Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
SaintsInDome2006

The Case Against the President: Emoluments, Trump's Finances, Taxes & Foundation

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

That's quite the flipping of the switch from 1994 to 1995. Did something specifically happen in 1995 that would have turned a $100 million per year loser into a profit maker thereafter?

If he was heavily invested in real estate.  RE crashed in the early 90s and then came back strong in the mid 90s.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judge upholds House panel subpoena for Trump financial records.

District Judge Amit Mehta on Monday ruled in favor of a subpoena issued by the House Oversight Committee for President Trump's financial records from the accounting firm Mazars.

In a 41-page-long opinion, Mehta found that "President Trump cannot block the subpoena to Mazars."

Trump's attorneys had argued that the subpoena was unconstitutional because it wasn't tied to legislation. But attorneys for the House said that the records will help strengthen ethics and disclosure laws and see if Trump is in compliance with the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.

"These are facially valid legislative purposes, and it is not for the court to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations," Mehta wrote.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/regulation/444638-judge-upholds-house-panel-subpoena-for-trump-financial-records%3famp

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mile High said:

Judge upholds House panel subpoena for Trump financial records.

District Judge Amit Mehta on Monday ruled in favor of a subpoena issued by the House Oversight Committee for President Trump's financial records from the accounting firm Mazars.

In a 41-page-long opinion, Mehta found that "President Trump cannot block the subpoena to Mazars."

Trump's attorneys had argued that the subpoena was unconstitutional because it wasn't tied to legislation. But attorneys for the House said that the records will help strengthen ethics and disclosure laws and see if Trump is in compliance with the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.

"These are facially valid legislative purposes, and it is not for the court to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations," Mehta wrote.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/regulation/444638-judge-upholds-house-panel-subpoena-for-trump-financial-records%3famp

Not only that - but declined to issue a stay while Trump appeals (I assume the Appellate court will issue a stay.)

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the opinion. It's persuasive.

As things stand, Mazars is supposed to turn over the records in one week.

I'm sure Trump will appeal. I'm not sure what the process is for getting the appellate court to block the subpoena before it rules. I don't think it's automatic, but I'm not sure. If Trump has to convince the appellate court that his appeal is likely to succeed, I don't think that's going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Here's the opinion. It's persuasive.

As things stand, Mazars is supposed to turn over the records in one week.

I'm sure Trump will appeal. I'm not sure what the process is for getting the appellate court to block the subpoena before it rules. I don't think it's automatic, but I'm not sure. If Trump has to convince the appellate court that his appeal is likely to succeed, I don't think that's going to happen.

Its not automatic - but I would be surprised if the court does not issue a temporary stay - once the documents are disclosed it makes the case moot.

And, I would expect Team Trump to pull out all of the stops here - if the panel denies the stay, apply for an en banc hearing with the entire circuit, and if that fails, throw a hail mary to the SC.  (But I think the DC circuit will issue a temporary stay, and expedite the appeal.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Its not automatic - but I would be surprised if the court does not issue a temporary stay - once the documents are disclosed it makes the case moot.

And, I would expect Team Trump to pull out all of the stops here - if the panel denies the stay, apply for an en banc hearing with the entire circuit, and if that fails, throw a hail mary to the SC.  (But I think the DC circuit will issue a temporary stay, and expedite the appeal.)

If it's not automatic, there must be a test. I don't know what the specific test is, but it's hard to think of a reasonable one that he could pass. If irreparable harm is the only factor, okay, he can pass that. But I doubt there's a one-factor test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

If it's not automatic, there must be a test. I don't know what the specific test is, but it's hard to think of a reasonable one that he could pass. If irreparable harm is the only factor, okay, he can pass that. But I doubt there's a one-factor test.

"In the D.C. Circuit, courts assess four factors when determining whether to grant a motion for a stay pending appeal: '(1) the moving party’s likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal, (2) whether the moving party will suffer irreparable injury, (3) whether issuance of the stay would substantially harm other parties in the proceeding, and (4) the public interest.'"
Akiachak Native Cmty. v. Jewell, 995 F. Supp. 2d 7, 12 (D.D.C. 2014).

 

This is, obviously, a pretty universal test.  The only slam dunk is irreparable harm, though you can argue effectively that Congress is not substantially harmed by the issuance of the stay, and "public interest" is really a fudge factor.  If Trump gets a favorable panel, I could see two judges deciding differently on the likelihood of success prong.

