Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53
Thanks Tree18Thanks

Thread: More Trumpian conflict of interest

  1. #1
    Above the FRAY Friday13's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    11,210
    Thanks
    13480

    From
    SoCal

    More Trumpian conflict of interest

    The orange shit-gibbon really believes that he is immune from the proscriptions of the emoluments clause of the Constitution. "... I have a no conflict situation because I'm president..."


    Trump promised not to work with foreign entities. His company just did.

    A major construction company owned by the Chinese government was hired to work on the latest Trump golf club development in Dubai despite a pledge from Donald Trump that his family business would not engage in any transactions with foreign government entities while he serves as president.

    Trump’s partner, DAMAC Properties, awarded a $32-million contract to the Middle East subsidiary of China State Construction Engineering Corporation to build a six-lane road as part of the residential piece of the Trump World Golf Club Dubai project called Akoya Oxygen, according to*news releases*released by*both companies. It is scheduled to open next year.

    The companies’ statements do not detail*the exact timing of the contract except to note it was sometime in the first two months of 2017, just as Trump was inaugurated and questions were raised about a slew of*potential conflicts of interest*between his presidency and his vast real estate empire.

    The Chinese company, known as*CSCEC, is majority government-owned — according to*Bloomberg*and*Moody’s, among others — an arrangement that generally encourages growth and drives out competition. It was listed as the 7th largest company in China and 37th worldwide with nearly $130 billion in revenues in 2014, according to Fortune’s*Global 500 list.

    The company, which has had a presence in the United States since the mid-1980s, was one of several*accused by the World Bank*of corruption for its role in the bidding process for a*roads project*in the Philippines and banned in 2009 from World Bank-financed contracts for several years.

    [...]

    The Emoluments Clause in the U.S. Constitution says officials may not accept gifts, titles of nobility or emoluments from foreign governments with respect to their office, and that no benefit should be derived by holding office.

    “This is not just a concern of good government organizations,” she said. “It was a fundamental concern of the founding fathers.”

    [...]
    Hussain Sajwani, DAMAC’s wealthy chairman, who has family members listed in the Panama papers, offered the Trump Organization $2 billion in deals following Trump’s election, according to*both sides. Trump said he rejected the offers to avoid conflicts of interest.

    “Over the weekend, I was offered $2 billion to do a deal in Dubai with a very, very, very amazing man, a great, great developer from the Middle East,” Trump said at a news conference in January. “And I turned it down. I didn't have to turn it down because as you know I have a no conflict situation because I'm president...But I don’t want to take advantage of something.”
    Last edited by Friday13; 12th September 2017 at 12:43 AM.
    Thanks from Davocrat

  2. #2
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,453
    Thanks
    10870

    From
    By the wall
    Congress passed a law removing the president from any conflict of interest.

    He can fully run a business if he likes.

    In order for the emoluments clause to be relevant it has to be extremely specific.

    Have you ever read it?

  3. #3
    "Mr. Original". the watchman's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    76,087
    Thanks
    39172

    From
    becoming more and more
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Congress passed a law removing the president from any conflict of interest.

    He can fully run a business if he likes.

    In order for the emoluments clause to be relevant it has to be extremely specific.

    Have you ever read it?
    what law would that be? Any such law would surely be unconstitutional.
    Thanks from Friday13

  4. #4
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    8,837
    Thanks
    2628

    Trump is above the law. Congress evidently said so...?

    Congress overruled the Constitution with a law invalidating the concept of a conflict of interest for the President, apparently. I don't know about this, but one of the most blatantly deliberately foolish wasters of time and effort on this site says so, so it's probably true.

  5. #5
    Cat-tastic Babba's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    64,987
    Thanks
    45552

    From
    So. Md.
    I love the way Trump supporters think the president should be above the law - that is when the president is a Republican.

  6. #6
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,453
    Thanks
    10870

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by the watchman View Post
    what law would that be? Any such law would surely be unconstitutional.
    Setting aside the troubling ethical implications of such a statement, from a purely legal perspective, Trump*is right. *Both the Vice President and President are exempt from federal rules that prohibit*executive branch*employees from participating in matters in which*they have financial interests.
    In fact,*18 U.S.C. Section 202 specifically states, as relating to Section 208 which deals with financial interests:

    “Except as otherwise provided in such sections, the terms ‘officer’ and ’employee’ in sections 203, 205, 207 through 209, and 218 of this title shall not include the President, the Vice President, a Member of Congress, or a Federal judge.”

    https://lawnewz.com/high-profile/tru...-apply-to-him/

  7. #7
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    36,887
    Thanks
    38887

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Setting aside the troubling ethical implications of such a statement, from a purely legal perspective, Trump*is right. *Both the Vice President and President are exempt from federal rules that prohibit*executive branch*employees from participating in matters in which*they have financial interests.
    In fact,*18 U.S.C. Section 202 specifically states, as relating to Section 208 which deals with financial interests:

    “Except as otherwise provided in such sections, the terms ‘officer’ and ’employee’ in sections 203, 205, 207 through 209, and 218 of this title shall not include the President, the Vice President, a Member of Congress, or a Federal judge.”

    https://lawnewz.com/high-profile/tru...-apply-to-him/
    Are you OK with that? You didn't seem to be when it was the Clintons...
    Thanks from Friday13

  8. #8
    "Mr. Original". the watchman's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    76,087
    Thanks
    39172

    From
    becoming more and more
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Setting aside the troubling ethical implications of such a statement, from a purely legal perspective, Trump*is right. *Both the Vice President and President are exempt from federal rules that prohibit*executive branch*employees from participating in matters in which*they have financial interests.
    In fact,*18 U.S.C. Section 202 specifically states, as relating to Section 208 which deals with financial interests:

    “Except as otherwise provided in such sections, the terms ‘officer’ and ’employee’ in sections 203, 205, 207 through 209, and 218 of this title shall not include the President, the Vice President, a Member of Congress, or a Federal judge.”

    https://lawnewz.com/high-profile/tru...-apply-to-him/
    Except as otherwise provided in such sections,....

    This law doesn't exempt the president from the emoluments clause in our constitution.
    Thanks from Babba and Friday13

  9. #9
    Established Member
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    5,563
    Thanks
    4309

    From
    In my mind
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Congress passed a law removing the president from any conflict of interest.

    He can fully run a business if he likes.

    In order for the emoluments clause to be relevant it has to be extremely specific.

    Have you ever read it?

    Not quite what the law says.
    Thanks from the watchman and Friday13

  10. #10
    "Mr. Original". the watchman's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    76,087
    Thanks
    39172

    From
    becoming more and more
    Quote Originally Posted by Think for myself View Post
    Not quite what the law says.
    ya kinda get the feeling Trump supporters would be happy if he got richer off of being president.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Major Conflict Of Interest
    By MaryAnne in forum Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 1st December 2016, 06:33 AM
  2. The Fed and conflict of interest.
    By Cicero in forum Economics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 31st August 2011, 12:45 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed