Trump claims he is victim of "phony emoluments"clause

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Can't be bothered to care anymore, we have had multiple president's in my time that entered office as middle class and left with the ability to spend 10s of millions of dollars, on a less than 300k (or whatever the president makes now) a year job and nobody cared, want to burn down all of them great I'm on board... Just orange man bad you might be a hypocrite.

The Clintons and the Obamas both fit this description. Of course, the Clintons have their own charity, specifically set up to launder bribe money and facilitate influence paddling.

As for the Obamas, I can't help but wonder if they got a cut of all that money they (illegally) flew to Iran right before he left office. They were middle to upper-middle class before they entered office, but now they somehow have enough money to take frequent vacations in places like Tahiti and the French Riviera. Oh, and they bought a walled compound in DC.

W Bush clearly had money before he became president. How much of it he got from his daddy I don't know. But no president in modern times has ever been poor.

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Wayfarer

your just upset my wife laughed at you


second

Uh, you wouldn't happen to be smelling almonds, would you bud?

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
There's no question he's lost a ton of money being president.

There are a ton of questions and at least one lawsuit.

He donates his salary, and he cannot perform any real estate deals while president.

Every time he visits Mar-Lar-Go with his entire staff and secret service he pays himself.
Let alone the tonnage of foriegn leaders booking floors of his hotels etc.

He says he would have given the summit the use of Mar-a-Lago for free.

Hilarious. Tell me how that accounting works.

The emolument claim is mainly that people staying at one of Trump's hotels could be considered a gift, but that's a rather tenuous argument, and we'd need the Supreme Court to rule on it.

It's not even an argument at all. It is foreign governments paying money to Trump.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Wayfarer

your just upset my wife laughed at you


second

Uh, you wouldn't happen to be smelling almonds, would you bud?

I don't even know what that means but it sounds nasty.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Just to get everybody on the right page the property being offered for next years G7 summit was Trump Doral in Miami.
Not Mar a Largo.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Wayfarer

your just upset my wife laughed at you


second

Uh, you wouldn't happen to be smelling almonds, would you bud?

So does that mean you don't want to cuddle anymore???😂😲😂😲😂😲😂😲



welcome back silly hows life


🎵🎵🎵Pink...🎵🎵🎵🎵🎵

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Wayfarer

Ooh ooh, I want to play!

Can you prove he has taken a salary or made any profits?

Well we know that the constitution provides for a salary for the president.
What happens to it after he gets paid is his business but he is getting paid.

Compensation Provision of the Constitution for the President US Constitution, Article II, Section 1 The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them.

a reply to: annoyedpharmacist

He said he would leave the running of his business to his offspring while he was president.


Why is he losing money if they are supposedly running things?

originally posted by: thedigirati

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Wayfarer

your just upset my wife laughed at you


second

Uh, you wouldn't happen to be smelling almonds, would you bud?

So does that mean you don't want to cuddle anymore???😂😲😂😲😂😲😂😲



welcome back silly hows life


🎵🎵🎵Pink...🎵🎵🎵🎵🎵

I was so tired and confused when I read this reply this morning, and like 1 minute later got to the other thread to which that reply was relevant.

That being said I like to think of myself as an equal opportunity/non-biased cuddler, so the offer is still on the table

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
The Clintons left the White house almost broke. Well that was the claim anyway.
The legal bills from the impeachment were a big drain.
Of course in the years following they more than made up for it but the balance sheet did in fact show they were in the red at the end of the presidency.
I would not say they were dead broke which they have claimed. They had assets and they had reputation that enabled them to earn much more over the years. They were not penniless at any time. The broad balance sheet showed a deficit at the end of Bills second term but were they shaking out the sofa for loose change? Probably not.

originally posted by: tinner07
The whole G-7 at mar a lago to me seemed a violation of the constitution. Some will say he would not make a profit and some will say the emoluments clause does not mention profit.

but in a talk, he just said the phony emoluments clause...

Context, little one...

It was clear he meant the phony charges about violating the emoluments clause - if you listen to the actual full and unedited recording. I did. It was clear.

He had people check, but it was unclear whether letting everyone stay for free would be considered bribery, or some such, so he chose not to do it.

Ridiculous, but that is the MSM in America today...

originally posted by: tinner07
OK.. when did he say he would give mara lago for free to the G-7? you have a source for that?

So... you didn't even listen to the video you cited... got it...

He donates his salary? you have proof of that?

Pretty easy to prove. You apparently only watch CNN... poor little one...

Lost a ton of money being president? How?

Tsk, tsk...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist

He said he would leave the running of his business to his offspring while he was president.

Why is he losing money if they are supposedly running things?

Maybe because he's not getting any "emolument" from the businesses ? 😎

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Hell, I'd wager that the majority of the left would be removed from office based on their own interpretation. This will be interesting.

I would hope so. Wouldn't it be crazy if politicians actually had to abide by the constitution?

That's the thing though, the constitution says nothing about profit from a business.