Donald Trump pulls his Doral property from consideration for G-7 after bipartisan blowback

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by MrTLegal, Oct 20, 2019.

  1. Arkanis

    Arkanis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    13,330
    Likes Received:
    16,992
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I can't dispute the fact that the facts have no impact on your beliefs.
     
    bx4 and cd8ed like this.
  2. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    15,979
    Likes Received:
    8,754
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1. Where do you get the notion that (a) there would be "no profit", and (b) that booking a hotel in the Summer in Florida, where no-****ing-body stays at that time of the year, isn't to Bonespurs' financial gain?; and
    2. That the Emoluments Clause magically requires a net profit for there to be a violation?

    You'd be better off simply acknowledging that Bonespurs' back-peddling on this rather easy issue was the best move he could've made instead of fabricating nonsensical "legal theories" that are neither found in the Constitution or in case law.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
    Quantum Nerd and MrTLegal like this.
  3. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The facts are, his property IS profitable and Trump offered to forfeit it and the libs forced him to keep the profit. You're yet to specify an inaccuracy in these facts.
     
  4. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, we are just not stupid enough to cheer him on for rectifying his own idiotic decision.
     
    bx4 likes this.
  5. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump can't be imprisoned because Obama and Hillary Clinton are not criminals.

    Solid logic.
     
    bx4 and Quantum Nerd like this.
  6. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Emoluments Clause does not say anything about profit. So that's one.

    Second, the anti-self dealing laws would make Trump's decision (awarding himself a no bid contract) illegal for literally every single federal employee except for the President and Vice President.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
    bx4 and Quantum Nerd like this.
  7. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The emoluments clause disallows accepting gifts, titles and emoluments from foreign states.... the at cost arrangement is not a gift, not an emolument and it's not paid by foreign states, it's paid by the host country.

    The ignorance is staggering lol
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
  8. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

    Talk to Andrew Napolitano.

    Judge Napolitano: Hosting G7 at Trump Doral is a violation of Emoluments Clause
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
    bx4 and Quantum Nerd like this.
  9. Daniel Light

    Daniel Light Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    Messages:
    31,455
    Likes Received:
    34,888
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There’s a solid argument for the courts, “your Honor, my client can’t be found guilty of murder because ten years ago, some other person was not convicted of murder.”

    Cool.
     
  10. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,109
    Likes Received:
    37,454
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well I beg to differ ;)
     
  11. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,662
    Likes Received:
    32,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Who has said the facility was not profitable?
    That is a strawman you have created because you cannot acknowledge the actual topic.

    Also, you have not disclosed how he will profit off of him having a lower occupancy rate during the period in question because he could not fill it with world leaders?
     
    MrTLegal likes this.
  12. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The never-Trumper clown has been wrong on absolutely every single thing since Trump's election, he spent 2.5 years spewing Russia conspiracy hoax. Nobody takes his seriously.

    And this gibberish is a great example. No gifts, no emoluments and no foreign governments were involved in the proposal, not a single item mentioned in the Emolument clause is applicable lol poor libs twisting themselves into a pretzel
     
  13. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    15,979
    Likes Received:
    8,754
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. The ignorance is staggering.
     
    cd8ed and MrTLegal like this.
  14. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    15,979
    Likes Received:
    8,754
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Instead of whining and crying that the eeeevil libs are wrong, how about providing an argument, supported by facts, law and logic?

    That would be refreshing.
     
  15. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But no rebuttal on your bogus Emolument clause violation? Let me guess, you have finally read it? Lol it's good for your education, even if it isn't for your totally baseless claim lol
     
    mngam likes this.
  16. bx4

    bx4 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2016
    Messages:
    15,063
    Likes Received:
    12,444
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Really? Do you have ANY evidence that, historically, Doral makes "millions" in June?

    Even if it did, it doesn't matter. I don't really care whether Trump makes millions at Doral. I do care whether he uses his office to drive business towards his own resorts.

    That's the way conflict of interest laws work. As a public servant, you can't do anything that could affect your own financial interest. Sending millions of dollars in revenue to Doral affects Trump's personal financial interest. Him saying he would do it "at cost" doesn't change that. On the contrary, it confirms that he does have a personal financial interest in the contract.

    So ... yeah, even if it will cost more elsewhere (we will never know, because Trump didn't tell us what it would have cost at Doral); even if he will make more money by renting his resort out privately (I doubt it, but again we will never know), it is still ethically correct that the G7 isn't hosted at Doral.

    And still, none of the Trumpsters have addressed the key issue: any other federal employee would be breaking the law by doing what he proposed. Why would it be OK for Trump to do it?
     
  17. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Huh? I have destroyed it. The clause is about gifts, titles and emoluments accepted from foreign entities.

    Neither gifts, nor titles, nor emoluments, not even foreign entities (the host pays for the summit) were involved in Trump's proposal.

    Get over it lol
     
  18. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do you have ANY relevant credentials on this matter?
     
  19. bx4

    bx4 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2016
    Messages:
    15,063
    Likes Received:
    12,444
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You need to look at the Constitution, Art.II, S.1, paragraph 7:
    7: The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased 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.

    So it also applies to emoluments from federal and state governments.

    Anyway, there are federal conflict of interest laws. Any other federal employee except POTUS and VPOTUS would be breaking federal law by doing this. No-one ha addressed that.
     
  20. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    15,979
    Likes Received:
    8,754
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I already have; you ignored it, because your claims are baseless.

    There's nothing in the Constitution or case law to support your argument that "Jeepers, well if he's not making a profit, it can't be a violation of the Emoluments Clause."

    Pro tip: when I made that argument, it's your job to find something besides your own musings to controvert my argument. Find a learned treatise, find some case law---use logic. Citing to "libs" is not an argument, friend.
     
  21. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    15,979
    Likes Received:
    8,754
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He doesn't have any.

    You and I do.
     
    MrTLegal likes this.
  22. Borat

    Borat Banned

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    9,859
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I have something much better, I have the actual Emolument clause lol

    No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

    No gifts, no titles, no emoluments, no foreign states. Read and weep and best regards to clown Napolitano lol
     
  23. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,134
    Likes Received:
    38,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not my job to keep you up to speed on the issues.
     
  24. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    15,979
    Likes Received:
    8,754
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Define "emoluments".
     
    MrTLegal likes this.
  25. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,134
    Likes Received:
    38,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The decision the government officials in charge of the election. What do you care?
     

Share This Page