Trump received over $7 million from foreign countries as prez

A three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled unanimously that the attorneys general did not have the standing to bring the lawsuit and instructed a lower court to dismiss the lawsuit.

All three judges on the panel were appointed by Republican presidents.

Racine and Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh issued a joint statement that said the panel of judges "got it wrong," and that they will continue to pursue their legal options.

They said the court "failed to acknowledge the most extraordinary circumstance of all: President Trump is brazenly profiting from the Office of the President in ways that no other President in history ever imagined and that the founders expressly sought — in the Constitution — to prohibit," Frosh and Racine wrote.


so, let's find the party that has standing, and send it to a court that isn't so damn conservative, and we'll see a different outcome, one that's called 'justice'.

 

It just depends on who it is. Different standards for Trump and the Dems. THAT has been obvious for a long time. And forget about ethics.....as that does not even factor in with the MAGA group.
Bottom line: IF Trump does it........it is just fine. Anyone else ( Dems) Not s o much. That is the repeating theme.

 

It's not even income, it's REVENUE. The vast majority of the money paid into a business goes to paying for salaries, upkeep, supplies, etc. Typically, only a tiny fraction of revenue generated ends up in the business owners pocket.

 

So no proof.

 

So neither of you have even the slightest rebuttal or can counter the facts... the silly games some of us play..

https://twitter.com/EricTrump/status/1742967062610301161
https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1693938700906881103
https://archive.is/ipOsi ...or for people foolish enough to pay the subscription.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/trump-press-conference-transcript.html?_r=0
Donald Trump’s News Conference
JAN. 11, 2017
Sheri A. Dillon

 

Before I got excited about this, I would have to know what entity actually received the money, for what reason was the money given, and whether or not transfer of the money was supposed to be hidden. For instance, was this money transferred in a huge lump and run through 20 shell corporations that provide no service or product and then distributed to Trump family members for no discernible reason in an effort to launder it, or was it paid via credit card receipts at the check in desk at the Trump Hotel and Golf Course, and lawfully reported to the IRS? Did "Trump receive over $7 million" like your OP says, or did Trump's businesses take in $7 million in revenue? There's a huge difference.

 

Lets see financial docs.

 

Find them yourself…. I done playing this game…

 

So no proof. Got it.

 

Good for you for holding judgement until the facts are in.

That's how it should be.

If only other Repubs would follow your example, i wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

Showing you have nothing and can't address the law. The emoluments nonsense died months ago you are just desperate to try and find some lame excuse for the Biden's because the evidence more and more points to the bribery and influence peddling in which they were engaged.

 

It’s in here…

 

You truncated my comment which is pertinent.

No, the 'emoluments issue died' because of standing and the fact that there was no philosophical opposition in the 3 judge panel noting that the judges....

... "failed to acknowledge the most extraordinary circumstance of all: President Trump is brazenly profiting from the Office of the President in ways that no other President in history ever imagined and that the founders expressly sought — in the Constitution — to prohibit," Frosh and Racine wrote.


What that means is that there is plenty of room for a challenge on their ruling.

After 6 years, Weiss has not charged anyone with money laundering, financial corruption, nor influence peddling.

do you want to know why?

There is no evidence.

 

If you have something to say then say it.

The question was do we know for what those payments to Trump INTERNATIONAL were made, I take it you link shows for what those payments were made. If so GREAT, it was a legitimate international long standing business why should we expect they were not getting paid for the services provided to their customers. I take it you link shows for what those payments were made.

The next question is do we know for what the payments to the Biden family PERSONAL bank accounts were made? Do you have a link for that?

If your position that any foreign money flowing to President and his family is bribery and corruption or signs of it and violates the emoluments clause then you got a lot of explanation to do about your defense of Biden and his family.

