And the count down begins to our next President of the United States

I wouldn't call myself a Constitutional scholar but I know a little about it. But yes he's in violation if he doesn't divest from the company. Let me ask you, the point of the clause is that the president can't receive compensation from foreign countries right? Well Trump Tower, which he owns, there is a tenant there, a bank that is owned by the government of China. So the rent they are paying goes into the pocket of the president. China = foreign government. Rent = compensation. Trump = president. I think that means it violates that clause. But I mean I could be wrong. Also foreign countries have been changing reservations to his D.C. hotel (which is a whole other issue) in hopes it will carry favor. That's kinda giving money to him right? See his reasoning of giving all profits from foreign hotels doesn't prevent foreign countries from giving money to him from US hotels. But yeah he hasn't violated it yet because he is (sic) president. But since he has said he won't divest, the second he becomes president he will be in violation. But hey, it's only a clause in the Constitution, no biggie. Originally Posted by Milly23

Yeah, you could be wrong... and you are! But don't take MY word for it. Hear it from the woman who laid out Trump's plans to avoid conflicts of interest last week. She's a tax attorney at Morgan Lewis. I'm just guessing, but I think she probably knows more about the subject than you do. I don't think she would risk a legal malpractice lawsuit (and her firm's good reputation) by giving our next President bad counsel, do you?


"At a press conference Wednesday in New York, one of Trump's lawyers, Sheri Dillon, a tax attorney at Morgan Lewis, said that the president-elect would give the profits his hotels generate from foreign governments to the Treasury...

Dillon said that the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution — which bars individuals holding office in the U.S. from accepting payments from foreign states — did not apply to the hotel visits."

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/11/trump...o-can-you.html


In any event, it looks like Trump has turned the tables on you, millsy! Under any interpretation, he won't be "receiving compensation from foreign governments" - the US Treasury will! And surely you don't have a problem with letting any fawning foreign supplicants help pay down our national debt (which has nearly doubled under Obama), do you millsy? Didn't think so!

Got any more "biggies"? Keep trying, mope. Keep letting Trump Derangement Syndrome discombobulate you. And keep throwing whatever you can at him. Maybe something will stick. You never know.

Oh, and keep watching MSNBC for your next talking point.

I'm not "crawfishing". Sorry if you can't understand, let me explain it better for you. Congress wouldn't impeach Trump because he's the leader of their party ergo it looks bad for them. So what they would do is tell him that he's dead to rights but he can resign and not go through the hearings. And guess what, he would do it. The guy didn't want to do all the work of being president, which is why he told Kasich he could be VP and be in charge of foreign affairs and domestic affairs (i.e. the President) and he would be out making America great again. He can hang his hat on winning and make lots of money before leaving. For him it would be a win/win. And for Congress they wouldn't lose his voting block (sic) and they get Pence in who's more inline with traditional Republicans. And if you think members of his party aren't already against him, you're delusional. And it's members with pull. Originally Posted by Milly23

Er millsy, you really need to stop making a fool out of yourself. First, you put out a hasty, ill-considered lame argument. Then you stumbled all over yourself trying to walk it back. Now you're doubling down on it.

I'll try to keep this as simple as possible, since it's a ludicrous subject to even be talking about 3 days before the Inauguration. Trump has a YUGE ego, right? Winning is important to him. There is no way in hell that resigning from the Presidency could possibly be spun as a "win". Trump knows that. Only losers resign. Especially from the office of POTUS. It's a very traumatic and humiliating experience. But then, don't take MY word for it. Just ask the Nixon family.

August 8, 1974: Looking like happy "winners".




Now go do something useful, millsy. Find Hillary Clinton and cheer her up. Tell her she's a winner. After all, she did win the popular vote. That's her participation trophy.

How did he make a fool out of himself?

In fact the behavior of which you accuse him sounds a lot like that of Drumpf.

Imitation is flattery.

Awwww jeeze - Come on,man - you have got to be kidding.

I'm not "crawfishing". Sorry if you can't understand, let me explain it better for you. Congress wouldn't impeach Trump because he's the leader of their party ergo it looks bad for them. So what they would do is tell him that he's dead to rights but he can resign and not go through the hearings. And guess what, he would do it. The guy didn't want to do all the work of being president, which is why he told Kasich he could be VP and be in charge of foreign affairs and domestic affairs (i.e. the President) and he would be out making America great again. He can hang his hat on winning and make lots of money before leaving. For him it would be a win/win. And for Congress they wouldn't lose his voting block and they get Pence in who's more inline with traditional Republicans. And if you think members of his party aren't already against him, you're delusional. And it's members with pull.

I wouldn't call myself a Constitutional scholar but I know a little about it. But yes he's in violation if he doesn't divest from the company. Let me ask you, the point of the clause is that the president can't receive compensation from foreign countries right? Well Trump Tower, which he owns, there is a tenant there, a bank that is owned by the government of China. So the rent they are paying goes into the pocket of the president. China = foreign government. Rent = compensation. Trump = president. I think that means it violates that clause. But I mean I could be wrong. Also foreign countries have been changing reservations to his D.C. hotel (which is a whole other issue) in hopes it will carry favor. That's kinda giving money to him right? See his reasoning of giving all profits from foreign hotels doesn't prevent foreign countries from giving money to him from US hotels. But yeah he hasn't violated it yet because he is president. But since he has said he won't divest, the second he becomes president he will be in violation. But hey, it's only a clause in the Constitution, no biggie.

