Supreme Court Smacks Down Democrats' Attack on Trump

[Papageorgio]

And the Democrats lose again....

Supreme Court Rejects Democratic Lawmakers' Lawsuit Against Trump

The Supreme Court's denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling.

www.westernjournal.com

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to hear a lawsuit case brought by congressional Democrats who alleged President Donald Trump was illegally profiting from his business interests in violation of the anti-corruption provisions in the U.S. Constitution.

The justices refused to hear an appeal by 215 Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives of a February ruling by a lower court that lawmakers had no standing to bring their suit, which pointed to Trump profiting from foreign government officials choosing to spend money at Trump hotels as violations of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, Reuters reported.

The Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C. is the primary property Democrats have singled out as one some foreign officials choose to patronize while they are in the nation’s capital.

The hotel is located blocks away from the White House and was opened shortly before Trump was elected in 2016.

The emoluments lawsuits have accused Trump of making himself vulnerable to bribery by foreign governments because he has retained ownership of his business interests.


The Supreme Court’s denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling, according to The Hill.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit judges found in February that the lawsuit is really a political matter for Congress and the president to work out, not the judiciary.

“The Members can, and likely will, continue to use their weighty voices to make their case to the American people, their colleagues in the Congress and the President himself, all of whom are free to engage that argument as they see fit,” the judges wrote. “But we will not — indeed we cannot — participate in this debate.”

“The Constitution permits the Judiciary to speak only in the context of an Article III case or controversy and this lawsuit presents neither,” they added.


The D.C. Circuit judges noted that the Senate and House Democrats who sued Trump represented a minority in both chambers, and therefore the lawmakers had no standing to bring the case.

“[O]ur conclusion is straightforward because the Members — 29 Senators and 186 Members of the House of Representatives — do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the President’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the court decision reads.

They are proving Senator Whitehouse correct. Another partisan decision?

Time to expand the court.

it will piss off the moderates but if the Dems want to risk it

 

[daveman]

And the Democrats lose again....

Supreme Court Rejects Democratic Lawmakers' Lawsuit Against Trump

The Supreme Court's denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling.

www.westernjournal.com

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to hear a lawsuit case brought by congressional Democrats who alleged President Donald Trump was illegally profiting from his business interests in violation of the anti-corruption provisions in the U.S. Constitution.

The justices refused to hear an appeal by 215 Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives of a February ruling by a lower court that lawmakers had no standing to bring their suit, which pointed to Trump profiting from foreign government officials choosing to spend money at Trump hotels as violations of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, Reuters reported.

The Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C. is the primary property Democrats have singled out as one some foreign officials choose to patronize while they are in the nation’s capital.

The hotel is located blocks away from the White House and was opened shortly before Trump was elected in 2016.

The emoluments lawsuits have accused Trump of making himself vulnerable to bribery by foreign governments because he has retained ownership of his business interests.


The Supreme Court’s denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling, according to The Hill.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit judges found in February that the lawsuit is really a political matter for Congress and the president to work out, not the judiciary.

“The Members can, and likely will, continue to use their weighty voices to make their case to the American people, their colleagues in the Congress and the President himself, all of whom are free to engage that argument as they see fit,” the judges wrote. “But we will not — indeed we cannot — participate in this debate.”

“The Constitution permits the Judiciary to speak only in the context of an Article III case or controversy and this lawsuit presents neither,” they added.


The D.C. Circuit judges noted that the Senate and House Democrats who sued Trump represented a minority in both chambers, and therefore the lawmakers had no standing to bring the case.

“[O]ur conclusion is straightforward because the Members — 29 Senators and 186 Members of the House of Representatives — do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the President’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the court decision reads.

They are proving Senator Whitehouse correct. Another partisan decision?

Time to expand the court.

In two years Progs will lose the House and Senate if they do. And Repubs with a vengeance would expand the court again if given the chance at power. Many of the Progs are in first or second gear in their ways of life. On a sucker would stay at second and third gear if there was no reward for it. Yeah, I would see a slow down in quality of work from this.

Do we really want tostack the courts? How about we continue filling them with constitutional minded justcies

Given how the left sees the Constitution as an impediment, they hate that idea.

 

[daveman]

...says the guy who insists criminal activity by Democrats is perfectly fine.

I warned you that castration was part of the Trump cult initiation ceremony. You didn't care. You thought it was worth the price of getting that contant hate-rush.