 

And, given that I would expect the Appelate Court to do the same as the District Court - hear the merits of the appeal at the same time it hears the motion for stay pending appeal - I could see the court issuing a temporary stay, with an expedited - next 1-2 weeks - appeal process.  It seems both parties have already extensively briefed the issues - the motions and arguments will be the same on appeal.

 

Of course, if the Court denies the stay - they are effectively saying Trump will not prevail on Appeal, and he will want it in front of the SC as quickly as possible.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

"In the D.C. Circuit, courts assess four factors when determining whether to grant a motion for a stay pending appeal: '(1) the moving party’s likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal, (2) whether the moving party will suffer irreparable injury, (3) whether issuance of the stay would substantially harm other parties in the proceeding, and (4) the public interest.'"
Akiachak Native Cmty. v. Jewell, 995 F. Supp. 2d 7, 12 (D.D.C. 2014).

That's the same test the district court judge just applied and resolved in favor of the Committee. The circuit court might analyze things differently, but I'm not sure I'd bet on it. The district court's reasoning seemed right.

Trump has almost no shot of succeeding on the merits. His arguments are extremely stupid.

Trump would be irreparably injured if a stay is denied (and if he would have ended up prevailing), but the harm is mitigated by the fact that disclosure isn't to a business competitor: it's to Congress. Congress is presumed to be somewhat responsible about what they do with the info.

The last two factors aren't a huge deal, but the public interest generally favors transparency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

That's the same test the district court judge just applied and resolved in favor of the Committee. The circuit court might analyze things differently, but I'm not sure I'd bet on it. The district court's reasoning seemed right.

Trump has almost no shot of succeeding on the merits. His arguments are extremely stupid.

Trump would be irreparably injured if a stay is denied (and he would have ended up prevailing), but the harm is mitigated by the fact that disclosure isn't to a business competitor: it's to Congress. Congress is presumed to be somewhat responsible about what they do with the info.

The last two factors aren't a huge deal, but the public interest generally favors transparency.

Its an uphill climb - but, I would not be shocked if the court issued a stay, if the parties can not brief the court prior to Mazars turning over the documents.  Once Congress gets the documents, it shuts down the appelate process.  Really hard to unring that bell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One really disturbing piece underlying the president’s arguments has been the idea that the executive is separate and apart in our system, so for instance they argue that the WH can’t compel Congressmen into the Oval Office and so Congress can’t compel the WH’s staffs or documents to the Hill. But we have a republic, with a few very defined exceptions laws and power derive from Congress. Imo Trump is arguing for an authoritarian executive branch outside the reach of the Congress, it’s anti-constitutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

One really disturbing piece underlying the president’s arguments has been the idea that the executive is separate and apart in our system, so for instance they argue that the WH can’t compel Congressmen into the Oval Office and so Congress can’t compel the WH’s staffs or documents to the Hill. But we have a republic, with a few very defined exceptions laws and power derive from Congress. Imo Trump is arguing for an authoritarian executive branch outside the reach of the Congress, it’s anti-constitutional.

In fairness, if we want to enable the leader of the executive branch to achieve his party’s objectives more effectively, it does make sense to disempower the legislature. That’s one of the take-home lessons from 1933.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merrick Garland is overseeing Trump's appeal? The writers of this show are just mailing it in now.

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matthew Yglesias Retweeted

Bank CEO Stephen Calk charged with corruptly soliciting a presidential administration position in exchange for approving $16 million in loans

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calk made a list of positions he desired. Among them, Treasury Secretary, Deputy Treasury Secretary, DoD Secretery, Commerce Secretary, or more than a dozen possible ambassadorships.

CNN

Federal prosecutors in New York on Thursday unsealed an indictment charging the former CEO of a bank with approving loans to former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in exchange for an administration position.

-NBC NYC

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Calk made a list of positions he desired. Among them, Treasury Secretary, Deputy Treasury Secretary, DoD Secretery, Commerce Secretary, or more than a dozen possible ambassadorships.

CNN

Federal prosecutors in New York on Thursday unsealed an indictment charging the former CEO of a bank with approving loans to former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in exchange for an administration position.

-NBC NYC

Manafort is a guy DJT hired (who is now going to spend quite a bit of time in a federal penitentiary, likely die there & had upwards of 40 million plus confiscated due to his criminality,) then DJT hired Calk on Manaforts suggestion, with a list of jobs Calk himself provided that he would be fine doing. This doesn't bother conservatives, Republicans, DJT supporters? It doesn't reek of swampiness?

