Hosting the G7 at Trump's Doral resort violates the constitution

Author: HistoryBuff

Posts

Total: 55
Topic's author
#1
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
Article 2, Section 1, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution says:

“The President shall, at stated Times, receive for hisServices, a Compensation which shall neither beencreased nor diminished during the Period for which heshall have been elected, and he shall not receive withinthat Period any other Emolument from the UnitedStates, or any of them.”
An emolument is any kind of payment. 

The Trump government has decided that the next G7 summit will be at a Trump owned and Trump managed resort in Florida. The US government is now going to pay 10's of millions of dollars to Donald trump's business. A business which Trump has not divested from. This means Trump directed the US government to pay him 10's of millions of dollars. 

This is a very clear breach of the constitution and therefore a breach of his oath of office. This is yet another impeachable offense. 

#2
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@HistoryBuff
Is the government really paying for it though or is he since it is his property?

It is probably a really nice venue, so I wouldn't see the problem if Trump was paying for everything himself.

Topic's author
#3
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
Is the government really paying for it though or is he since it is his property?
These summits are paid for by the government of the country holding the summit. For example, for the G8 summit in canada in 2010 the canadian government spent 80 million dollars on food and lodging for the summit. The US government would be expected to pay the resort for the food and renting the resort. 

If trump were to forgo charging anything for the summit, that would be completely different. But Mulvaney said it would be "millions of dollars cheaper" than other venues. So that would strongly suggest Trump will be charging for the privilege of using his resort. 

If he is charging the government money, then he is violating the constitution. 


#4
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@HistoryBuff
Well, it might be cheaper because the government doesn't have to be charged for lodging.

I dunno, I think if Trump was really that greedy for money he wouldn't be giving away his presidential salary. I think he probably would have been better off in the private sector.




#5
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Mopac
He has already lost over a billion dollars of net worth since running for president. Whatever he makes at Mar-a-lago won't put a dent in those losses.
#6
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Mopac
About half of Trump's customers boycotted him the moment he came down the escalator. Trump is definitely not in it for the money.
Topic's author
#7
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
I dunno, I think if Trump was really that greedy for money he wouldn't be giving away his presidential salary. I think he probably would have been better off in the private sector.
The annual salary of the US president is $400,000. This one event has the potential to make him 10's of millions of dollars if the 2010 summit is any indication. That salary is peanuts compared to what he can make by being president. 

And not just for him. His children have gotten huge boosts in investments into their companies since trump became president. Ivanka has gotten over a dozen trademarks in China while she has been part of the Trump government. Jared kushner has gotten huge sums of money from countries he deals with in a government capacity. He has gotten 10's of millions of the Saudi's. While being one of the top government advisers on the middle east. 

Selling access to america's policy has made the trumps hundreds of millions of dollars. 

he real estate company Cadre, owned by Kushner, his brother, Joshua, and a friend, has taken in $90 million in investments from Saudi Arabia and a "Goldman Sachs entity" in the Cayman Islands. Cadre is also one of the properties that Kushner initially forgot to put on his security-clearance application when he joined the Trump administration.
Topic's author
#8
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
He has already lost over a billion dollars of net worth since running for president. Whatever he makes at Mar-a-lago won't put a dent in those losses.
Since no one knows what his net worth is, i would love to know where you got that figure from. 


#9
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
It's from biased corporate media.

Mar-A-Lago has lost profits the day Trump came down the escalator since half of the people that stayed there are Demorats who are now boycotting Trump.


He aint in it for the money. 
Topic's author
#10
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
He aint in it for the money. 
Strongly disagree. There is a very compelling argument to be made that he never thought he would win. He was planning to run to get name recognition for his brand and use that to make more money. This argument would also suggest that he and his wife were shocked and horrified when he won. 

But that is not the critical point for this topic. The constitution is very clear. The president cannot get any kind of emolument (payment) from the government other than his salary. His company is going to make millions from the US government from the summit. Because he has not divested from his businesses, he stands to make millions from this decision. This is an extremely clear violation of the constitution. 

#11
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
 There is a very compelling argument to be made that he never thought he would win.
And how does that square with the fact he lost half his consumer base just coming down the escalator?

#12
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Also, he hasn't pocketed any of his salary.

He aint in it for the money.
Topic's author
#13
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
And how does that square with the fact he lost half his consumer base just coming down the escalator?
He didn't lose half of them by announcing. He lost lots of them by being terrible. But if he had lost, no one would really have cared. They would have forgotten the terrible things he said and did and focused on some new terrible thing. But it would have gotten him huge amounts of advertising as well as potentially getting him more access to foreign investment from the saudi's and the russians. The fact that he won threw a wrench into that plan because people never forgot the terrible things he said and did because he is still saying them and doing them. 

Also, he hasn't pocketed any of his salary.
his salary is 400,000 per year. He will make 10's of millions off of the G7 summit. Forgoing thousands gives him cover to make millions. People, such as yourself, will point to the small amount of money he refused to take while he takes millions from US tax payers, Russian Oligarchs and Saudi Princes. 

