trump Prohibited from Receiving Any Bailout Money

[Auld Phart]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

The legislation doesn't name elected officials. It names Trump. If it named "the President," it would still be a bill of attainder.

he legislation doesn't name elected officials. It names Trump.

Got a link to the legislation that names Trump?

 

[OKTexas]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

 

[OKTexas]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

The person that does it has to have standing. That means only Trump or a member of the Trump family can do it. If they do then brings up the whole issue of whether Trump is using his office to enrich himself.

How are they different from any other hotel chain?

.

 

[colfax_m]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

 

[OKTexas]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

 

[colfax_m]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him and it’s not your money in the first place. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

 

[OKTexas]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

 

[colfax_m]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

Sure. And if Trump Jr receives bailout cash as a result of his connection with his father, it would likewise be illegal. However, proving such would be just as impossible and undoubtedly he would be followed around by baseless accusations of such.

 

[OKTexas]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

Sure. And if Trump Jr receives bailout cash as a result of his connection with his father, it would likewise be illegal. However, proving such would be just as impossible and undoubtedly he would be followed around by baseless accusations of such.

The Trump organization existed long before Trump ran for office. Like I said the Trump hotel chain is no different than any other. If the others get money, so should the Trumps, they and their employees face the same challenges as all of them. I guess equal treatment under the law is meaningless to you commies.

.

 

[colfax_m]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

Sure. And if Trump Jr receives bailout cash as a result of his connection with his father, it would likewise be illegal. However, proving such would be just as impossible and undoubtedly he would be followed around by baseless accusations of such.

The Trump organization existed long before Trump ran for office. Like I said the Trump hotel chain is no different than any other. If the others get money, so should the Trumps, they and their employees face the same challenges as all of them. I guess equal treatment under the law is meaningless to you commies.

.

What are you talking about? Did you already forget I agreed with you about restrictions to family of the president?

That said, I have no problems with limiting the bailouts going towards politicians. If they don’t like it, then there is a very straightforward way for them to change that.

 

[bripat9643]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

They aren't allowed to engage in bribery, moron.

The constant attempts by TDS morons to compare Hunter Biden with the Trump kids is pathetic. There is simply no comparison. The Trump kids were rich before he got elected. Biden only gets paid by trading on his father's influence and pull in the government.

 

[bripat9643]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

Sure. And if Trump Jr receives bailout cash as a result of his connection with his father, it would likewise be illegal. However, proving such would be just as impossible and undoubtedly he would be followed around by baseless accusations of such.

The Trump organization existed long before Trump ran for office. Like I said the Trump hotel chain is no different than any other. If the others get money, so should the Trumps, they and their employees face the same challenges as all of them. I guess equal treatment under the law is meaningless to you commies.

.

What are you talking about? Did you already forget I agreed with you about restrictions to family of the president?

That said, I have no problems with limiting the bailouts going towards politicians. If they don’t like it, then there is a very straightforward way for them to change that.

They aren't restricting bailouts going to politicians in general. They are restricting bailouts going to Trump businesses. That's a bill of attainder.

 

[bripat9643]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

Sure. And if Trump Jr receives bailout cash as a result of his connection with his father, it would likewise be illegal. However, proving such would be just as impossible and undoubtedly he would be followed around by baseless accusations of such.

It isn't about making money as a result of your "connection." It's about making money because your father abused his authority as Vice President.

You fucking dumbasses just can't figure it out.

 

[bripat9643]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

That isn't even required. Check out the "Foriegn Corrupt Practices Act."

 

[OKTexas]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

So equal treatment under the law doesn't apply to people you don't like? The Constitution has a term for that, it's called a "bill of attainder", and it prohibits them.

.

He is welcome to resign his position in order to receive his bailout.

No need for that, that's what the courts are for. You should try reading the Constitution for a change.

.

I have. Bill of attainder is not relevant to this bill. The restriction is not directed at a person, but an office. Therefore that does not apply.

Wrong answer, it singles out a particular class of people (federal politicians and their families) for unequal treatment under the law. That's a clear violation of the Constitution.

.

Having an occupation does not make one a class of people. There are already laws regarding how politicians and government workers are allowed to participate in government programs. This is no different. This is applying conditions to employment and no one is obligated to accept their employment given those conditions.

We'll see what the courts say about it.

.

Doubt it. Someone is going to have to file a lawsuit first.

Who is going to do that?

Doubt all you want, you can bet someone will. I hope Don Jr. is the first. That would put you commiecrats in a tailspin.

.