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reps of 22 foreign governments have spent money at Trump properties

The number of foreign governments hints at a significant foreign cash flow to the U.S. president that critics say violates the Constitution.

Quote

 

WASHINGTON — Representatives of at least 22 foreign governments appear to have spent money at Trump Organization properties, an NBC News review has found, hinting at a significant foreign cash flow to the American president that critics say violates the U.S. Constitution.

The extent and amount of foreign spending at Trump's hotels, golf clubs and restaurants is not known, because the Trump Organization is a private company and declines to disclose that information. Trump promised to donate any profits from foreign governments, and the Trump Organization has sent $343,000 to the U.S. Treasury for 2017 and 2018. The company did not release underlying numbers to support that figure.

Amid two lawsuits accusing Trump of accepting illegal foreign payments, NBC News sought to compile the most comprehensive possible list of foreign spending at Trump properties based on information in the public record. In June 2018, a report by the watchdog group Public Citizen came up with 10 foreign governments that had spent money at Trump venues. More information has since become public.

...

Trump-owned properties — including his D.C. hotel and his Mar-a-Lago golf club — have been the frequent recipients of foreign money.

According to news accounts and other public records:

At least nine foreign governments were involved in hosting events at a Trump property: Afghanistan, Cyprus, Ireland, Japan, Philippines, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Turkey

At least nine foreign governments rented or purchased property in buildings or communities owned by Trump businesses: Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, China, Malaysia, Slovakia, Thailand, India and the European Union.

Representatives of at least five foreign governments — Georgia, Nigeria, Malaysia, Romania and Saudi Arabia — have stayed at a Trump property.

Foreign governments have improved infrastructure in a way that benefited Trump properties in Indonesia and Panama.

At least eight foreign governments or their representatives attended parties or gatherings at Trump properties: Brazil, Dominica, Georgia, Nigeria, Russia, Turkey, Malaysia and Qatar

An event at the Trump International Hotel in Washington last May exemplifies the risk of a conflict of interest, or the risk of an appearance of such a conflict.

A delegation from the Mediterranean island nation of Cyprus hosted a "Justice for Cyprus" conference at the hotel. The group opposes Turkish influence in a breakaway region of Cyprus once occupied by the Turkish military.

The purpose of the gathering, as first reported by journalist Zach Everson, was described in a report in the Cyprus News Agency, which gets funding from the government. The group was examining "ways of exerting influence on US President Donald Trump with a view to avert the Islamization of the Turkish-occupied part of Cyprus," the report said.

In February, the investigative reporting site ProPublica observed that Nigerian presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar and his entourage were staying at the Trump Hotel in Washington, despite Abubakar reportedly having been barred from the U.S. for his alleged involvement in corruption while he was Nigeria's vice president.

And last week, The Washington Post reported that a wealthy Iraqi sheikh who was trying to influence the Trump administration spent 26 nights in a suite at the hotel at an estimated cost of tens of thousands of dollars.

In a court ruling last year denying Trump's motion to dismiss an emoluments lawsuit, a federal judge in Washington, Peter Messitte, raised the seminal question: When "a President maintains a premier hotel property that generates millions of dollars a year in profits, how likely is it that he will not be swayed, whether consciously or subconsciously, in any and all of his dealings with foreign or domestic governments that might choose to spend large sums of money at that hotel property?" ...

 

 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's quite amazing to me that THIS thread has had as little traffic as it has.  Probably the most blatant and damning of all his actions and nary a peep.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's Beverly Hills mansion was assessed at last year: $8.3 million. Price Trump's Indonesian business partner secretly paid for it a couple of weeks ago: $13.5 million.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bucky86 said:

Trump's Beverly Hills mansion was assessed at last year: $8.3 million. Price Trump's Indonesian business partner secretly paid for it a couple of weeks ago: $13.5 million.

 

You think market value is always the same as tax assessments?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

You think market value is always the same as tax assessments?

 

:lol:. Those numbers seem about right actually. But Trump!

:lmao: Going to need to go ahead and bold and italicize that. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bucky86 said:

Trump's Beverly Hills mansion was assessed at last year: $8.3 million. Price Trump's Indonesian business partner secretly paid for it a couple of weeks ago: $13.5 million.

 

>>>Trump’s company sells California mansion to firm linked to Indonesian billionaire, a business partner Link

President Trump’s company has quietly sold one of his last remaining properties in California — a 5,400-square-foot Beverly Hills mansion that county records show was purchased by a corporate entity linked to an Indonesian billionaire and Trump business partner.