 

Yes we know the DOJ and FBI at the top were doing everything they could to cover up the evidence and declare it Russian disinformation. YES Trump INTERNATIONAL profits from it's business and as cited profits from foreign governments LEGITIMATE business with Trump INTERNATIONAL were donated away. The entire premise of your attempt to excuse and couch and whataboutism trying to defend Binden is specious nonsense as the Judge I cited was quite clear.

 

OK, let's compare Trump and Biden in this 'arena'....

Trump was, and is, openly and obviously in the hotel, resort, and office building BUSINESS. Now... what "business" was/is the Biden family and "Big Guy" Joe Biden in?!

Or, to put it more simply, Trump's on the street selling apples. A customer buys an apple and pays Trump. That's business! You know -- one guy is selling an identifiable something, and another guy is buying that something....

But, ostensibly, Joe Biden and the "Biden Family" were not (NOT) in the business of 'selling apples' or anything else... right? So what the hell were the Bidens being paid millions of dollars for?

. His lovely, beneficent smile...?

 

Show us the receipt or invoice

 

if you want to be an informed person, you'll read the report. You're the one accusing.

As for:

you got a lot of explanation to do about your defense of Biden and his family.

Okay, well explain this:

How come, In the 6 years since US Attorney Delaware David Weiss was assigned as Special Counsel investigating Hunter biden, no charges of

1. Money laundering
2. Financial corruption
3. Influence peddling

have been charged?

How come?

I'll tell you how come.

There is no evidence and Weiss knows it.

And during those 6 years, republicans have consistently accused both Hunter and Joe of these allegations, defaming their reputations, and when Hunter wanted to defend himself in public, to quell those defamations, Comer changed his mind and decided no public hearing.

So, the folks who need a lot of explaining are those who accuse, for which, in 6 years, no evidence has been produced to warrant those charges.

You accuse, you prove.

Until there are charges, the innocent until proven guilty don't have to explain squat.

Got that?

And FYI, the emoluments clause doesn't give a damn if payments made from foreign countries with which the presidency conducts affairs, if the payments were for products or services. That is IRRELEVANT.

 

The emoluments clause doesn't give a damn if payments made from foreign countries with which the presidency conducts affairs, if the payments were for products or services. That is IRRELEVANT.

Noting that no payments to Joe have been proven other than loan repayments. Now, if those payments were made to private individuals, what crime is being alleged? Lots of services don't have products, such as financial investment advice, business consulting, that sort of thing, so don't shoot arrows until you have the facts. Was not Manafort paid millions for consultation services to world leaders?

 

YOU are the one accusing Trump of something criminal or something so if the report backs that quote from it, what were the illegal payments that were received? Does the report state for those payments were made yes or no? If yes GREAT that is all I ask about Biden and YOU can't say for what they were receiving those tens of millions. I don't know why you think this report somehow absolves the Biden's of their influence peddling.

And citing how long Wiess et al sat on the evidence and covered it up and the higher ups stymied investigator so it could go past the statute of limitations is some proof of Hunter's and the families innocence is laughable at best.

 

Insofar as section three, I'm not accusing Trump of anything.

I'm saying that if the determinant body finds him as 'engaging in insurrection', then, per section 3, he must be disqualified it. I'm also reminding us of the fact that Trump can appeal that decision, all the way to the SCOTUS, if necessary.

Now, if i accuse him of 'insurrection', as a criminal matter, that point won't be related to section three, it will be related to the GA and WASH DC indictments.

 

Thjs is not about section 3

 

Why, then, would you claim "Trump received over $7 million from foreign countried as prez."? When, in all probability, that is a complete fabrication... it's at least dishonest if not outright deceptive.

 

Trump violated the emoluments clause of the constitution, I think it's very clear that he did.

 

"All probability', now you are the one making **** up.

It was congressional investigation which took a few years. Source documents are provided in the report. There is no reason to believe they fabricated anything. If they did, their reputations would be ruined. That doesn't mean, necessarily, facts can be misinterpreted, but all reports can be disputed. but, 'fabrication'? No.