Trump will face unprecedented ethics decisions

[The VOR]

Yes, she did.......and look at what we got instead, correct??? LOL

(tell the truth, would you be one of those giving Trump the Nazi salute?)

Lame.....very lame............but expected from a right wing moron.

It's not nearly as lame as douche bags like you accusing all Trump voters of being Nazis.

Douchebags!!!
Douchebags!!!
Douchebags!!!

They're all Douchebags!!!

The bitter, little old man screams at his monitor, while hopping up and down in his seat, frothing at the mouth with steam coming out of his ears, as he smashes his keyboard with clenched fists.

ROTFLMAO.

You don't like it when someone labels your kind accurately?

My kind? What is my kind?

For that matter, what is your kind?

 

[kaz]

This should be "fun"to watch.....

There are two main legal issues he would have to avoid, ethics experts say: traditional prosecution under government bribery laws and a little-noticed provision in the Constitution known as the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from taking money from foreign sources without the consent of Congress. If Trump committed an official act in exchange for a financial reward from another person or company, he could open himself up to prosecution or impeachment. Prosecutors would be called upon to demonstrate a quid pro quo relationship between a specific act and a material gain for the Trump organization. That probe could be conducted by Congress or as a criminal investigation within his Justice Department, where it might prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor.

With a web of foreign business interests extending from Azerbaijan to Panama, Trump could find that the most minor contractual renewal turns into a new reason for concern. Even Trump’s oft-touted status as landlord to the Bank of China in Trump Tower could place him in jeopardy, if, for example, the state-backed bank agreed to pay above-market-rate rents in the future

Trump could remove these potential conflicts by selling his business empire and placing the proceeds in a blind trust.

Donald Trump Will Face Unprecedented Ethics Decisions as President

(which does NOT mean that his children would independently run the company.)

Fortunately "he" is "more" ethical "than" Hillary "by far"

 

[kaz]

It's not nearly as lame as douche bags like you accusing all Trump voters of being Nazis.

Never said ALL Trump supporters are Nazi-like.......most of them are too dumb to even know what "nazi-like"means......But some of Trump supporters are surely salivating at the prospect of finally having free rein to reintroduce white supremacy.

ROFL! They don't have any such "free rein," and the accusation that they do is just another attack on Trump supporters.

You just can't help being a douche bag, can you?

He takes pride in it

 

[nat4900]

ROFL! They don't have any such "free rein," and the accusation that they do is just another attack on Trump supporters.

So who is going to stop them??? DOJ's Sessions who would readily reintroduce slavery if he could?

 

[kaz]

It's not nearly as lame as douche bags like you accusing all Trump voters of being Nazis.

Never said ALL Trump supporters are Nazi-like.......most of them are too dumb to even know what "nazi-like"means......But some of Trump supporters are surely salivating at the prospect of finally having free rein to reintroduce white supremacy.

Don't forget "they" want "to eat" babies, murder "kindergarten" teachers "and leave" bad "tips"

 

[kaz]

ROFL! They don't have any such "free rein," and the accusation that they do is just another attack on Trump supporters.

So who is going to stop them??? DOJ's Sessions who would readily reintroduce slavery if he could?

I'm "just" laughing "at you" now

 

[bripat9643]

ROFL! They don't have any such "free rein," and the accusation that they do is just another attack on Trump supporters.

So who is going to stop them??? DOJ's Sessions who would readily reintroduce slavery if he could?

Do you imagine you enhance your credibility by posting such idiocies?

 

[NightFox]

Yeah, fortunately the voters made sure we won't have to worry about that problem.

Oh, but the "fun" is just starting with Trump.......buckle up.........LOL

I look forward to some outstanding comic relief for the next 4-8 years, courtesy of the Donald and his merry band of Republican malefactors.

... it's good a thing as I was getting extremely bored making fun of the criminals in the Democrat Party and their Nimrod In Chief in the Oval Office.

"A plague a' both your houses" -- William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah, fortunately the voters made sure we won't have to worry about that problem.

Oh, but the "fun" is just starting with Trump.......buckle up.........LOL

I look forward to some outstanding comic relief for the next 4-8 years, courtesy of the Donald and his merry band of Republican malefactors.

... it's good a thing as I was getting extremely bored making fun of the criminals in the Democrat Party and their Nimrod In Chief in the Oval Office.

