Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDonald Trumps Business Dealings Test a Constitutional Limit
This is a great article, looks as if Trump's business conflicts of interest may have some gray area. I highly recommend you read the complete article. Mr. Trumps companies do business with entities controlled by foreign governments and people with ties to them. The ventures include multimillion-dollar real estate arrangements with Mr. Trumps companies either as a full owner or a branding partner in Ireland and Uruguay. The Bank of China is a tenant in Trump Tower and a lender for another building in Midtown Manhattan where Mr. Trump has a significant partnership interest.
Experts in legal ethics say those kinds of arrangements could easily run afoul of the Emoluments Clause if they continue after Mr. Trump takes office. The founders very clearly intended that officers of the United States, including the president, not accept presents from foreign sovereigns, said Norman Eisen, who was the chief White House ethics lawyer for Mr. Obama from 2009 to 2011.
The Supreme Court has never squarely considered the scope of the clause, and there are no historical analogies to help understand how it should apply to a president who owns a sprawling international business empire. Earlier presidents worked hard to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest involving a foreign power, said Zephyr Teachout, a law professor at Fordham who ran for Congress in New York this year as a Democrat and lost.
The reason we dont really have a lot of precedent here is that presidents in the past have gone out of their way to avoid getting even close to the Emoluments Clause, she said.
Experts in legal ethics say those kinds of arrangements could easily run afoul of the Emoluments Clause if they continue after Mr. Trump takes office. The founders very clearly intended that officers of the United States, including the president, not accept presents from foreign sovereigns, said Norman Eisen, who was the chief White House ethics lawyer for Mr. Obama from 2009 to 2011.
The Supreme Court has never squarely considered the scope of the clause, and there are no historical analogies to help understand how it should apply to a president who owns a sprawling international business empire. Earlier presidents worked hard to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest involving a foreign power, said Zephyr Teachout, a law professor at Fordham who ran for Congress in New York this year as a Democrat and lost.
The reason we dont really have a lot of precedent here is that presidents in the past have gone out of their way to avoid getting even close to the Emoluments Clause, she said.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/us/politics/donald-trump-conflict-of-interest.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 677 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Donald Trumps Business Dealings Test a Constitutional Limit (Original Post)
AmericanMan1958
Nov 2016
OP
DPutin doesn't have to give a shit about laws... the MM will never hold him accountable
uponit7771
Nov 2016
#3
AmericanMan1958
(520 posts)1. Bush 43's ethics counsel
Richard Painter, has state it is grounds for impeachment.
But will the Republicans do it?
If it was Hillary they would do it in a New York second!
tanyev
(42,564 posts)2. Some establishment GOPers will be keeping track of things like this.
In case they decide it's in their best interest to impeach him.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)3. DPutin doesn't have to give a shit about laws... the MM will never hold him accountable