"The president can’t have a conflict of interest" Trump said....

[bendog]

Really???.....A president can’t have a conflict of interest??

Nixon once stated that anything that a president does CANNOT be interpreted as "illegal", and that attitude eventually got him to resign or face impeachment.

Are we headed toward a situation where whatever a president does is tantamount to absolution before the law; simply stated, is a president ABOVE the law?

So all the Clinton potential conflicts of interest were horseshit?

All the crying about "crooked Hillary" was horseshit compared to Trump's entanglements. But, 16 years of the Clintons was more than we were willing to overlook, considering she wanted another 4, at least.

 

[nat4900]

Apparently you didn't follow the election, Trump ran against the Republican establishment and beat them. You might try thinking once in a while before posting.

Actually true......Trump ran and won (thanks to morons) on the TRUMP Party; meanning that he is in it mostly for Trump's own sake.

 

[nat4900]

It wasn't a conclusion, just an observation, and dealing with the crap you post always makes one want to wash his hands thoroughly.

Not that it makes any difference among nitwits, but I (for one) was not a Clinton lover, she was just the "better" of the two selfish crooks.

 

[nat4900]

So all the Clinton potential conflicts of interest were horseshit?

Actually, NO!!! Hillary Clinton may have been guilty of using the Sec. of State office unethically.......but we should be even MORE incensed for the oval office possibly doing the very same unethical dealings.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Conflicts of interest are going to dog him. It is the duty of an electorate supposedly sick of corruption to point out any instance Trump seems to be profiting directly from his office. It will be interesting how the true believers will defend him when it is guaranteed he will find a hundred ways to steer contracts to his company and use executive orders to cut through regulatory obstacles.

If he does use his office to further enrich himself, Republicans will impeach him. When Hillary did that, Democrats nominated her for president.

Republicans are not going to do shit except to argue that the president can do whatever he wants to do. They always expand the power of the president when they have one in office and then ***** about those powers when don't have the white house.

Apparently you didn't follow the election, Trump ran against the Republican establishment and beat them. You might try thinking once in a while before posting.

LOL What makes you think he actually meant anything he said? Far too many former critics and adversaries have jumped on the Trump crazy train, a deal has been made, He is going to be a rubber stamping stooge for congress. The veto pen is locked away until congress gets voted out in the mid-terms.

You clearly have a rich fantasy life, but when I suggested you think before posting I meant rational thought, not sharing your fantasies with us.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Really???.....A president can’t have a conflict of interest??

Nixon once stated that anything that a president does CANNOT be interpreted as "illegal", and that attitude eventually got him to resign or face impeachment.

Are we headed toward a situation where whatever a president does is tantamount to absolution before the law; simply stated, is a president ABOVE the law?

Trump thinks it's a monarchy, not a republic. He will be the most abusive of all presidents when it comes to "pay to play".

 

[bendog]

It wasn't a conclusion, just an observation, and dealing with the crap you post always makes one want to wash his hands thoroughly.

Not that it makes any difference among nitwits, but I (for one) was not a Clinton lover, she was just the "better" of the two selfish crooks.

Well, you knew what Hillary was going to try to do. I gotta give her that. But the funny thing was that here she was with a gazillion years of experience, actual policy and proposals that were more or less paid for .... not that the GOP House was going to agree to any of it.

And then you had Trump, who didn't mean any of the divisive shit he was ranting about at his rallies, and had no actual policy he intended to follow

And look who won.

LOL

 

[bendog]

Apparently you didn't follow the election, Trump ran against the Republican establishment and beat them. You might try thinking once in a while before posting.

Actually true......Trump ran and won (thanks to morons) on the TRUMP Party; meanning that he is in it mostly for Trump's own sake.

He's going to enrich himself, no doubt, and yuuugely bigly compared to the Clintons, but his brand demands that he succeed on something. He's got to produce. He cannot afford to be branded a loser like Carter or even Ford (who was a good guy)

 

[nat4900]

Well, you knew what Hillary was going to try to do. I gotta give her that. But the funny thing was that here she was with a gazillion years of experience, actual policy and proposals that were more or less paid for .... not that the GOP House was going to agree to any of it.

And then you had Trump, who didn't mean any of the divisive shit he was ranting about at his rallies, and had no actual policy he intended to follow

And look who won.

Given the above, WHO will be more pissed, those who knew that Trump was just a charlatan, demagogue, or those who actually believed his bullshit?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Really???.....A president can’t have a conflict of interest??