And no the impeachment ceremonies can't start on the 21st because Trump said he's taking the weekend off, his first day in office isn't until Monday (although he said he wouldn't take time off because it's too important, the job of running the country). Originally Posted by Milly23

Yeah, you could be wrong... and you are! But don't take MY word for it. Hear it from the woman who laid out Trump's plans to avoid conflicts of interest last week. She's a tax attorney at Morgan Lewis. I'm just guessing, but I think she probably knows more about the subject than you do. I don't think she would risk a legal malpractice lawsuit (and her firm's good reputation) by giving our next President bad counsel, do you?


"At a press conference Wednesday in New York, one of Trump's lawyers, Sheri Dillon, a tax attorney at Morgan Lewis, said that the president-elect would give the profits his hotels generate from foreign governments to the Treasury...

Dillon said that the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution — which bars individuals holding office in the U.S. from accepting payments from foreign states — did not apply to the hotel visits."

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/11/trump...o-can-you.html


In any event, it looks like Trump has turned the tables on you, millsy! Under any interpretation, he won't be "receiving compensation from foreign governments" - the US Treasury will! And surely you don't have a problem with letting any fawning foreign supplicants help pay down our national debt (which has nearly doubled under Obama), do you millsy? Didn't think so!

Got any more "biggies"? Keep trying, mope. Keep letting Trump Derangement Syndrome discombobulate you. And keep throwing whatever you can at him. Maybe something will stick. You never know.

Oh, and keep watching MSNBC for your next talking point. Originally Posted by lustylad

I will just answer both of your comments now and let you go about you day. There is really no point in debating with you because with all my Trump Derangement Syndrome and you having your head so far up his ass you can't see what's fact.

So Trump's lawyer, yes she probably knows more about the situation than me. But she also knows that law is how you can interpret it. And since the clause has never been litigated, she/her firm can argue it the way they want to. But a layman can read the clause as I pointed out in my previous post. You can't hold office in this country and collect contributions from a foreign state/state controlled entity. As it's known by anyone, you can look it up, Trump Tower (owed by Trump) gets rent (compensation) from a Chinese bank (state controlled entity). Sorry if you refuse to accept that the situation violates that.

Here's a little reading for ya:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.4bdfd274643c

And that law firm and it's reputation... Last year they won "Russia Law Firm of the Year" award last year. Their reputation is safe in the world Trump lives in.

And if you listen closely, the lady says, as I pointed out in the previous comment (but your head being where it is could only smell shit).. The profits from overseas hotels (keyword hotels) are what's going to the treasury. Those controls (like China in Trump Tower, D.C. hotel) can still compensate him in the US since those profits aren't going to the treasury. Yes the national debt went up like 68% under Obama, more than doubled. How about under Reagan, only went up 186%. Yeah Obama was so bad but trickle down, Reagan Economics, that was genius.

I do watch MSNBC. I also watch CNN, Fox News, and read different publications. I don't just follow one side and believe everything they say to be gospel. Maybe try it.

As for Trump resigning. Yes we all know Trump likes to win. But we also know that Trump likes being liked, he can't stand people making fun of him, and he doesn't like anything perceived as weakness. So after two years of doing the job, he will not want to stay. He will be even more scrutinized for the things he might not get down, there will be more SNL skits (the overrated show he went on), he will keep getting pressure from people over his perceived conflicts of interests, and he will keep stepping on the ideas of traditional Republicans. If you think the heat won't be turned up on him, you are mistaken. As powerful as the president is we live in a government with check and balances. And the Congress (as they did with Obama) can make Trump lose a lot of things he wants done if it goes against their interests. For example, Trump saying he will get medical prices down (which would be great and I would applaud him for that). Pharma has so many lobbyists and have donated so much money to both sides that there is no way that's getting done. He is going to realize that the power of those big companies my outweigh his and he may just want to take his ball and leave.

And here's how it may go: Trump gets tired of all the hassle of the presidency. All those conflicts, emoluments, etc. will be a constant issue with Congress. So Trump will just say that he loves his company like a child. And he loves this country but he can't do both because the liberal media and those against the movement are making it impossible. He would have made his brand even bigger and put his company in position to make money. He won so he can always have that. He will never win over the voters who were against him, his only goal is to keep those he has. He will be able to walk away with his followers still behind him and go start that media network he wants. Maybe it doesn't happen this way. But if you think you know what goes on in that guy's mind, you're crazy. I don't think Trump will see it as a loss because he was president and no one can take that back. Yes Nixon's family looks sad, but idk that Trump and his family have that same affinity for shame.

Ok so maybe this is ludicrous to talk about (ha). Want to talk about Russia? Because that's a doozy.