And no, I will not stop busting you for being a corrupt Stalinist psychopath just because you now cry at me in an extremely shrill tone.

Stalinists are leftists. Corruption is Democratic. Emotionalism is liberal.

You do nothing but project.

 

[Dragonlady]

For generations, U.S. presidents have gone to great lengths to avoid potential conflicts of interest. When I was elected, I followed suit by placing my small business in a blind trust to assure our citizens that I would always put the country’s interests ahead of my own. It’s a vital presidential tradition. That’s why I find it a bit curious that our new commander-in-chief has been allowed to ignore it.

For Christ’s sake, you people made me get rid of my peanut farm before you let me be president.

I grew up on that farm. When my father died, I moved back home and worked those fields with my own two hands to keep it afloat. It was a hard job, but it was so rewarding. It wasn’t just a business—it was the place I called home. Letting go of the family farm was one of the hardest things I’ve ever had to do, but I did it because the American people asked me to. I did it for their sake, without enthusiasm, but also without hesitation.

Boy, times sure have changed, haven’t they? I couldn’t help but notice that the current occupant of the White House owns more than 500 companies, has business interests across the Middle East and Asia, and owes hundreds of millions of dollars to banks he is now responsible for regulating. It seems a touch unfair that a bigger fuss was made about my little peanut operation than all his office towers, hotels, and golf courses combined. All I had was a farm, you know? A small, precious farm.

Seriously, it was just a few fields and a warehouse, and you idiots still appointed a special prosecutor and spent six months investigating it.

You People Made Me Give Up My Peanut Farm Before I Got To Be President

For generations, U.S. presidents have gone to great lengths to avoid potential conflicts of interest. When I was elected, I followed suit by placing my small business in a blind trust to assure our citizens that I would always put the country’s interests ahead of my own. It’s a vital...

www.theonion.com

It's the Onion.

Lighten up.

I knew that wasn’t Jimmy Carter. He would never blaspheme (For Christ’s sake).

But the Onion has a very good point.

 

[Yarddog]

Profiting from a Hotel?

Trump hands out big money political favors to whoever pays his vastly inflated hotel rates. Bribe-taking like that is specifically why the founders wrote the emoluments clause into the Constitution.

All the Trump cultists, without exception, defend the bribe-taking and the violation of the Constitution. They're not even pretending they don't kiss the keister of corruption. Like I said, they're all loyal to Trump instead of the USA.

What bribe taking?

"The emoluments lawsuits have accused Trump of making himself vulnerable to bribery by foreign governments because he has retained ownership of his business interests."

He is accused of making himself vulnerable... you are saying something quite different. Your article doesn't say he is accused of taking actual bribes. I get that these people don't like Trump, he has been accused of everything under the sun, nonstop before he even took office. It's humanly impossible for one person to be guilty of all these accusations, this is just more politics from the left trying to find a reason to have him removed. I bet all these organizations used the Trump Hotels prior to him being President. Why would they not?

 

[eagle7-31]

That's funny coming from the likes of you who looks the other way on Biden family business is Russia and China.

As is always the case, you lying about us doesn't make us hypocrites. It just makes you bigger liars. You're just making up idiot conspiracy theories about the Bidens.

And why are you doing that? You're deliberately run cover for Trump's bribe-taking and corruption. That won't change now matter how frantically you deflect. Trump is taking bribes, and you support it. You suck hard at being an American.

Take two aspirin and call Dr. Soros in the morning. If the Bidens were Republicans they would be up on charges long before now.

 

[badbob85037]

And the Democrats lose again....

Supreme Court Rejects Democratic Lawmakers' Lawsuit Against Trump

The Supreme Court's denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling.

www.westernjournal.com

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to hear a lawsuit case brought by congressional Democrats who alleged President Donald Trump was illegally profiting from his business interests in violation of the anti-corruption provisions in the U.S. Constitution.

The justices refused to hear an appeal by 215 Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives of a February ruling by a lower court that lawmakers had no standing to bring their suit, which pointed to Trump profiting from foreign government officials choosing to spend money at Trump hotels as violations of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, Reuters reported.

The Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C. is the primary property Democrats have singled out as one some foreign officials choose to patronize while they are in the nation’s capital.

The hotel is located blocks away from the White House and was opened shortly before Trump was elected in 2016.

The emoluments lawsuits have accused Trump of making himself vulnerable to bribery by foreign governments because he has retained ownership of his business interests.