But again, the level to which he is corrupt and greedy is a side point here. Taking any kind of payment from the US government, such as the G7 summit, is a violation of the constitution. Violating the constitution in such a brazen way is an impeachable offense. 
#14
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
But if he had lost, no one would really have cared. They would have forgotten the terrible things he said and did and focused on some new terrible thing.

Correct. Trump could have regained those consumers by "shutting up and dribbling" as they say in the NBA.

So if Trump was in it for the money like the NBA, why didn't he shut up and dribble? He could have dropped out at any time after getting free exposure in the corporate media and let Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz take the primary. He could have stolen money from the Russians with empty promises and pocketed it and gone back to dribbling. 

He aint in it for the money.
Topic's author
#15
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Correct. Trump could have regained those consumers by "shutting up and dribbling" as they say in the NBA.
So if Trump was in it for the money like the NBA, why didn't he shut up and dribble?
Plan A was to use this as a branding exercise and make money that way. Plan A failed when he won. So he went to Plan B which was to directly profit from being president. Using government funds to enrich himself, selling access to the president, selling america's foreign policy to russia and the Saudis' etc. 

he can make way more from corruption than he could otherwise. 

As to why he didn't shut up, I don't think he is capable of it. He just has no filter and is an idiot. He just can't help himself but say and do terrible things. 

But again, we are getting side tracked. The moment the US government pays him money other than his salary, he is violating the constitution. He has been doing it in smaller amounts this whole time, but trying to take 10's of millions is a single event is a very serious breach. 
#16
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
You're giving way too much credit to a person who most regard as a complete idiot.

The evil "genius" theory doesn't hold water.

He aint in it for the money.

Topic's author
#17
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
You're giving way too much credit to a person who most regard as a complete idiot.
The evil "genius" theory doesn't hold water.
No one ever thought he was an evil genius. He is a con man. He is good at grifting and convincing people of lies. That is how he has made money his whole life. And if he were a genius we wouldn't know he was doing these things. He has been doing this so sloppily that his abuses are found all the time. The problem is that about 35% of the country are either so brainwashed they ignore it, or they simply don't care that he is doing it. 

He aint in it for the money.
Money, power and popularity is all he has ever cared about. 

But again, his motivations are kind of besides the point. If he takes millions of dollars from the US government, he is violating the constitution. The republicans claim they support the constitution. So if they are willing to trample it, why should anyone take any part of it seriously?
#18
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
or they simply don't care that he is doing it. 

Probably because they love the country more than they hate Trump, and they do hate Trump. Hell, even I hate Trump.
Topic's author
#19
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
You keep failing to reply to the main point of this topic. Trump is instructing the US government to pay him millions of dollars. That violates the constitution. Do you believe the constitution should be upheld?
#20
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
I'm not going to comment on a hypothetical.
Topic's author
#21
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
I'm not going to comment on a hypothetical.
What hypothetical? The white house has announced this. 


#22
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
Trump is instructing the US government to pay him millions of dollars. 
citation?  proof?
Topic's author
#23
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
citation?  proof?
Mick mulvaney announced it in a press conference. 

#24
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
I didn't read anything about him profiting from this deal, has he profited yet?  can  you break a law before actually breaking it?
#25
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I love how trump defenses are the same ones a gang member would use in a movie. "I was charging for protection. It is fair business. Show me explicit threat, no threat! Ask weak person who i will see later, they say no threat! Right?"

Attempting a crime is also a crime. He is reserving the seats in his own hotel. Unless he makes the announcement that he is paying, which he hasnt yet, hes paying himself. Hundreds of millions of government dollars. Our dollars. If canada did 80 mil, im guessing were going easy triple digits mils.

He has made exponents on any losses, and he also gotten one of the greatest titles under his belt, the POTUS. Worth far more then money. Prestige. Power. History books. 

You must be kidding bringing up his penny salary, what good has he done? (Obvious veterans and 9/11 bills aside, no president doesnt do that. Thats like not kicking kittens).
#26
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@Nemiroff
then why are we still discussing it and why is it being debated in the news etc?
#27
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Ukraine.

Its one thing to profit.
Its another to use your position of power to retain your position of power. 
Im sure emolutments will be part of the impeachment, altho not the main event.
#28
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
There will come a day when much of the republican party, maybe even you, will deny voting for this man.
#29
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Nemiroff
There will come a day when much of the republican party, maybe even you, will deny voting for this man.

If this is true, there will come a day when you’re standing in a breadline and wishing you did vote for Republicans
Topic's author
#30
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ILikePie5
If this is true, there will come a day when you’re standing in a breadline and wishing you did vote for Republicans
So you are willing to back thieves and criminals for the vain hope it will benefit you financially? What kind of person does that make you?

And how foolish do you need to be to believe that politicians who only care about themselves and their rich cronies are somehow going to make you richer?