"glimpse the rampant illegality and corruption of the Trump presidency" -- $7.8 million from foreign governments

[thaicurious]

Trump Raked in Millions From China, Other Governments While President (rollingstone.com)

"Trump Raked in Millions From China During Presidency: Report

House Oversight Democrats revealed that the former president collected $7.8 million from foreign governments while in office...

 

...Under the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, elected office-holders — including presidents — are barred from accepting gifts, payments, and other emoluments from foreign governments and dignitaries without the consent of Congress, as they could be used to influence policy and governance. 

As president, Trump refused to divest from his business empire, instead handing control of the conglomerate to his sons Eric and Donald Jr. The report released Thursday alleges that Trump violated the prohibitions against receiving emoluments when his businesses accepted payments from foreign governments..."

 

Trump business got at least $7.8 million in foreign payments during presidency -report | Reuters

"the payments detailed in the 156-page report are likely a fraction of the foreign payments made to Trump and his family during his 2017-2021 administration."

 

Trump Businesses Received $7.8 Million From Foreign Countries During Presidency, House Reports (forbes.com)

"Trump chose not to impose sanctions on ICBC, a Chinese bank that the Justice Department alleged was helping North Korea avoid sanctions (ICBC’s U.S. headquarters is located at Trump Tower, and paid Trump approximately $7 million in rent at Trump Tower, according to Forbes reporting)."

[Jingthing]

His cult of fans if their bubble even brings them this news will love him even more now.

Don't ask me for a logical explanation. 

Edited January 4 by Jingthing

[Captain Monday]

The only reason Trump ran in 2016 was personal aggrandizement and fundraising. Then to his and everyone else’s amazement he won, beginning this 7 year nightmare. 

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

The only reason Trump ran in 2016 was personal aggrandizement and fundraising. Then to his and everyone else’s amazement he won, beginning this 7 year nightmare. 

I agree that he didn't expect to win. 

Now he's running to dodge prison. 

[thaicurious]

47 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

His cult of fans if their bubble even brings them this news will love him even more now.

Don't ask me for a logical explanation. 

 

The logic is their cheering his thumbing his nose at law, the founding basis of America, "a government of laws not of men" (founding father John Adams, 5 Adams Diary, Volume I, January 1759, page 73)

 

PS apologies to moderators if thread is mislocated. Was thinking it a story of law but I suppose the politics of it are unavoidable)

[ozimoron]

The report notes that its findings are incomplete after House Republicans took control of the committee last year and halted the investigation, which the late Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., started in 2016 when he was the top Democrat on the committee. 

 

After Republicans took control of the committee, Mazars was eventually released from its legal obligation to provide relevant documentation to the Democrats’ investigation.

As a result, the report “is a significant glimpse into former President Trump’s foreign financial dealings –but far from a comprehensive account of his unprecedented efforts to use the presidency to enrich himself and his family in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.”

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/01/04/trump-foreign-governments-house-democrats/72097540007/

[impulse]

What a nothing burger.

 

Trump had existing business, with employees, payroll, customers and expenses.  What was he supposed to do, kick out his customers, and fire his employees?

 

He's the only modern president that actually left office with less net worth than when he entered.  $2.4 billion less (if you believe CNN).  That's quite a sacrifice.  Makes that $7.8 million look like chump change.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/05/politics/donald-trump-net-worth-forbes-billionaire/index.html

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/09/politics/forbes-400-donald-trump-wealth/index.html

 

https://blog.cheapism.com/what-presidents-are-worth/

 

Contrast that to Biden, whose family had no businesses, no product (other than "the big guy") and took in $24 million from foreign sources.  (That they know about so far)  Mostly from unfriendly nations.

 

https://dailycaller.com/2023/09/28/biden-family-associates-more-than-24-million-foreign-business-dealings/

 

 

Edited January 5 by impulse

[thaicurious]

8 minutes ago, impulse said:

Trump had existing business, with employees, payroll, customers and expenses.  What was he supposed to do, kick out his customers, and fire his employees?

So your argument is that it was okay for him break the law because he had the infrastructure to act illegally?

 

Perhaps he was simply supposed to sell his own businesses (& not America's nuclear secrets, haha). Thus the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution of the United States of America. If you have a problem with that, you need to take it up with our Founding Fathers who wrote...

 

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i/clauses/759

Article I, Section 9, Clause 8

[N]o Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them [i.e., the United States], 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.

[seajae]

here we go, another russia collusion  pushed by a  left leaning publication, how dare hotels and buildings accept people paying to stay in/use their facilities, shows how pathetic the dems are trying to make this out as anythng more than the normal business of these buildings(that was ongoing prior to his election) especially when biden & his family have been actually shown to have taken a hell of a lot more for access to biden himself. No surprise this garbage was allowed in here when it is pushed by the dems and their pathetic supporters that are all sh*t scared trump will be the next president, all the crap they are desperately throwing at him is falling down around them. I find US politics one huge laugh as the ones bitching lack the inteliigence to research the truth in most matters and only accept the innuendo from their biased propaganderist news sites/publications, hahahahahahaha, I have had one rusted on dem trying to say that 5 cops were killed during jan 6, they refuse to believe the truth, only what they have been told by other leftist idiots 

Edited January 5 by seajae

[thaicurious]

6 hours ago, ozimoron said:

The report notes that its findings are incomplete after House Republicans took control of the committee last year and halted the investigation, which the late Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., started in 2016 when he was the top Democrat on the committee. 

Yup, way incomplete. I'm surprised this much is seeing the light of day. Just wait until the rest comes out about the billions made by Trump's son in law who actually DID work in the White House. That should be fun.

[heybruce]

15 hours ago, impulse said:

What a nothing burger.