"A plague a' both your houses" -- William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet

we can expect more of the same shit that lost them the election. I am going to enjoy it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Thankfully, Hillary lost

Yes, she did.......and look at what we got instead, correct??? LOL

(tell the truth, would you be one of those giving Trump the Nazi salute?)

Not very bright are you? I didn't vote for trump. No one on this board who is paying attention would miss that.

And anyone could tell you someone who might be corrupt in office is better to someone who is repeatedly proves they are corrupt

 

[Avatar4321]

This should be "fun"to watch.....

There are two main legal issues he would have to avoid, ethics experts say: traditional prosecution under government bribery laws and a little-noticed provision in the Constitution known as the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from taking money from foreign sources without the consent of Congress. If Trump committed an official act in exchange for a financial reward from another person or company, he could open himself up to prosecution or impeachment. Prosecutors would be called upon to demonstrate a quid pro quo relationship between a specific act and a material gain for the Trump organization. That probe could be conducted by Congress or as a criminal investigation within his Justice Department, where it might prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor.

With a web of foreign business interests extending from Azerbaijan to Panama, Trump could find that the most minor contractual renewal turns into a new reason for concern. Even Trump’s oft-touted status as landlord to the Bank of China in Trump Tower could place him in jeopardy, if, for example, the state-backed bank agreed to pay above-market-rate rents in the future

Trump could remove these potential conflicts by selling his business empire and placing the proceeds in a blind trust.

Donald Trump Will Face Unprecedented Ethics Decisions as President

(which does NOT mean that his children would independently run the company.)

Fortunately "he" is "more" ethical "than" Hillary "by far"

The challenge would be finding someone less ethical

 

[Avatar4321]

ROFL! They don't have any such "free rein," and the accusation that they do is just another attack on Trump supporters.

So who is going to stop them??? DOJ's Sessions who would readily reintroduce slavery if he could?

Don't be stupid. Sessions has never said anything to suggest he wants a resume slavery. In fact a major case he prosecuted before he ran for congress was against the KKK

 

[OKTexas]

Feel free to demonstrate how providing market rate consumers products and services would qualify.

You really are that stupid, eh Tex?

Don't feel too bad boy, you're the third regressive that couldn't live up to the challenge. LMAO

What challenge chump? You and your fucking 20 question off topic bullshit! Look up the definitions of emolument and quid pro quo you fucking shit for brains and apply those definitions to your idiotic horseshit of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." All fucking hat and no cattle, Tex!

And they apply to Trumps situation HOW? Be specific shit for brains.

OK! Here is the first full paragraph of the OP you fucking idiot!

There are two main legal issues he would have to avoid, ethics experts say: traditional prosecution under government bribery laws and a little-noticed provision in the Constitution known as the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from taking money from foreign sources without the consent of Congress. If Trump committed an official act in exchange for a financial reward from another person or company, he could open himself up to prosecution or impeachment. Prosecutors would be called upon to demonstrate a quid pro quo relationship between a specific act and a material gain for the Trump organization. That probe could be conducted by Congress or as a criminal investigation within his Justice Department, where it might prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor.

If you had actually read and understood what it says you would have read that it speaks of emoluments and quid pro quos and not your supercilious alter topic of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." Now go back and read my first post to you on this thread, fool! Find someone to explain the differences to you. It's about conflicts of interests, the appearance of or actual vis-à-vis Trump POTUS and the United States, that are at odds, you mother fucking IDIOT! Gawd Damn you can play stupid much better than most, Tex!

Name one consumer transaction that is not a quid pro quo. People are talking like his renting hotel rooms to foreign diplomats, at market rates, as an example of a violation. The violations you referred to would apply to anyone in government, yet I never heard anyone claiming maobama could be guilty from day one. That's what makes this bullshit so ridiculous.

 

[OKTexas]

ROFL! They don't have any such "free rein," and the accusation that they do is just another attack on Trump supporters.

So who is going to stop them??? DOJ's Sessions who would readily reintroduce slavery if he could?

You're a fucking liar, he's got a very good record on civil rights. Try looking it up instead of echoing your little echo chamber.

 

[Kosh]

This should be "fun"to watch.....

