W. Bush’s ethics lawyer says

[Luddly Neddite]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

Yabut, he has done similar crimes before - going to foreign countries for money for his campaign. Its very likely he got money from Pooting. In fact, he was pretty open about that as well as his thank you calls on his unsecured cell phone.

He has also been very open in his desire to end the US Constitution - in fact, that's why the trumpkins voted for him.

There's no doubt that trump is a criminal and always has been but maybe by now, someone has read Article 5 to him. If so, he'll stick to his Twitter whining cuz he just doesn't have the balls or the brains for actual governing. Just more of his hot air threats.

 

[MisterBeale]

When Obama decided to NOT enforce federal immigration laws, was he violating the Constiution?

POP QUIZ! How many illegal immigrants has Obama deported?

How many illegal ALIENS has Obama deported?

Using the old definition, or using Obama's new definition?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens, or are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

Next he'll be renting out the Lincoln bedroom and selling missile technology to the Chinese. No, wait...

He's already given the Chinese a lot more than that.

Now he's got to pay Pooting back for the election.

 

[koshergrl]

We already knew Trump would play loosie goosie on this. Now, nothing can be done until after he takes the oath. He may find a way around all this like he did on Trump U. We are only using our crystal balls at this time.

Who are you kidding, you don't have any balls.

All this hysteria based on nothing but lefty fantasies.

 

[MisterBeale]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

 

[HenryBHough]

Amusing how the looney-left has suddenly fallen in love with Booooosssshhhhhhhh!

 

[TemplarKormac]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

Sure he is snowflake, sure he is.......

Don't take my word for it, take the lawyers word.

A lawyer doing an interview with ThinkProgress. Yeah, his words are about as good as one of Hillary's campaign promises.

 

[Mustang]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

I've got some news for you (and for anyone else who thinks this or any other constitutional violation will matter to Trump supporters).

After years of trying to make monumental mountains out of minor molehills when some issue had Obama's name even only tangentially attached to it, Trump supporters and conservatives will summarily dismiss almost any Trump transgression.

However, Trump better be careful what he does since I can see him being Impeached and removed from office by Republicans who are not only wary of his policies and his temperament, but who would also just LOVE to have Pence in the Oval Office instead of The Donald.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

That rich that you should give a shit about that considering what the Clinton foundation was up to. Next to the Clinton foundation, Trump properties are a lemonade stand.

Ya know, there's just nothing quite so stupid as you RWNJ traitors. Instead of sitting on your fat butts lying about the Clintons, why don't you get a degree from Trump University? Or invest in any of his other crooked, failed schemes? How about investing in a casino or two. Or three. Or the Plaza Hotel? Hmmm ?

You wanted Pooting in the Lincoln bedroom. You wanted a fascist who says he'll take your rights away and that's what you got. You idiots sold out your country, your own children's futures and you will never ever be able to say you didn't know it.

 

[Eloy]

Impeaching Trump is in the cards.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

Sure he is snowflake, sure he is.......

Don't take my word for it, take the lawyers word.

A layer doing an interview with ThinkProgress. Yeah, his words are about as good as one of Hillary's campaign promises.

Too stupid and too lazy to put down your Twinkie and actually address the OP.

Why don't you just admit you don't have a clue? Admit you can't refute the OP.

Or belly up to another Twinkie.

 

[MisterBeale]

When Obama decided to NOT enforce federal immigration laws, was he violating the Constiution?

POP QUIZ! How many illegal immigrants has Obama deported?

pop quiz no.2.....how many have come right back in?.....

 

[Slade3200]

When Obama decided to NOT enforce federal immigration laws, was he violating the Constiution?

POP QUIZ! How many illegal immigrants has Obama deported?

How many illegal ALIENS has Obama deported?

Using the old definition, or using Obama's new definition?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens, or are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

I'm not offended, just like to call out the assholes when I see them being assholes

 

[koshergrl]

Amusing how the looney-left has suddenly fallen in love with Booooosssshhhhhhhh!

Isn't it, though?

 

[koshergrl]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

I've got some news for you (and for anyone else who thinks this or any other constitutional violation will matter to Trump supporters).

After years of trying to make monumental mountains out of minor molehills when some issue had Obama's name even only tangentially attached to it, Trump supporters and conservatives will summarily dismiss almost any Trump transgression.

However, Trump better be careful what he does since I can see him being Impeached and removed from office by Republicans who are not only wary of his policies and his temperament, but who would also just LOVE to have Pence in the Oval Office instead of The Donald.

Translation...for years Obama has shredded the constitution and we defended it. Now we've set the precedent, we're terrified that Trump will do the same thing!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When Obama decided to NOT enforce federal immigration laws, was he violating the Constiution?

POP QUIZ! How many illegal immigrants has Obama deported?

How many illegal ALIENS has Obama deported?

Using the old definition, or using Obama's new definition?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens, or are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens,

Yes, I believe using the proper term is necessary.

are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Why would using the proper term be either?

 

[SYTFE]

Amusing how the looney-left has suddenly fallen in love with Booooosssshhhhhhhh!

No one on the left loves Bush. Wit isn't your forte.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

I've got some news for you (and for anyone else who thinks this or any other constitutional violation will matter to Trump supporters).

After years of trying to make monumental mountains out of minor molehills when some issue had Obama's name even only tangentially attached to it, Trump supporters and conservatives will summarily dismiss almost any Trump transgression.

However, Trump better be careful what he does since I can see him being Impeached and removed from office by Republicans who are not only wary of his policies and his temperament, but who would also just LOVE to have Pence in the Oval Office instead of The Donald.

Good point except that Mike Sharia Law Pence has the support of other fundie nutters in congress and will get the worst crap imaginable passed into law because trump with rubber stamp almost anything. All that matters to trump is his ego getting stroked and more money in his pocket. He has said he wants wars, wants to use nukes, wants his 1% cronies even richer and the working class will Someday have to pay for it all.

I say "someday" because he has also said he wants higher debt and his little pet projects guarantee that and then some.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Too stupid and too lazy to put down your Twinkie and actually address the OP.

Why would I take seriously an op which cites a lawyer doing an interview with highly biased liberal website?

Besides, I'm saving all of my Twinkies for Thanksgiving.

Why don't you just admit you don't have a clue? Admit you can't refute the OP.

Oh is that all?

Where was this lawyer when it was discovered Hillary had been pulling the same with her foundation as SoS? If anything violated the Emoluments Clause, it was that.

Or belly up to another Twinkie.

Well, after watching you get angry, I think I'll let you have one instead.

 

[Slade3200]

When Obama decided to NOT enforce federal immigration laws, was he violating the Constiution?

POP QUIZ! How many illegal immigrants has Obama deported?

How many illegal ALIENS has Obama deported?

Using the old definition, or using Obama's new definition?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens, or are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens,

Yes, I believe using the proper term is necessary.

are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Why would using the proper term be either?

Alien is an old out dated term that dehumanizes real people so many substitute with immigrant. I find most people that still use it are either old school and unaware or intentionally trying to make a point of being offensive. Given your use of bold and underline for the statement I think it's fair to assume you are the later