The Supreme Court’s denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling, according to The Hill.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit judges found in February that the lawsuit is really a political matter for Congress and the president to work out, not the judiciary.

“The Members can, and likely will, continue to use their weighty voices to make their case to the American people, their colleagues in the Congress and the President himself, all of whom are free to engage that argument as they see fit,” the judges wrote. “But we will not — indeed we cannot — participate in this debate.”

“The Constitution permits the Judiciary to speak only in the context of an Article III case or controversy and this lawsuit presents neither,” they added.


The D.C. Circuit judges noted that the Senate and House Democrats who sued Trump represented a minority in both chambers, and therefore the lawmakers had no standing to bring the case.

“[O]ur conclusion is straightforward because the Members — 29 Senators and 186 Members of the House of Representatives — do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the President’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the court decision reads.

This is what democrats do. It's just too bad republicans are the enabler party and were never charged with a crime and rotted from the trees they hung from.

 

[busybee01]

And the Democrats lose again....

Supreme Court Rejects Democratic Lawmakers' Lawsuit Against Trump

The Supreme Court's denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling.

www.westernjournal.com

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to hear a lawsuit case brought by congressional Democrats who alleged President Donald Trump was illegally profiting from his business interests in violation of the anti-corruption provisions in the U.S. Constitution.

The justices refused to hear an appeal by 215 Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives of a February ruling by a lower court that lawmakers had no standing to bring their suit, which pointed to Trump profiting from foreign government officials choosing to spend money at Trump hotels as violations of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, Reuters reported.

The Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C. is the primary property Democrats have singled out as one some foreign officials choose to patronize while they are in the nation’s capital.

The hotel is located blocks away from the White House and was opened shortly before Trump was elected in 2016.

The emoluments lawsuits have accused Trump of making himself vulnerable to bribery by foreign governments because he has retained ownership of his business interests.


The Supreme Court’s denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling, according to The Hill.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit judges found in February that the lawsuit is really a political matter for Congress and the president to work out, not the judiciary.

“The Members can, and likely will, continue to use their weighty voices to make their case to the American people, their colleagues in the Congress and the President himself, all of whom are free to engage that argument as they see fit,” the judges wrote. “But we will not — indeed we cannot — participate in this debate.”

“The Constitution permits the Judiciary to speak only in the context of an Article III case or controversy and this lawsuit presents neither,” they added.


The D.C. Circuit judges noted that the Senate and House Democrats who sued Trump represented a minority in both chambers, and therefore the lawmakers had no standing to bring the case.

“[O]ur conclusion is straightforward because the Members — 29 Senators and 186 Members of the House of Representatives — do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the President’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the court decision reads.

It proves how corrupt the courts have become under Trump.

 

[miketx]

And the Democrats lose again....

Supreme Court Rejects Democratic Lawmakers' Lawsuit Against Trump

The Supreme Court's denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling.

www.westernjournal.com

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to hear a lawsuit case brought by congressional Democrats who alleged President Donald Trump was illegally profiting from his business interests in violation of the anti-corruption provisions in the U.S. Constitution.

The justices refused to hear an appeal by 215 Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives of a February ruling by a lower court that lawmakers had no standing to bring their suit, which pointed to Trump profiting from foreign government officials choosing to spend money at Trump hotels as violations of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, Reuters reported.

The Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C. is the primary property Democrats have singled out as one some foreign officials choose to patronize while they are in the nation’s capital.

The hotel is located blocks away from the White House and was opened shortly before Trump was elected in 2016.

The emoluments lawsuits have accused Trump of making himself vulnerable to bribery by foreign governments because he has retained ownership of his business interests.


The Supreme Court’s denial to hear the case means the petition failed to get the support of at least four judges and leaves in place the lower court ruling, according to The Hill.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit judges found in February that the lawsuit is really a political matter for Congress and the president to work out, not the judiciary.

“The Members can, and likely will, continue to use their weighty voices to make their case to the American people, their colleagues in the Congress and the President himself, all of whom are free to engage that argument as they see fit,” the judges wrote. “But we will not — indeed we cannot — participate in this debate.”

“The Constitution permits the Judiciary to speak only in the context of an Article III case or controversy and this lawsuit presents neither,” they added.


The D.C. Circuit judges noted that the Senate and House Democrats who sued Trump represented a minority in both chambers, and therefore the lawmakers had no standing to bring the case.

“[O]ur conclusion is straightforward because the Members — 29 Senators and 186 Members of the House of Representatives — do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the President’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the court decision reads.