There are two main legal issues he would have to avoid, ethics experts say: traditional prosecution under government bribery laws and a little-noticed provision in the Constitution known as the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from taking money from foreign sources without the consent of Congress. If Trump committed an official act in exchange for a financial reward from another person or company, he could open himself up to prosecution or impeachment. Prosecutors would be called upon to demonstrate a quid pro quo relationship between a specific act and a material gain for the Trump organization. That probe could be conducted by Congress or as a criminal investigation within his Justice Department, where it might prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor.

With a web of foreign business interests extending from Azerbaijan to Panama, Trump could find that the most minor contractual renewal turns into a new reason for concern. Even Trump’s oft-touted status as landlord to the Bank of China in Trump Tower could place him in jeopardy, if, for example, the state-backed bank agreed to pay above-market-rate rents in the future

Trump could remove these potential conflicts by selling his business empire and placing the proceeds in a blind trust.

Donald Trump Will Face Unprecedented Ethics Decisions as President

(which does NOT mean that his children would independently run the company.)

Oh look a far left drone using a known far left blog site for their "facts"..

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You really are that stupid, eh Tex?

Don't feel too bad boy, you're the third regressive that couldn't live up to the challenge. LMAO

What challenge chump? You and your fucking 20 question off topic bullshit! Look up the definitions of emolument and quid pro quo you fucking shit for brains and apply those definitions to your idiotic horseshit of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." All fucking hat and no cattle, Tex!

And they apply to Trumps situation HOW? Be specific shit for brains.

OK! Here is the first full paragraph of the OP you fucking idiot!

There are two main legal issues he would have to avoid, ethics experts say: traditional prosecution under government bribery laws and a little-noticed provision in the Constitution known as the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from taking money from foreign sources without the consent of Congress. If Trump committed an official act in exchange for a financial reward from another person or company, he could open himself up to prosecution or impeachment. Prosecutors would be called upon to demonstrate a quid pro quo relationship between a specific act and a material gain for the Trump organization. That probe could be conducted by Congress or as a criminal investigation within his Justice Department, where it might prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor.

If you had actually read and understood what it says you would have read that it speaks of emoluments and quid pro quos and not your supercilious alter topic of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." Now go back and read my first post to you on this thread, fool! Find someone to explain the differences to you. It's about conflicts of interests, the appearance of or actual vis-à-vis Trump POTUS and the United States, that are at odds, you mother fucking IDIOT! Gawd Damn you can play stupid much better than most, Tex!

Name one consumer transaction that is not a quid pro quo. People are talking like his renting hotel rooms to foreign diplomats, at market rates, as an example of a violation. The violations you referred to would apply to anyone in government, yet I never heard anyone claiming maobama could be guilty from day one. That's what makes this bullshit so ridiculous.

You're being professionally obtuse now you fucking idiot. Again...

If you had actually read and understood what it says you would have read that it speaks of emoluments and quid pro quos and not your supercilious alter topic of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." Now go back and read my first post to you on this thread, fool! Find someone to explain the differences to you. It's about conflicts of interests, the appearance of or actual vis-à-vis Trump POTUS and the United States, that are at odds, you mother fucking IDIOT! Gawd Damn you can play stupid much better than most, Tex!

 

[PoliticalChic]

ROFL! They don't have any such "free rein," and the accusation that they do is just another attack on Trump supporters.

So who is going to stop them??? DOJ's Sessions who would readily reintroduce slavery if he could?

Do you imagine you enhance your credibility by posting such idiocies?

He never had any.

 

[OKTexas]

Don't feel too bad boy, you're the third regressive that couldn't live up to the challenge. LMAO

What challenge chump? You and your fucking 20 question off topic bullshit! Look up the definitions of emolument and quid pro quo you fucking shit for brains and apply those definitions to your idiotic horseshit of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." All fucking hat and no cattle, Tex!

And they apply to Trumps situation HOW? Be specific shit for brains.

OK! Here is the first full paragraph of the OP you fucking idiot!

There are two main legal issues he would have to avoid, ethics experts say: traditional prosecution under government bribery laws and a little-noticed provision in the Constitution known as the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from taking money from foreign sources without the consent of Congress. If Trump committed an official act in exchange for a financial reward from another person or company, he could open himself up to prosecution or impeachment. Prosecutors would be called upon to demonstrate a quid pro quo relationship between a specific act and a material gain for the Trump organization. That probe could be conducted by Congress or as a criminal investigation within his Justice Department, where it might prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor.

