Lol. Now you’re faulting him for his personal business not benefiting from his presidency. At least you’re honest in your disregard for the Constitution.
Again, this is the question I was responding to, but feel free to move the goalposts again. 
I agree, but is it your belief that a successful business person lacks the integrity to be president while maintaining control of their business?
What the hell are you even talking about? There’s no constitutional requirement for a president to disassociate themselves from their business interests while in office.
1 Like
Never said the Constitution expressly mandates divestment. Don’t put words in my mouth. The president cannot personally gain from office. Poor understanding of the Constitution on your part if you think otherwise.
Domestic emoluments clause. Article II, Section 1, Clause 7
Every president in history has benefitted/profited from holding the office.
Lol. Modern Republican response. I don’t care if it’s illegal or unconstitutional. I’ll just say everybody else is doing it. That will make it OK. Sad!
1 Like
It’s neither.
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.
Explain in detail exactly how Trump has violated it.
Dear lord. There are two emoluments clauses in the Constitution. You quoted the foreign emoluments clause. I literally gave the exact location of the domestic emoluments clause.
And the claim is that Trump is profiting by having foreign diplomats stay in his hotels which is exactly why the cases that have been filed refer to it.
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.
The domestic clause simply prohibits the president from being paid for holding any other office at local, state, or federal levels during their terms as president.
How precisely is Trump violating this clause? Be specific.
No. It doesn’t. The President cannot receive additional income from the government other than his salary. He also cannot derive income from foreign governments while President.
Government employees or foreign officials staying at Trump properties unless it is clear they would have done so even if he were not President violates the emoluments clauses. This is incredibly simple and straightforward. It’s also why Presidents have divested in the past. To avoid the entire emoluments conversation.
They can make as much money as they want on a former presidency after they leave office. At that point they are no longer President and neither emoluments clause applies.
Did any Democrats complains when Bill was getting paid $600K by the RUSSIANS for a speech in Moscow while Hillary was SOS?
The typical response is that I’m “deflecting” or “whatabout…”
I think it’s a fair to point out double-standards. Democrats are POSITIVE that Trump is corrupt and getting rich through his office but had NO PROBLEM when their political masters were blatantly cashing in.
No that isn’t what it says, it is very clear. Need I post it again for you?
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
He is not receiving any gift or a paycheck from the US or any of the States.
You can’t even show that he’s drawing a check from any of his hotel properties even though there’s is no preclusion in the emolument’s clause prohibiting it.
How many hotels are there in Dublin?
Obviously there would be some properties that unless sold by the blind trust it would be common knowledge that they were owned by Trump. Those properties should not accept bookings where there could be the perception that Trump is deriving a benefit from his presidency. It is all about removing any question of impropriety.
Why would an alleged billionaire have a pressing need for money?
You sound like a fascist.
You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it does.
1 Like
I don’t know nor do I care.
That’s ridiculous. There is no reason Trump should have to take a financial loss simply because he’s president.
1 Like
Hilarious; absolutely hilarious.