Now you go do something with your. Maybe try to get in touch with Trump and schedule a session with a provider. Make sure the up charge for golden showers isn't too high. Have fun.

Awwww jeeze - Come on,man - you have got to be kidding. Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Yeah I don't expect too much of a response from you because I know you like the intelligence to understand the things being discussed.

I thank Obama for his near complete destruction of the Democrat Party. They are becoming an extinct species nationwide in governorships and state houses. Their national leaders are dinosaurs whose average age is "deceased". They were the first party in history to run a cadaver (Hillary) for president.

I thank Obama for his near complete destruction of the Democrat Party. They are becoming an extinct species nationwide in governorships and state houses. Their national leaders are dinosaurs whose average age is "deceased". They were the first party in history to run a cadaver (Hillary) for president. Originally Posted by Zhivago52

Politics are relatively temporary. A full 2 term president often causes refocus of the party out of power and governing over 8 years historically causes gains by the party out of power. That's the price paid to governing. Especially when trying to make significant changes in the status quo. B. Clinton rode that after Reagan/Bush. Obama rode that (especially Iraq) after Bush Jr, and Trump is riding that now.

The body politic is generally middle of the road. Neither the lefties or righties will ever win in perpetuity. IMO, gerrymandering is the greatest problem our country faces, since it creates way too many safe seats in state and US legislatures, and forces the candidates to pander to their base (whether left or right).

I didn't vote for Trump, but hope (although I am not confident) he is successful in making positive progress in this country.

I "like" the intelligence??? Dick, or whatever your name is - come back to me when you learn how to spell.

Yeah I don't expect too much of a response from you because I know you like the intelligence to understand the things being discussed. Originally Posted by Milly23

Politics are relatively temporary. A full 2 term president often causes refocus of the party out of power and governing over 8 years historically causes gains by the party out of power. That's the price paid to governing. Especially when trying to make significant changes in the status quo. B. Clinton rode that after Reagan/Bush. Obama rode that (especially Iraq) after Bush Jr, and Trump is riding that now.

The body politic is generally middle of the road. Neither the lefties or righties will ever win in perpetuity. IMO, gerrymandering is the greatest problem our country faces, since it creates way too many safe seats in state and US legislatures, and forces the candidates to pander to their base (whether left or right).

I didn't vote for Trump, but hope (although I am not confident) he is successful in making positive progress in this country. Originally Posted by EagleEye

Well put. I, too, hope he can make positive change in this country.

Of course, that would require him giving a shit about all of the people who live in it. And I have seen increasing evidence since his election that he'd prefer to attack celebrities on Twitter, hurl threats at our allies and insult the people he needs to help keep America safe.

Hopefully, he'll grow up, real fast. We need a leader.

I "like" the intelligence??? Dick, or whatever your name is - come back to me when you learn how to spell. Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Ahh you got me, it said like, not lack. And a person with your intelligent probably couldn't decipher what I meant. I could probably go back through some of your post and point out your errors but I don't need to. It's not just what you post that shows me your lack of intelligence. A friend who introduced me to the site has seen you. And he confirms it. Am I making that up no. Need proof, he saw you at your incall. It was an apt west of the Domain. Off Duval Road. I could go further but won't. So I know how to spell, wouldn't have made it through UT if I didn't. Come back to me when you learn to think for yourself and not listen to partisan spin. Good day.

Ok now -- you're just weird.

Ahh you got me, it said like, not lack. And a person with your intelligent probably couldn't decipher what I meant. I could probably go back through some of your post and point out your errors but I don't need to. It's not just what you post that shows me your lack of intelligence. A friend who introduced me to the site has seen you. And he confirms it. Am I making that up no. Need proof, he saw you at your incall. It was an apt west of the Domain. Off Duval Road. I could go further but won't. So I know how to spell, wouldn't have made it through UT if I didn't. Come back to me when you learn to think for yourself and not listen to partisan spin. Good day. Originally Posted by Milly23

Your logic escapes me. Why would any POTUS resign unless he knew he would otherwise be impeached (by the House) and convicted (by the Senate)? That's why Nixon resigned and Bill Clinton didn't.

In any event, it is truly astonishing and bizarre, to say the least, that people like you and nuglet are even talking about possible impeachment before the guy is even sworn in!

That's the kind of polarizing thinking that makes our politics so dysfunctional. Originally Posted by lustylad

Trump has a very shady background that hasn't been subject to close examination prior to being elected pres.

Now that he's made himself a target, all kinds of dirt will show up and if he isn't impeached for lying, then he'll be dragged into court and it will still end up with him leaving office.

A lot of folks talk about him being shot, but it'll be much sweeter to see him have to resign and and live with the shame of his past.

And as for " polarizing", Trump is the poster boy for polarizing.. he brought it on.. His daddy did a really bad job of teaching his son. But we'll all just have to wait and see. Hell, he has such a penchant for siccing his attorneys on anyone that he perceives crossed him, he'll probably sue the USA for his problems. lol

Either way, "legally" he's the pres elect. I'll back him even if I don't support him! But the fact I voted, gives me the right to bitch about it. YAY America!

I have plenty popcorn and beer, this is going to be a hoot.