ST Alpha - "I’m not an expert and there’s been two long detailed Circuit Court opinions on it and I’ve found the argument to be somewhat of a stretch at times " (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 157

In response to ""You people with this phony Emoluments Clause” -- (link)" by mud

I’m not an expert and there’s been two long detailed Circuit Court opinions on it and I’ve found the argument to be somewhat of a stretch at times

Posted by JackDawson (aka dawson) Oct 21 '19, 09:55

Just MO

It depends on some of the facts

The fact that a president has a hotel and that a foreign dignitary may stay at it seems without more not to have anything to do with what that clause is about

A separate more troubling issue is forcing them or govt workers to use his properties

Responses:

What about foreign governments buying up hotel rooms at his properties and not using them. Does there need to be evidence of a quid pro quo or is the - pmb Oct 21, 10:06 1
- It seems like the history of the clause is pretty persuasive that you couldn’t be basically working for a foreign govt, like employed by them - JackDawson Oct 21, 10:16
what about promising North Korea he'd finish building the hotel and tourist area Kim is obsessed with -- (link) - Remlik Oct 21, 10:02 1
- That seems to be a payment to NK? -- nm - JackDawson Oct 21, 10:13

Post a message top

I’m not an expert and there’s been two long detailed Circuit Court opinions on it and I’ve found the argument to be somewhat of a stretch at times

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.