It proves how corrupt the courts have become under Trump.

You liars have no idea what the word proof means.

 

[DJT for Life]

Profiting from a Hotel?

Trump hands out big money political favors to whoever pays his vastly inflated hotel rates. Bribe-taking like that is specifically why the founders wrote the emoluments clause into the Constitution.

All the Trump cultists, without exception, defend the bribe-taking and the violation of the Constitution. They're not even pretending they don't kiss the keister of corruption. Like I said, they're all loyal to Trump instead of the USA.

Wow...

Trump does favors for you if you rent a room in his hotel????

View attachment 401156

What happens if a foreign government starts renting out hundreds of rooms? Thousands of rooms?

At some point in time, this crosses a line, doesn’t it?

Maybe he should peddle political influence like the Biden's. That appears to be pretty lucrative.

 

[Papageorgio]

If Democrats would spend some time trying to figure out what the American people need, they wouldn't have so much time to do this kind of dead end sniping. Democrats truly don't seem to care anything about improving the lot of the American people. They're more worried about their own parties power. Vote straight Republican

I believe they are trying to get rid of a corrupt president. I do.

They have fought to have the President ousted from office the day after he was elected, if they spent half that time trying to be constructive and not destructive the country would be much better off. so much time has been wasted and the next four years is going to be much worse. What a sad state we are in, politics over country.

Maybe that crooked lousy shell of a man should have been smarter. Same with those that voted him in. All this wouldn't have happened.

Believe, no one is going to forget it. When a Democrat is elected to the Presidency, the GOP won't forget anything and there is going to be payback, then the next Republican that is President will get payback and on and on it goes.

Maybe had the Democrats in 2016 ran a good candidate Trump would not have been elected, but no, they trotted out the heir apparent, Democrats weren't bright enough to run a real candidate and this is what the Democrats stuck America with, Trump.

 

[okfine]

If Democrats would spend some time trying to figure out what the American people need, they wouldn't have so much time to do this kind of dead end sniping. Democrats truly don't seem to care anything about improving the lot of the American people. They're more worried about their own parties power. Vote straight Republican

I believe they are trying to get rid of a corrupt president. I do.

They have fought to have the President ousted from office the day after he was elected, if they spent half that time trying to be constructive and not destructive the country would be much better off. so much time has been wasted and the next four years is going to be much worse. What a sad state we are in, politics over country.

Maybe that crooked lousy shell of a man should have been smarter. Same with those that voted him in. All this wouldn't have happened.

Believe, no one is going to forget it. When a Democrat is elected to the Presidency, the GOP won't forget anything and there is going to be payback, then the next Republican that is President will get payback and on and on it goes.

Maybe had the Democrats in 2016 ran a good candidate Trump would not have been elected, but no, they trotted out the heir apparent, Democrats weren't bright enough to run a real candidate and this is what the Democrats stuck America with, Trump.

When a D is elected it will be many years before a fn R gets that spot ever again.

 

[Papageorgio]

If Democrats would spend some time trying to figure out what the American people need, they wouldn't have so much time to do this kind of dead end sniping. Democrats truly don't seem to care anything about improving the lot of the American people. They're more worried about their own parties power. Vote straight Republican

I believe they are trying to get rid of a corrupt president. I do.

They have fought to have the President ousted from office the day after he was elected, if they spent half that time trying to be constructive and not destructive the country would be much better off. so much time has been wasted and the next four years is going to be much worse. What a sad state we are in, politics over country.

Maybe that crooked lousy shell of a man should have been smarter. Same with those that voted him in. All this wouldn't have happened.

Believe, no one is going to forget it. When a Democrat is elected to the Presidency, the GOP won't forget anything and there is going to be payback, then the next Republican that is President will get payback and on and on it goes.

Maybe had the Democrats in 2016 ran a good candidate Trump would not have been elected, but no, they trotted out the heir apparent, Democrats weren't bright enough to run a real candidate and this is what the Democrats stuck America with, Trump.

When a D is elected it will be many years before a fn R gets that spot ever again.

I heard that when Obama was elected, I heard the Democrats were dead during the Bush administration. I heard Clinton, Bush and Obama would not concede power. I do know if the combo of a R-House and a D-President comes up the GOP will be investigating and will probably impeaching that President. It has gotten nasty and both parties are guilty. Next time don't nominate Hillary and you won't get Trump.