- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Trump MAY be in violation of the Emoluments Clause by trading
Posted on 11/21/16 at 10:54 am
Posted on 11/21/16 at 10:54 am
on his name with foreign entities seeking the good graces of a new POTUS. An interesting idea.
LINK
LINK
This post was edited on 11/21/16 at 10:57 am
18
Posted on 11/21/16 at 10:55 am to GeorgeWest
Posted on 11/21/16 at 10:56 am to GeorgeWest
Just like Hillary's Pay to Play.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 10:57 am to LSURussian
How refreshing... all these considerations for someone who ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING vs the lifetime, silver-spoon legacy politicians.
It is truly a breath of fresh air that all this has to be considered based on what he's accomplished.
It is truly a breath of fresh air that all this has to be considered based on what he's accomplished.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 10:59 am to GeorgeWest
quote:
except HRC's was for a charity not a for profit business.
See, if you ever even wanted some consideration of your point, you just lost all credibility.
Your OP may be right on point, but I just don't care anymore b/c it's obvious where you're coming from. And it sure as hell isn't an objective position.
This post was edited on 11/21/16 at 11:01 am
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:02 am to MSMHater
My "point" is getting plenty of consideration by people who are not blinded by loyalty to a man.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:02 am to GeorgeWest
Get ready.
We are in for years of these kinds of attacks using the worst kinds of pretzel logic you can imagine.
We are in for years of these kinds of attacks using the worst kinds of pretzel logic you can imagine.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:03 am to MSMHater
quote:
How refreshing... all these considerations for someone who ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING vs the lifetime, silver-spoon legacy politicians.
LOL! Yeah, he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and spent his entire life gaming the system, refusing to pay his bills, not paying taxes, filing bankruptcy over and over. The only thing that moronic twat ever succeeded at is selling his name.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:04 am to GeorgeWest
quote:
except HRC's was for a charity
Yes, the Clinton's were so poor they needed charity to survive. After all, they had to fund Chelsea's lifestyle and wedding somehow. Am I right, or am I right?
LINK
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:05 am to HTDawg
Wow you seem like you are one angry little beaver, what's eating you?
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:06 am to Jbird
quote:
one angry little beaver
Trump grabbed that
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:07 am to HTDawg
It is cute when someone who has never built anything, never run a business, never sold anything, never added value to the world around him attempts to criticize someone else for being successful.
Enjoy your cubicle, hope you don't get any paper cuts or sciatica.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:08 am to GeorgeWest
Clinton did exactly this
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:11 am to GeorgeWest
quote:
My "point" is getting plenty of consideration by people
Not really.
quote:
As ThinkProgress pointed out, however, one of the biggest problems with the emoluments clause is enforcement and accountability. It's unclear how foolproof internal safeguards are or whether a rival business would risk suing a conglomerate bearing the name of the president.
And I don't even like them man. Didn't vote for him, and don't particularly like his new swamp. But if his "enemies" just keep throwing shite against the wall that has no chance of actually phasing him, you just further alienate your bubble. Same with calling everybody associated with him racists. The public tuned it out for the election, and 4 more years of it will only piss them off more.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:13 am to PerCuriam
So, because "Clinton did this," its OK for Trump to use his office to be to promote his businesses with foreigners?
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:17 am to GeorgeWest
quote:
on his name with foreign entities seeking the good graces of a new POTUS. An interesting idea.
Trump has always traded on his name. It is called branding.
These hotels around the world that have his name on it have been paying licensing agreements for years.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:18 am to GeorgeWest
Obama instructed the DOJ to NOT follow the law. How backwards is that?
Were you screaming about that then?
Were you screaming about that then?
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:18 am to GeorgeWest
quote:
except HRC's was for a charity not a for profit business
Neither you nor Hillary know what a charity is
Posted on 11/21/16 at 11:21 am to tss22h8
quote:I don't think it is exactly alike, but similar. Either way, the "she did it too" is a piss poor defense.
Just like Hillary's Pay to Play.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News