Nixon once stated that anything that a president does CANNOT be interpreted as "illegal", and that attitude eventually got him to resign or face impeachment.

Are we headed toward a situation where whatever a president does is tantamount to absolution before the law; simply stated, is a president ABOVE the law?

There is no law relevant to this situation. If Trump tries to pull a Clinton and use his office for personal gain, then he should be prosecuted, just as Clinton should be prosecuted for ignoring the law.

It's an interesting question... should a cop get a ticket if they speed or change lanes without using their blinker etc?

It's an irrelevant question since there is no law relevant to Trump not divesting from his business, however if he used his office to enrich himself through that business, it would be an impeachable offense.

 

[nat4900]

Apparently you didn't follow the election, Trump ran against the Republican establishment and beat them. You might try thinking once in a while before posting.

Actually true......Trump ran and won (thanks to morons) on the TRUMP Party; meanning that he is in it mostly for Trump's own sake.

He's going to enrich himself, no doubt, and yuuugely bigly compared to the Clintons, but his brand demands that he succeed on something. He's got to produce. He cannot afford to be branded a loser like Carter or even Ford (who was a good guy)

Ultimately, the MOST dangerous aspect of a Trump administration is not the underhanded, selfish and unethical dealings that he will surely undertake, but his very, very thin-skinned ego that may get us into foolish wars.

 

[toomuchtime_]

It wasn't a conclusion, just an observation, and dealing with the crap you post always makes one want to wash his hands thoroughly.

Not that it makes any difference among nitwits, but I (for one) was not a Clinton lover, she was just the "better" of the two selfish crooks.

lol Better at what?

 

[nat4900]

lol Better at what?

Well, better at knowing what the **** running the most powerful country in the world entails and is all about....Just selling the "trump" name is not sufficient qualifications to run a complex government faced with all sort of challenges.

 

[toomuchtime_]

lol Better at what?

Well, better at knowing what the **** running the most powerful country in the world entails and is all about....Just selling the "trump" name is not sufficient qualifications to run a complex government faced with all sort of challenges.

lol If she had known what running for the presidency was all about, she wouldn't have lost the election.

 

[occupied]

Conflicts of interest are going to dog him. It is the duty of an electorate supposedly sick of corruption to point out any instance Trump seems to be profiting directly from his office. It will be interesting how the true believers will defend him when it is guaranteed he will find a hundred ways to steer contracts to his company and use executive orders to cut through regulatory obstacles.

If he does use his office to further enrich himself, Republicans will impeach him. When Hillary did that, Democrats nominated her for president.

Republicans are not going to do shit except to argue that the president can do whatever he wants to do. They always expand the power of the president when they have one in office and then ***** about those powers when don't have the white house.

Apparently you didn't follow the election, Trump ran against the Republican establishment and beat them. You might try thinking once in a while before posting.

LOL What makes you think he actually meant anything he said? Far too many former critics and adversaries have jumped on the Trump crazy train, a deal has been made, He is going to be a rubber stamping stooge for congress. The veto pen is locked away until congress gets voted out in the mid-terms.

You clearly have a rich fantasy life, but when I suggested you think before posting I meant rational thought, not sharing your fantasies with us.

Been watching these people abandon their publicly stated ideologies all my life. This time is no different. It's like how you Trump people will put away all your anti-government, tree of liberty Bullshit and be pro-government nationalists until the next democrat is elected president. You will then pull out all your Gadsden flags and apocalyptic rhetoric about armed revolt against the same bloated corrupt government and not even feel remotely like flaming hypocrites.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If he does use his office to further enrich himself, Republicans will impeach him. When Hillary did that, Democrats nominated her for president.

Republicans are not going to do shit except to argue that the president can do whatever he wants to do. They always expand the power of the president when they have one in office and then ***** about those powers when don't have the white house.

Apparently you didn't follow the election, Trump ran against the Republican establishment and beat them. You might try thinking once in a while before posting.

LOL What makes you think he actually meant anything he said? Far too many former critics and adversaries have jumped on the Trump crazy train, a deal has been made, He is going to be a rubber stamping stooge for congress. The veto pen is locked away until congress gets voted out in the mid-terms.

You clearly have a rich fantasy life, but when I suggested you think before posting I meant rational thought, not sharing your fantasies with us.

Been watching these people abandon their publicly stated ideologies all my life. This time is no different. It's like how you Trump people will put away all your anti-government, tree of liberty Bullshit and be pro-government nationalists until the next democrat is elected president. You will then pull out all your Gadsden flags and apocalyptic rhetoric about armed revolt against the same bloated corrupt government and not even feel remotely like flaming hypocrites.

