Discussion: State AGs On Emoluments: President Is Not Above The Law!

TPM Article Topics
1
State AGs On Emoluments: President Is Not Above The Law! State AGs On Emoluments: President Is Not Above The Law! Back to article
2 Likes
2

the attorneys cited a 1993 memo written by then-OLC staffer and
current Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. as saying that the
emoluments clause covers “any profits” accepted from a domestic or
foreign government.

Did I say “any profits”? I meant to say “any profits accompanied by a duly-notarized contract specifying a quid pro quo.”

20 Likes
3

Clowns to the left, jokers to the right.

10 Likes
4

“Conspicuously, the attorneys cited a 1993 memo written by then-OLC staffer and current Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. as saying that the emoluments clause covers “any profits” accepted from a domestic or foreign government. Some observers anticipate the Supreme Court to eventually rule on Trump’s emoluments issues.”

This observer anticipates that Alito will prove as arbitrary, capricious, intellectually dishonest and self-contradictory as Scalia just to protect Trump.

17 Likes
5

Alito will invoke that well-respected hoary legal maxim, “that was then, this is now”.

18 Likes
6

“President Is Not Above Law!”

He is if he’s a GOPer. IOKIYAR. It’s partly why the GOP spends so much time manufacturing bullshit about Dem POTUSes and then bemoaning that the Dem POTUSes are lawless and treated as above the law. They then turn around and use it to feel justified doing whatever the fuck they want while POTUS and literally, blatantly abousing congressional power to protect their POTUSes from oversight.

7 Likes
7

As tRump has more suits against him, I’d love to know where the money to pay attorneys comes from. I’m willing to bet he’s trying to milk it all from the US Govt.

5 Likes
8

The Inaugural Committee millions.

8 Likes
9

I can’t wait to see Alito trying now to parse those words.

6 Likes
10

Someone posted Mueller’s mandate yesterday or the day before and part of that mandate is the authority to prosecute whatever federal crimes he discovers.

That seems to by pass the whole “you can’t indict the president” policy. How can he prosecute anything the president has done without indicting him?

7 Likes
11

No whataboutism, or Obama books sales blah, blah, blah.

2 Likes
12

I’m sure the big 5 on the Supreme Court will say that Alito was right, but 'In this case only" it doesn’t apply for… reasons i.e. the “Why we can’t let Al Gore become President or get a fair vote count precedent”.

9 Likes
13

Indicting is for minions, easy pass is for guys like Trump and Epstein.

5 Likes
14

That’s obviously what happened with Epstein.

4 Likes
15

Intellectually dishonest. From a man creep who wrote a dissenting opinion that it was okay to strip search a 10 year old girl without a warrant. Shocking.

5 Likes
16

“Emoluments?! Land sakes! So much hullaballoo over some hand lotion!” - Sen. Lindsey Graham (R - Fluffer)

7 Likes
17

:laughing:

18

Let’s see now, who was the POTUS in 1993 when Alito laid down that law? Strick definitions of what “emoluments” entails is only operational when there is a Democratic POTUS according to Alito. We’ll see when this gets to the SCOTUS I guess.

1 Like
19

‘A bunch of lawyers??? C’mon…they are all a bunch of hacks…if they were any good they’d be working for the Trump Corporation! Is there some way I can fire them all?’ - DJT

1 Like
20

And Mr. Tangerine Man in the middle.

5 Likes