LadySkinsFan

The Trump Conflict of Interest Thread: Shearing the Sheep

377 posts in this topic

Here is McCain criticizing Russia as being "a gas station masquerading as a country".  I feel like the Trump administration increasingly resembles an energy corporation rather than a government.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Mark Burnett will serve as the director of the National Endowment of the Arts...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might get interesting:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/14/news/companies/trump-washington-hotel-democrats/index.html

 

" The GSA's deputy commissioner "made clear that Mr. Trump must divest himself not only of managerial control, but of all ownership interest as well," said a letter from Representative Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the committee."

 

Of the Washington Hotel that he's so fond of bragging about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Not that this specifically relates but can a President pardon himself?  

 

Realistically, it would go to the Supreme Court and there is no precedent.  My bias would be yes, except for from impeachment:

 

" he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. "

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii

 

He could prevent himself from being prosecuted in court, but not removed from office.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be nice to see the Trump sign taken down from the Old Post Office Pavillion.  I won't hold my breath, but what an interesting situation brewing between the GSA and the President-elect of the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dan T. said:

It would be nice to see the Trump sign taken down from the Old Post Office Pavillion.  I won't hold my breath, but what an interesting situation brewing between the GSA and the President-elect of the United States.

 

Rather doubtful the sign will come down, numerous ways around the issue.

 

meanwhile the GSA says slow your roll on it being a violation of the lease.

Quote

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/310419-gsa-pushes-back-on-dems-over-trump-hotel

 

“GSA does not have a position that the lease provision requires the President-elect to divest of his financial interests,” the spokesperson said. “We can make no definitive statement at this time about what would constitute a breach of the agreement, and to do so now would be premature.”

The statement added that it would not reach a final determination about the lease agreement until Trump is inaugurated and has reached a decision about how to organize his business interests.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same children who are supposed to be running his businesses while he's president....

 

 

Edited by visionary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's clear that unless there is a total divestiture, which we know will not happen, there will be no real separation between Trump the businessman and Trump the President. There is no way his kids should be sitting in on meetings if they intend to run the company. Anyone claiming otherwise is ignorant or a troll. Anything he claims short of completely divesting is a charade. 

Edited by Hersh
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troll call?

:)

 

There is no rule against his kids being there or even chairing since he is not in office.

 

I'm sure he will do plenty to twist yer knickers once he is though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, twa said:

Troll call?

:)

 

There is no rule against his kids being there or even chairing since he is not in office.

 

I'm sure he will do plenty to twist yer knickers once he is though.

 

Once again, if this were the other way around; there would be the same conversation from the right. So there is either a conflict of interest or there isn't. I think any neutral party would say there is. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Busch1724 said:

 

Once again, if this were the other way around; there would be the same conversation from the right. So there is either a conflict of interest or there isn't. I think any neutral party would say there is. 

 

There would certainly be the same accusations, but a conflict of interest does not exist until in office.

Just as there cannot be a problem with his lease till in office

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, twa said:

a conflict of interest does not exist until in office.

I don't believe that's an accurate assessment of the situation.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.