In other words, you didn't follow the election and so have nothing to post except anti Republican slanders.

 

[Slade3200]

Really???.....A president can’t have a conflict of interest??

Nixon once stated that anything that a president does CANNOT be interpreted as "illegal", and that attitude eventually got him to resign or face impeachment.

Are we headed toward a situation where whatever a president does is tantamount to absolution before the law; simply stated, is a president ABOVE the law?

There is no law relevant to this situation. If Trump tries to pull a Clinton and use his office for personal gain, then he should be prosecuted, just as Clinton should be prosecuted for ignoring the law.

It's an interesting question... should a cop get a ticket if they speed or change lanes without using their blinker etc?

It's an irrelevant question since there is no law relevant to Trump not divesting from his business, however if he used his office to enrich himself through that business, it would be an impeachable offense.

You know good and well that with as many business dealing that Trump has there is going to be a constant stream of grey area deals that Trump critics will be able to spin or justify investigations for... you saw what the Hillary critics did when looking into her Foundation. She is defined to many as a crooked criminal because of these accusations. I fear that it will be a never ending battle against Trump and a complete distraction from doing productive things for our country. It's gonna be a mess

 

[mascale]

Trump will likely face charges and lawsuits over "Conflict of Interest" from Day One. In the Constitution, the President is not allowed to receive pay or favors from any of the states of the United States. Anyone notes that is intended to void potential conflicts of interest in deciding on national matters. Siding with partisan matters happens instead. Those tend to be broadly based, if in fact only a base of members of a particular interest group.

The Constitution prohibits "emoluments" from other nation-states. In the modern context, virtually every national economy is government regulated, so any profit from any enterprise could be construed a myriad of Constitutional violations.

Federalist Papers 22, in support of the Constitutional ratification, goes further into the matter of said favors, an "Evil" peculiar to Republics. A monarch is harder to bribe. An elected official is easy to bribe. Bribes tend to involve money. The benefits of business enterprise tend to be in money.

The lawsuits will notice that, and likely be more than enough to destroy the concept of the Trump Presidency.

Any business decision will tend to create a lawsuit alleging a "Conflict of Interest" with basis in the simple existence of any Presidency of the United States. It will likely be easy to win any such lawsuits, and bankrupt the office-holder during the term.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many Are Called, Few Chosen: Except that they tend to become lawyers!)

 

[LoneLaugher]

Why would anyone we who did not demand to see his tax returns ever worry about his shady business dealings?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Really???.....A president can’t have a conflict of interest??

Nixon once stated that anything that a president does CANNOT be interpreted as "illegal", and that attitude eventually got him to resign or face impeachment.

Are we headed toward a situation where whatever a president does is tantamount to absolution before the law; simply stated, is a president ABOVE the law?

There is no law relevant to this situation. If Trump tries to pull a Clinton and use his office for personal gain, then he should be prosecuted, just as Clinton should be prosecuted for ignoring the law.

It's an interesting question... should a cop get a ticket if they speed or change lanes without using their blinker etc?

It's an irrelevant question since there is no law relevant to Trump not divesting from his business, however if he used his office to enrich himself through that business, it would be an impeachable offense.

You know good and well that with as many business dealing that Trump has there is going to be a constant stream of grey area deals that Trump critics will be able to spin or justify investigations for... you saw what the Hillary critics did when looking into her Foundation. She is defined to many as a crooked criminal because of these accusations. I fear that it will be a never ending battle against Trump and a complete distraction from doing productive things for our country. It's gonna be a mess

The Democrats are going to wage a never ending battle against Trump no matter what he does just as they have been doing. Hillary is "is defined to many as a crooked criminal" because all three Clintons are crooks.

'Chelsea Clinton used her family foundation’s cash to pay for her wedding, living expenses and taxes on gifts of cash from her parents, according to a bombshell email made public Sunday.

Doug Band, formerly a top aide to President Bill Clinton, griped about the former first daughter’s spending in a Jan. 4, 2012, email released by WikiLeaks.

“The investigation into her getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade, taxes on money from her parents…,” Band wrote to John Podesta, now Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman.

“I hope that you will speak to her and end this. Once we go down this road…”'

Chelsea Clinton used foundation to help pay for wedding: email | New York Post

If Trump or his children turn out to be as crooked as the Clintons are, they should be prosecuted, as the Clintons should be, but so far there is no evidence they are low lifes like the Clintons.