If you had actually read and understood what it says you would have read that it speaks of emoluments and quid pro quos and not your supercilious alter topic of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." Now go back and read my first post to you on this thread, fool! Find someone to explain the differences to you. It's about conflicts of interests, the appearance of or actual vis-à-vis Trump POTUS and the United States, that are at odds, you mother fucking IDIOT! Gawd Damn you can play stupid much better than most, Tex!

Name one consumer transaction that is not a quid pro quo. People are talking like his renting hotel rooms to foreign diplomats, at market rates, as an example of a violation. The violations you referred to would apply to anyone in government, yet I never heard anyone claiming maobama could be guilty from day one. That's what makes this bullshit so ridiculous.

You're being professionally obtuse now you fucking idiot. Again...

If you had actually read and understood what it says you would have read that it speaks of emoluments and quid pro quos and not your supercilious alter topic of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." Now go back and read my first post to you on this thread, fool! Find someone to explain the differences to you. It's about conflicts of interests, the appearance of or actual vis-à-vis Trump POTUS and the United States, that are at odds, you mother fucking IDIOT! Gawd Damn you can play stupid much better than most, Tex!

You have yet to provide even ONE example where that MIGHT be the case. Come on fortune teller, put your rep on the line.

 

[Lastamender]

Trump is already creating jobs.

True......Now if only some of those laid-off coal miners had a law degree, Trump could have fulfilled one of his promises.

I see you are holding the president elect responsible for promises when he is not even in office. Maybe Hillary lost because her supporters are so fucking stupid.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

What challenge chump? You and your fucking 20 question off topic bullshit! Look up the definitions of emolument and quid pro quo you fucking shit for brains and apply those definitions to your idiotic horseshit of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." All fucking hat and no cattle, Tex!

And they apply to Trumps situation HOW? Be specific shit for brains.

OK! Here is the first full paragraph of the OP you fucking idiot!

There are two main legal issues he would have to avoid, ethics experts say: traditional prosecution under government bribery laws and a little-noticed provision in the Constitution known as the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from taking money from foreign sources without the consent of Congress. If Trump committed an official act in exchange for a financial reward from another person or company, he could open himself up to prosecution or impeachment. Prosecutors would be called upon to demonstrate a quid pro quo relationship between a specific act and a material gain for the Trump organization. That probe could be conducted by Congress or as a criminal investigation within his Justice Department, where it might prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor.

If you had actually read and understood what it says you would have read that it speaks of emoluments and quid pro quos and not your supercilious alter topic of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." Now go back and read my first post to you on this thread, fool! Find someone to explain the differences to you. It's about conflicts of interests, the appearance of or actual vis-à-vis Trump POTUS and the United States, that are at odds, you mother fucking IDIOT! Gawd Damn you can play stupid much better than most, Tex!

Name one consumer transaction that is not a quid pro quo. People are talking like his renting hotel rooms to foreign diplomats, at market rates, as an example of a violation. The violations you referred to would apply to anyone in government, yet I never heard anyone claiming maobama could be guilty from day one. That's what makes this bullshit so ridiculous.

You're being professionally obtuse now you fucking idiot. Again...

If you had actually read and understood what it says you would have read that it speaks of emoluments and quid pro quos and not your supercilious alter topic of "...providing market rate consumers products and services...." Now go back and read my first post to you on this thread, fool! Find someone to explain the differences to you. It's about conflicts of interests, the appearance of or actual vis-à-vis Trump POTUS and the United States, that are at odds, you mother fucking IDIOT! Gawd Damn you can play stupid much better than most, Tex!

You have yet to provide even ONE example where that MIGHT be the case. Come on fortune teller, put your rep on the line.

You have yet to provide even ONE example where that MIGHT be the case. Come on fortune teller, put your rep on the line.

You lack imagination, fool!? There have got to be thousands of ways to obtain kickbacks by selling influence of the office of POTUS, and that's just one GENERAL EXAMPLE of an unlawful ethics issue, you bloody fool! The means are at hand by the power of the office, given an unscrupulous bunch in the WH.

So fuck you very much I'm sure, you flaming idiot. Now disappear, you fucking gadfly!