Yeah. As I note below, where’s Judicial Watch when you need them?
2 Likes
The answer to the reporter’s question was already baked in the cake by this orange flambe’. A better question, that would have been more revealing, should have been, “sir, do you know the difference between a “trust” and a “blind trust”…and will you elaborate those differences”. Might need an alternative word than “e/lab/or/ate” however…Four syllable words can be hard for someone accustomed to using 3rd grade language skills.
3 Likes
There will be a very quick push to get his Supreme Court pick though. He will need the advantage when his court cases start up the legal ladder.
3 Likes
This is what lawyers call a case of first impression. Never been litigated. There is nothing in any record to say what it means and who it applies to. You could probably fit the scholarly legal writing that has been done on it into a very small binder.
I.A.N.L.A.Practicing.L, but trust me, as a matter of law, I can guaranteed that this is not a slam dunk no matter how much we might want it to be. Trump will drag this out and stonewall.
His supporters will cry “Witch hunt!” A majority of the public will just yawn.
Sadly, we are royally f*cked.
2 Likes
I’m glad Paul Ryan promised to keep Trump under control.
4 Likes
What the article failed to mention is that congress could simply vote on whatever the case is and state that congress is OK with it.
1 Like
I am not a practicing lawyer anymore either. But I was once. Since this is a case of first impression, the question of the intent behind the Clause is a part of the argument for standing.
8 Likes
And arguing “the question of the intent behind the Clause” is akin to arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin."
1 Like
Or how many angels can dance on a pin head.
4 Likes
He uses the same ‘totally without merit’ on ANYTHING that may have him look bad…c’mon. The ‘news’ is when he tries to buy it off or pay it off. We’ll see.
1 Like
Nah… He has Putin to pay for his legal defense.
1 Like
O do tell me more?
You do know that there are notes and writings on most of these things that are in libraries. When it’s the legislature, you go and get the legislative notes from the library.
Since it’s constitutional, you get what writings there are around the issue to support your argument.
3 Likes
Without merit because he doesn’t know what the Clause actually is
1 Like
Good to know. I always appreciate it when people with more knowledge/experience correct me!
1 Like
The Groper in Chief is such a legal braintrust.
1 Like
Sounds like you still are plugged into Westlaw and/or LexisNexis.
So please, enlighten us oh-wise-one… YOU go do the legal research and get back to us. No need to follow Bluebook citation guidelines. I await with baited breath.
Call it part of your 1L LWRR project.
You were the one who raised the objection, the research is on you because the burden of proof is on you.
As far as I’m concerned.
2 Likes
Copy of the lawsuit if anyone is interested: https://www.scribd.com/document/337336987/CREW-v-Trump-Complaint
2 Likes
Start with the Federalist Papers and other well-archived source material. I am sure that Professor Tribe and the other plaintiffs’ lawyers have everything ready to go.
3 Likes
Not sure of this either. There will be proof issues. We still do not know what is in his tax returns, so his income is unknown. And even if for example the city of Rio de Janeiro speeded up or even waived its variance process to allow a Trump project to move forward, how will it be proven that it intended this act as a “gift” to Trump or a Trump business if there is evidence it does this in the ordinary course of business with other big projects intending to bring jobs to its people? Also, if “emolument” is a “fee or profit”, it is no slam dunk I think that the courts agree on whether value for value payments are emoluments.
The real problem I see that the courts cannot ignore about undivested ownership by a President is similar to how the courts view “excessive entanglements” between Church and State. There are so many ways that a President can receive gifts and emoluments from foreign states that are under the radar, it is impossible to recognize all of them. Just as is the case with impossible to disentangle myriad of benefits financial and otherwise that a church receives from State largesse, this is also the case with Trump business ventures that solicit foreign patronage.
2 Likes