Thats a good point. I might see a family member being able to sufficiently say the bill should not apply to them. After all, it’s not their fault that their family is an elected official. I agree with that specific point.

Of course, that just reminds me very much of Hunter Biden, ironically.

Not even close, baby biden has never been involved in building much of anything, Don Jr. has been involved in building a hotel empire and employing 10s of thousands for decades. The Trump properties are taking the same hits as Marriott or any other hotel chain. Exclusion just because of their name is illegal.

.

It’s very analogous. Either the children of politicians are allowed to engage in business like everyone else or they aren’t. That wasn’t what we were hearing when it comes to Hunter Biden.

Hunter has been getting jobs because of his dads political connections all his life. If you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

.

So what? You can’t stop him. Passing a law to prevent it would be unconstitutional, would it not?

If his getting a job effected his dads policies or decisions both could be prosecuted. Of course that can't be proven without a proper investigation. Like did baby biden being on the board of Amtrack, effect his dads votes on that white elephant? We'll probably never know.

.

Sure. And if Trump Jr receives bailout cash as a result of his connection with his father, it would likewise be illegal. However, proving such would be just as impossible and undoubtedly he would be followed around by baseless accusations of such.

The Trump organization existed long before Trump ran for office. Like I said the Trump hotel chain is no different than any other. If the others get money, so should the Trumps, they and their employees face the same challenges as all of them. I guess equal treatment under the law is meaningless to you commies.

.

What are you talking about? Did you already forget I agreed with you about restrictions to family of the president?

That said, I have no problems with limiting the bailouts going towards politicians. If they don’t like it, then there is a very straightforward way for them to change that.

You've been bouncing around and deflecting so much I guess you're too senile to keep up with yourself. Run along commie.

.

 

[DOTR]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

 

[DOTR]

Schumer never worked anywhere but for the government. Like Biden, Obama, Hillary and Bill Clinton, Bernie Sanders..and so on.

His day is coming...as history shows. And he will whine "why do you always pick on us".

 

[DOTR]

The dims are too stupid to understand that what they did is called a "bill of attainder." It's unconstitutional. You can't pass legislation that singles out a single person for retribution.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8151077/Democrats-crow-Trump-family-businesses-BANNED-bailout-funds-2-trillion-package.html

Democrats indicate they are finally ready to sign the phase three economic stimulus package Wednesday, which includes a measure that prohibits Donald Trump's family businesses from receiving benefits from the coronavirus relief.

Senators were finally able to strike a deal overnight on the $2 trillion rescue package to address the fallout from the coronavirus outbreak, after Democrats blocked the first two versions of the GOP-backed bill.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote in a Dear Colleague letter early Wednesday morning that the new bill includes a provision to 'prohibit businesses controlled by the President, Vice President, Members of Congress, and heads of Executive Departments from receiving loans or investments from Treasury programs.'

'Our unity gave us important strength and leverage in negotiations,' Schumer lauded.

And this is what I was speakign of in another post when colfax_m was passing on communist propaganda. All officers of the government are forbidden to receive loans...but the government-check-cashing Dana7360 claims its trumps hotels which are forbidden.

True as far as it goes in a cowardly way. Dana7360 isnt human and shouldn't be treated as one. We have to realize this is how they deal all the time. Lies and half-truths.

 

[Mac-7]

This is good. I'm glad democrats in the senate are making sure that trump won't get a penny of that slush fund.

Senate coronavirus bill prohibits Trump's hotels from receiving bailouts

The measure was added in the portion of the bill aimed at helping distressed industries with at least $450 billion in loans.

www.aol.com

Trump businesses barred from getting coronavirus stimulus money, Schumer says

No member on congress should receive bailout money either

 

[CowboyTed]

So it singled out ALL politicians but of course the left focus on one person.

And y'all wonder why the TDS term is thrown around so much...

Right everyone...

All of Congress is included in this. This is not Trump focused but he is also part of it...

Why are the media focusing on Trump... Because he has abusing the emoluments law and charging the US taxpayer prime fees on his properties. He stole from charities. So he is fair game when a slush fund is created.

How Donald Trump Shifted Kids-Cancer Charity Money Into His Business

Donald Trump is one of the least charitable billionaires in the world. Eric Trump is far more altruistic. In a clash of values, the president directed hundreds of thousands of dollars from his son's kids-with-cancer foundation into his company coffers.

www.forbes.com

Congress didn't target him specifically and put everyone in it. Thats all GOP and DEMs... Doesn't look like swamp from here.

So what's the fucking problem...