 

Trump had existing business, with employees, payroll, customers and expenses.  What was he supposed to do, kick out his customers, and fire his employees?

 

He's the only modern president that actually left office with less net worth than when he entered.  $2.4 billion less (if you believe CNN).  That's quite a sacrifice.  Makes that $7.8 million look like chump change.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/05/politics/donald-trump-net-worth-forbes-billionaire/index.html

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/09/politics/forbes-400-donald-trump-wealth/index.html

 

https://blog.cheapism.com/what-presidents-are-worth/

 

Contrast that to Biden, whose family had no businesses, no product (other than "the big guy") and took in $24 million from foreign sources.  (That they know about so far)  Mostly from unfriendly nations.

 

https://dailycaller.com/2023/09/28/biden-family-associates-more-than-24-million-foreign-business-dealings/

 

 

"What was he supposed to do, kick out his customers, and fire his employees?"

 

No, he was supposed to put all his financial interests in a blind trust.  That's what the Presidents that preceded him did.  That's what honest Presidents do.

[thaicurious]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

"What was he supposed to do, kick out his customers, and fire his employees?"

 

No, he was supposed to put all his financial interests in a blind trust.  That's what the Presidents that preceded him did.  That's what honest Presidents do.

Normally & historically & likely in large part moving forward, correct. Orangely? Maybe not so much. Rather combine the sale I mentioned with the trust of your post per this 2016 study*

 

(moderators pardon if the excerpt seems lengthy but the issue is complex and I've taken just a small part from a 20plus page report to clarify an issue raised here)

 

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/gs_121616_emoluments-clause1.pdf

"...as the New York Times reported on the basis of careful study, “Every president in the past four decades has taken personal holdings he had before being elected and put them in a blind trust in which the assets were controlled by an

independent party” or the equivalent ...

 

...Nor could a supposedly “blind trust” involving control of Mr. Trump’s assets by his children (who would run the Trump Organization) suffice. As Senator Cardin has explained:

 

A true blind trust, including ones established by past

Presidents, is an arrangement where the official has no control

over, will receive no communications about, and will have no

knowledge of the identity of the specific assets held in the

trust, and the trust’s manager operates independently of the

owner. The arrangement described by Mr. Trump and his

lawyers is not independent: Mr. Trump is well aware of the

specific assets held and he can receive communications about

and take actions to affect the value of such assets. And the idea

that President-elect Trump’s children are or will be truly

“independent managers” is not credible.

 

The ultimate difficulty is that a “blind trust” of this sort does not address the fundamental reasons why the Emoluments Clause was written into the Constitution. Mr. Trump would still know that his interests and those of the Trump Organization are closely intertwined; he would still know what the Trump Organization is doing and how conduct by foreign states and their agents is affecting it (and him); he would still have continuing incentive and opportunity to use the power of the Presidency to influence the Trump Organization and, potentially, the conduct of its officers, directors, regulators, and competitors; and both the American public and international community would know all these facts.

 

the only true solution is for Mr. Trump and his children to divest themselves of all ownership interests in the Trump business empire. That divestment process must be run by an independent third party, who can then turn the

resulting assets over to a true blind trust. Even if, as some experts believe, there is nothing that Mr. Trump could do to avoid the significant tax consequences of divesting, fidelity to the Constitution, and to American foreign policy and national security interests, manifestly overcomes all such loss to Mr. Trump or his immediate family (who will remain extremely wealthy, in all events). Ultimately, having run for President and prevailed in Electoral College votes, Mr. Trump must make sacrifices in exchange for the awesome powers and responsibilities he will now inherit. That is the design of the Constitution, to which Mr. Trump is always subject.

 

Remedies for Emolument Clause Violations

In the event that Mr. Trump chooses a course of action that places him in continued violation of the Emoluments Clause, there are several possible remedies. First, given that Mr. Trump would arrive in office as a walking, talking violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, the Electoral College would be justified in concluding that he is unqualified for the Office of the Presidency. For that reason, among others, individual electors must be considered free to decline to cast votes for Mr. Trump" (bolding & underlining mine)

 

*the authors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_Eisen

American attorney, author, and former diplomat. He is a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Painter

American lawyer, professor ... chief White House ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Tribe

American legal scholar who is a University Professor Emeritus at Harvard University. He previously served as the Carl M. Loeb University Professor at Harvard Law School... A constitutional law scholar

Edited January 6 by thaicurious
typo

[Berkshire]

On 1/5/2024 at 10:10 AM, thaicurious said:

So your argument is that it was okay for him break the law because he had the infrastructure to act illegally?

 

Perhaps he was simply supposed to sell his own businesses (& not America's nuclear secrets, haha). Thus the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution of the United States of America. If you have a problem with that, you need to take it up with our Founding Fathers who wrote...

 

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i/clauses/759

Article I, Section 9, Clause 8

[N]o Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them [i.e., the United States], 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.

It's amazing to me that these Trump supporters--most of whom are likely poor "white trash"--have no problem with their hero making money from his position, not to mention stealing their money through secret service paying sky high prices at his resorts.  And then there's the non-stop fundraising siphoning every last remaining cent from these rubes.  It really is a cult following.

[thaicurious]

On 1/9/2024 at 10:30 PM, Berkshire said:

It's amazing to me that these Trump supporters--most of whom are likely poor "white trash"--have no problem with their hero making money from his position, not to mention stealing their money through secret service paying sky high prices at his resorts.  And then there's the non-stop fundraising siphoning every last remaining cent from these rubes.  It really is a cult following.

Some of them are cult

Some of them are excusing their own bad behaviors

Some of them don't know any better

Some of them seek acceptance at any cost

Some of them are just plain old fashion stupid

Some of them seek simple reasons even if wrong

Some of them are stuck in emotional cost sunk fallacy

Some of them want to be abused