A deed registered with L.A. County on May 31 shows that Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., signed the property over to Hillcrest Asia Ltd., a company registered in the British Virgin Islands. The price tag: $13.5 million, nearly double what Trump paid for the house when he bought it in 2007.

The purchaser address listed on the deed is a Beverly Hills condominium owned by a firm belonging to Hary Tanoesoedibjo, a billionaire media executive who ran for vice president of Indonesia in 2014.

He is Trump’s business partner on two projects in Indonesia — a resort on the island of Bali and a golf course and resort in the forests of West Java, south of the capital city of Jakarta. Tanoesoedibjo has said he expects that the projects will be worth more than $500 million when completed.

A woman reached by phone at the condominium, who declined to give her name, said she knew the family and had heard of the purchase but was not prepared to make a statement. Calls to other phones for the Tanoesoe­dibjo family were not returned.

...Trump bought the property, at 809 N. Canon Dr., for $7 million in 2007, according to L.A. County land records. The county assessed the property last year at $8.3 million.

...The U.S. Constitution bars the president from receiving gifts or payments from foreign leaders. Trump is fighting two federal lawsuits that claim he is running afoul of that prohibition by accepting business from foreign dignitaries at his hotels.

The $13.5 million sale price of the Beverly Hills mansion is likely to exacerbate ethics concerns. The property was sold off-market — meaning it was not listed for sale publicly — and Beverly Hills real estate experts said they were surprised at the high price.

The median home value in Beverly Hills has gone up from $2.3 million in early 2007 to $3.5 million this year, a 52 percent increase, according to analysis from Zillow. Trump sold his home for 93 percent more than he paid for it in 2007.

Trump “got a really good price,” said Luis Pezzini, the chief executive of Pezzini Luxury Homes in West Hollywood.

“Seems a little rich, to be perfectly frank,” Pezzini said. “Unless there’s something spectacular about this [house] that I’m missing.”

Pezzini said he had a listing nearby with a larger home and lot size — as well as a tennis court — and expected to get slightly less than the $13.5 million Trump received.

Tanoesoedibjo’s main business is media, as his MNC Group in Indonesia owns television stations and broadband businesses, but he also has finance and natural resources companies.

He and the Trump family know each other well, and beginning in 2015, he signed deals to partner with Trump on the two enormous projects in West Java and Bali, where he owns land.

Tanoesoedibjo attended Trump’s inauguration, posing for photos with Eric and Lara Trump at Trump’s D.C. hotel the day after the inauguration. He has said he has considered running for president in his country, with Trump as an inspiration.<<<

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, tonydead said:

:lol:. Those numbers seem about right actually. But Trump!

:lmao: Going to need to go ahead and bold and italicize that. 

 

 

How do you know that?

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bucky86 said:

Trump's Beverly Hills mansion was assessed at last year: $8.3 million. Price Trump's Indonesian business partner secretly paid for it a couple of weeks ago: $13.5 million.

 

The housing market must be red hot right now.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sammy3469 said:

I’ve always wondered what the backstory to this state park was...guess I know now...so Trumpian

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/failed-trump-golf-course-turned-into-dilapidated-n-y-state-park?srnd=premium

Fitting that a park for him is just mud rocks and hills that the state let grow over because it’s useless land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Sammy3469 said:

I’ve always wondered what the backstory to this state park was...guess I know now...so Trumpian

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/failed-trump-golf-course-turned-into-dilapidated-n-y-state-park?srnd=premium

Pete Seeger Useless Overgrown Park

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Sammy3469 said:

I’ve always wondered what the backstory to this state park was...guess I know now...so Trumpian

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/failed-trump-golf-course-turned-into-dilapidated-n-y-state-park?srnd=premium

Quote

Despite the purchase price of $2.75 million, and a county assessment of $5.5 million at the time of the donation, Trump’s 2016 campaign said in a list of charitable donations published by The Washington Post that the land was worth $26.1 million.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sho nuff said:

Fitting that a park for him is just mud rocks and hills that the state let grow over because it’s useless land.

"lies covered in brambles, mud and rocks"

Sums him up pretty well too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, siffoin said:

"lies covered in brambles, mud and rocks"

Sums him up pretty well too.

