It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. appeals court to revisit Trump win in hotel 'emoluments' case

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Reuter s


A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday said it would reconsider an earlier ruling that handed victory to U.S. President Donald Trump in a Democratic-backed lawsuit that accuses him of violating anti-corruption provisions of the U.S. Constitution with his Washington hotel.


A three-judge panel of the court ruled on July 10 that the attorneys general lacked legal standing to bring the lawsuit, which alleged violations of constitutional provisions known as the Emoluments Clauses that bans the president from accepting gifts or payments from foreign governments without congressional consent.


Back on the docket, emoluments. This is one of the three cases alleging president Trump was profiting from his position of power. Originally it was ruled that the attorneys general had no legal ground to sue, but now all three of the judges agreed to re-open the case and hear the arguments in December.


Trump opened the Trump International Hotel, just blocks from the White House, shortly before he was elected in November 2016. Unlike past presidents, he has retained ownership of numerous business interests, including the hotel, while serving as president.

Since his election, the hotel has become a favored lodging and event space for some foreign and state officials visiting the U.S. capital.

The lawsuit alleges that, in failing to disengage from the hotel, Trump has made himself vulnerable to inducements by foreign governments seeking to curry favor, violating the Constitution.


Not that he needed any additional issues, but this is sure to complicate things even further and anger the president. Regardless, it is a very serious issue and no person should put personal gains above the good of the nation, especially if they took an oath to the nation.

Out with the truth!



edit on 15-10-2019 by Oraculi because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Oraculi
so they are admitting they were wrong?
interesting

wonder if there will be other "dismissed lawsuits" that will be resurrected soon?



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Oraculi

Those 180 Trump-appointed Federal Judges are starting to yield good results. President Trump has WON recent decisions.

To quote President Trump on this issue during a recent rally, "Thank-you President Obama!"




posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Oraculi
so they are admitting they were wrong?
interesting

wonder if there will be other "dismissed lawsuits" that will be resurrected soon?



Well, the president and his staff are now implicated in currying favors from another government and are actively being investigated for it.

This creates solid legal ground for that lawsuit to be re-opened and gives those attorneys general a clear path to proceed.



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust



Those 180 Trump-appointed Federal Judges are starting to yield good results.


So you think the Judicial system should be partisan, then?



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Oraculi
By any means necessary, am I right?



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oraculi

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Oraculi
so they are admitting they were wrong?
interesting

wonder if there will be other "dismissed lawsuits" that will be resurrected soon?



Well, the president and his staff are now implicated in currying favors from another government and are actively being investigated for it.

This creates solid legal ground for that lawsuit to be re-opened and gives those attorneys general a clear path to proceed.

really
could you please demonstrate how one effects the other legally with respect to resurrecting this case?
which other nation is the president and his staff implicated in currying favors from?


+2 more 
posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I've never could have imagined such sore loosers in my life.
I don't even care anymore of this or any other allegation is true.
I care less about the content.

I do know that after this continues unprecedented assault on a sitting president.

The Next President after Trump will be, can be, only a saint or a lunatic!





edit on 15-10-2019 by EartOccupant because: (no reason given)


(post by timequake removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: Oraculi
By any means necessary, am I right?


I don't think you're right. All three of these judges are federal judges. That's hardly any means, that's the legal way.

And I don't think it really matters, I think judges are predominantly non-partisan, but for those that do care about those things - all three of these judges are Trump appointed.



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: carewemust



Those 180 Trump-appointed Federal Judges are starting to yield good results.


So you think the Judicial system should be partisan, then?


Ideally, it shouldn't be. But it has been for decades. Since it's now primarily conservative at the top levels, and I'm conservative, ALL IS GOOD.



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:37 PM
link   
The OP is as ridiculous as the law suit.
I can just see the conversation now...

"Hello Mr Presdient"
"Oh Hello Boris"
"OK, Mr President, I see we have spent $1200 in your hotel... can we have that trade deal now?"


edit on 15/10/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:58 PM
link   
At this point, the Dems are going to (re)investigate anything and everything.

- What side of the bread is his jelly getting spread on?
- Does he put his left sock on to his right foot?
- His toilet seat: Up or down?
- That one time it looked like he might be thinking the 'N' word.
- There might be too much ice in his iced tea.

This desperation from them is gross now. It sad and pathetic.

I'd like to quote Elvis Costello,

"I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused"



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: EartOccupant
I've never could have imagined such sore loosers in my life.
I don't even care anymore of this or any other allegation is true.
I care less about the content.

I do know that after this continues unprecedented assault on a sitting president.

The Next President after Trump will be, can be, only a saint or a lunatic!





Yep, it’s become beyond ridiculous and frankly I couldn’t give a # what any of them have to say anymore. Being a Democrat nowadays is nothing more than being a member of the biggest crybaby club in America. Seriously, all they do is piss n moan about trivial crap that nobody cares about but them. The only thing they keep proving to me is that they have no clue on how to deal with reality, none. Sorry Trump hurt your poor lil feelers but get over it and do something worthwhile, stop being worthless lil babies FFS. UGH



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: azbowhunter

Lifelong Trump family employees are on Schiff/Nadler's list for possibly being subpoenaed too. (Not kidding!)


(post by mtnshredder removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   

This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!


All rules for polite political debate will be enforced.
Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)

You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!



posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: carewemust



Those 180 Trump-appointed Federal Judges are starting to yield good results.


So you think the Judicial system should be partisan, then?


Ideally, it shouldn't be. But it has been for decades. Since it's now primarily conservative at the top levels, and I'm conservative, ALL IS GOOD.


So you're all right with it as long as it's partisanship in your favor?

Figures.




posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: carewemust



Those 180 Trump-appointed Federal Judges are starting to yield good results.


So you think the Judicial system should be partisan, then?


Ideally, it shouldn't be. But it has been for decades. Since it's now primarily conservative at the top levels, and I'm conservative, ALL IS GOOD.


So you're all right with it as long as it's partisanship in your favor?

Figures.



We learned it from watching you.




posted on Oct, 15 2019 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Oraculi

If they are going to reinterpret the Emoluments Clauses then I guess we will have to rewrite history as well.

Because 6 of the 7 first Presidents broke the law, according to Democrats in 2019.

Most of those Presidents helped write the clauses.

So who is right here... the people that wrote it, or 2019 Democrats?

It's a rhetorical question.





top topics



 
1

log in

join