"An hour’s drive north of Manhattan, Donald J. Trump State Park is what New York euphemistically calls a "passive park," meaning it has no trails, picnic tables or other amenities. The state stopped maintaining it in 2010, and the land lies covered in brambles, mud and rocks. A bill pending before the state legislature would change the name of the park to honor the folk singer Pete Seeger instead of the current president."

passive park :snicker: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds familiar...

 

Miller added that he billed the Trump Organization a seven-figure sum for his work on the land as well as his work on Trump National Golf ClubWestchester in Briarcliff Manor, New York. Trump’s company paid him all but $140,000, and after fighting for several months to get the balance, Miller said he finally accepted Trump’s personal offer of a discounted membership at the Briarcliff Manor club in lieu of payment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ned said:

Sounds familiar...

 

Miller added that he billed the Trump Organization a seven-figure sum for his work on the land as well as his work on Trump National Golf ClubWestchester in Briarcliff Manor, New York. Trump’s company paid him all but $140,000, and after fighting for several months to get the balance, Miller said he finally accepted Trump’s personal offer of a discounted membership at the Briarcliff Manor club in lieu of payment.

This is one of the first reasons why I started disliking Trump.  As a small business owner I can't stand his business practices and how he treats people.  He's a terrible person.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course tax value and market value are typically different.  What's not typical is that just one year after assessment the gap between market value and assessed value is that large.

oooooof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2019 at 9:27 AM, The Commish said:

It's quite amazing to me that THIS thread has had as little traffic as it has.  Probably the most blatant and damning of all his actions and nary a peep.

Because this is the most damning indictment of the Trump presidency.  Violation of the emoluments clause is strictly forbidden in the US constitution.  Even Trump's most ardent supporters usually fashion themselves as pro-constitution, so they ignore it, or more likely, don't even know about or understand it. Fox, Hannity and Rush ignore this stuff, which means in his supporters minds it just isn't happening. If it isn't happening, the talking points don't get issued and repeated ad infinitum. 

This is what I emailed my US Representative and Senators about when I encouraged them to begin impeachment proceedings.  That was nearly two years ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Herb said:

Because this is the most damning indictment of the Trump presidency.  Violation of the emoluments clause is strictly forbidden in the US constitution.  Even Trump's most ardent supporters usually fashion themselves as pro-constitution, so they ignore it, or more likely, don't even know about or understand it. Fox, Hannity and Rush ignore this stuff, which means in his supporters minds it just isn't happening. If it isn't happening, the talking points don't get issued and repeated ad infinitum. 

This is what I emailed my US Representative and Senators about when I encouraged them to begin impeachment proceedings.  That was nearly two years ago. 

This was always the area I thought they'd use to get him.  Though, I am beginning to wonder if anything matters anymore with the Conway revelation and his flat out saying he'd take intel from a foreign government to help him win an election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judge says Democrats can begin collecting Trump financial records in emoluments suit
 

Quote

 

A federal judge told US House and Senate Democrats they can begin collecting financial evidence this week about Donald Trump's businesses for a lawsuit.

Judge Emmet Sullivan, of the US District Court in Washington, denied an attempt by the Justice Department to stop the Democrats from collecting information from the Trump Organization and to appeal early court decisions in the lawsuit, which tests the constitutionality of Trump's business holdings while he serves as President.

The case is one of several avenues Democrats have to get to Trump's financial records.

Sullivan said the group of more than 200 members can begin collecting evidence June 28 through late September. Previously, the members of Congress said they plan to seek both documents and depositions from the Trump Organization. ...

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt anything comes of tax returns unless we get a really dedicated researcher/journalist on the case that wants to dig and dig.  I don't think committee in Congress is going to do what's necessary to get to the details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there an aspect to Donald Trump that isn't highly likely to be corrupt?  I'm serious.

Political relationships? Russia? 

Personal friendships? Epstein? Manafort? Gates? Stormy Daniels?

Charity?  Trump foundation?

Family? Kushner clearances/debt?

Businesses? Trump University?

I mean, what in this man's life stands up to scrutiny?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, adonis said:

Is there an aspect to Donald Trump that isn't highly likely to be corrupt?  I'm serious.

Political relationships? Russia? 

Personal friendships? Epstein? Manafort? Gates? Stormy Daniels?

Charity?  Trump foundation?

Family? Kushner clearances/debt?

Businesses? Trump University?

I mean, what in this man's life stands up to scrutiny?

All Fake News.  The man is a choir-boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad news: 4th circuit dismisses states' emoluments suit.

Quote

The court’s ruling, however, centered on whether the plaintiffs had standing to bring their case against the president — not the merits of whether Trump is violating the Constitution with his business dealings. The 4th Circuit issued two rulings Wednesday — one dismissing the case against the president in his official capacity and the other in his individual capacity.

Quote

The three judges on the panel that heard oral argument in March were nominated to the bench by Republican presidents — Niemeyer by President George H.W. Bush, Shedd by President George W. Bush and Quattlebaum by Trump. Frosh and Racine have said they would consider appealing for a rehearing by a full panel of the 4th Circuit and would not be surprised to see the case reach the Supreme Court.

- The Constitution has several measures designed to enforce ethical government but I have no idea how the courts expect anyone to enforce them with rulings like this. It's mystifying. If no one has standing to enforce the Constitution then how can it be enforced?

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2019 at 10:27 AM, The Commish said:

It's quite amazing to me that THIS thread has had as little traffic as it has.  Probably the most blatant and damning of all his actions and nary a peep.

True, he should be booted on conflicts of interest alone. But early on in his reign, I heard a very convincing argument (can’t remember the details) that while he may be guilty, it is very unlikely anything will come of it. It’s also way, way under-reported. Anyway, looks like he gets a pass, given the recent ruling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He’s a Chinese billionaire and a member of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago. Is he also a communist spy?

>>Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui belongs to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago, and has railed against China’s communist government. He is now one of China’s most-wanted, accused of myriad crimes by the Chinese government, including paying bribes and sexual assault.

The Miami Herald is investigating how U.S. President Donald J. Trump has become a favorite target of a little-known Chinese industry peddling access to the rich and powerful. At the center of this “Trump Tourism” is Cindy Yang, a former Asian day spa owner, who sold access to Mar-a-Lago and the White House, raising concerns about national security. 

A high-profile Chinese fugitive — who belongs to President Donald Trump’s exclusive South Florida club, Mar-a-Lago, and has railed against China’s communist government — is accused of being a spy for that very regime, according to new documents filed in a federal court case in New York.

Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, who also goes by Miles Kwok, fled to the United States four years ago after learning an associate had been arrested on corruption charges. He is now one of China’s most-wanted, accused of myriad crimes by the Chinese government, including paying bribes and sexual assault. He maintains his innocence, saying the charges are politically motivated.

Guo, who made his money in real estate, has long promoted himself as a dissident being hunted by the Chinese government for his opposition to the ruling Chinese Communist Party. He is currently seeking political asylum in the United States, where he reportedly avoided deportation by the Trump administration after the president learned Guo was a member of Mar-a-Lago.

Now, filings in a civil case, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, suggest Guo may not be the dissident he claims. “Instead, Guo Wengui was, and is, a dissident-hunter, propagandist, and agent in the service of the People’s Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party,”according to federal court papers filed on Friday.

...

Around the same time, Republican National Committee Finance Chairman Steve Wynn, a casino magnate and longtime associate of Trump’s with business interests in Macau, a special administrative region of China, reportedly hand-delivered a letter to the president on behalf of the Chinese government. It requested that the United States deport Guo back to China. (Wynn denied the story through his lawyer, when asked for comment by the Journal.) Trump appeared ready to grant China’s request until his aides dissuaded him by telling him that Guo was a member of Mar-a-Lago, according to the Journal.

Guo is known to be one of China’s most eccentric billionaires and has spent his life mired in controversy. Guo’s official Facebook page is filled with videos of himself demonstrating his various workout routines and anti-Chinese Communist Party content — like one recent video in which he interviews former senior Trump advisor Steve Bannon on U.S.-Chinese relations over dinner.

The unlikely duo met while Bannon worked in the White House as Trump’s chief strategist, according to Bannon, who spoke at a news conference last year where he announced he was joining Guo’s effort to expose Chinese corruption around the globe.

During the news conference, Guo and Bannon alleged that the Chinese government was involved in the death of another Chinese billionaire, Wang Jian, former chairman of the HNA Group, who fell to his death on July 4, 2018, while vacationing in the south of France. French officials ruled the death an accident and claimed there was no evidence pointing to suicide.

However, Guo said at the news conference that he had commissioned a private investigation into Wang’s fall that turned up several anomalies, including how his bodyguards reacted by giving the dying man facial acupuncture.

Together, Guo and Bannon launched the Rule of Law Foundation, which they said would collect evidence in cases of deaths like Wang’s, according to the South China Morning Post. ... <<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.