Judge dismisses lawsuit accusing Trump of violating Emoluments Clause
A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit accusing the president of violating the Constitution through payments from foreign entities to his businesses. U.S. District Court Judge George B. Daniels in Manhattan deemed the lawsuit from the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and other plaintiffs lacked standing, and the plaintiffs had failed to prove injury.
The plaintiffs have alleged President Trump's "vast, complicated and secret" business interests — like the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., blocks from the White House — have resulted in violations of the Domestic and Foreign Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution, intended to prevent bribery from foreign entities. The plaintiffs argued it was unconstitutional for Mr. Trump's businesses to benefit from foreign representatives staying at his hotels and eating at his restaurants while Mr. Trump is in office.
But Daniels said the plaintiffs failed to prove injury from the accusations. The judge did not elaborate on whether Mr. Trump was indeed in breach of the Emoluments Clause, saying that was a case for Congress.
CREW wasn't pleased with the lawsuit's outcome.
"The Constitution's emoluments clauses are core protections against destabilizing foreign and domestic corruption," CREW Executive Director Noah Bookbinder said in a statement. "We never thought we would have to sue the president to enforce them; we hoped that President Trump would take the necessary steps to avoid violating the Constitution before he took office. He did not, and we were forced to bring our landmark Emoluments case because the plaintiffs in this case—and the American people—have been directly harmed by the president's violations. While today's ruling is a setback, we will not walk away from this serious and ongoing constitutional violation. The Constitution is explicit on these issues, and the president is clearly in violation. Our legal team is weighing its options and will soon lay out our decisions on how to proceed."
Mr. Trump, who made his fortune in real estate, marketing and entertainment, bucked decades of precedent by refusing to release his tax returns during the 2016 presidential elections. That has fueled suspicions about his possible conflicts-of-interests as well as concerns about the source of his income, including whether any of it comes from sources abroad.
Tags
Who is online
48 visitors
Looks like a federal judge doesn't think so. I imagine there will be some serious whining about this. Even the DOJ is agreeing with the federal judge.
I imagine that because there is no legislation requiring him to release them, he didn't. That seems to have a bunch of leftist panties in a wad.
Is he involved with the day to day operations and decision making of the Trump Business Empire? Unless someone can prove he is, he is doing nothing wrong. I'd much rather have people investigate how a community organizer became a multi-millionaire while on a government salary.........
.....and there is no law that says a canddiate must release his taxes-and I'm sure during the Obama years, his tax returns were highly scrutinized by the only agency authorized to do so: The IRS.
they are working on that... the calm before the storm is almost over.
soon... the storm begins
In 2012 the Obamas made $608,611. In 2013 $481,098 In 2014 $477,383 In 2015$436,065.It's all there for you to see but you won't find it on infowars.
As I've never been on Infowars, I'll have to take your word for it. And yet, he is a multi-milllionaire now.....even as he was leaving the White House. Kind of like Hillary Crying Poor, when they left the White House and look how terribly uncomfortable her life is now.......
Well that's about 2 million in 4 years. I think it's about half from salary and the rest from his books. What's hard to understand about that?
Why should anyone see his college transcripts?
Oh, to see if he even graduated and what his grades were. What's so incriminating that he felt he needed to hide this normally revealed information.
And who financed all his schooling? Gramps and Toots were not all that rich. Might it have been those left wing radical friends of his??
Really...the truth about how Obama meddled in and quashed Project Cassandra in order to push through the Iran deal is just getting started.
What all that cash and equivalents that are off the books.
You spout complete and utter nonsense.
Who normally reveals this information?
Why should he? There is no law requiring him to do so. You know, like trumps tax returns?
Got proof or a link to support the lie? Just about every president except Obama has listed his educational records and business dealings. One has to wonder why those years of Obama's life off limits to public scrutiny? What was, and is, he trying to hide.
Making sound investments? Being a good business person? Giving speeches? Lots of ways to make money if you are a former POTUS.
You're not even curious? Why not? Afraid something negative will be revealed?
So you're saying he got it all honestly? But that Trump didn't?
It's funny how many liberal fools that cant put a three word sentence together suddenly become tax experts.
Yes, and I never said trump didn't earn his money honestly. But I WOULD point out that trump has been sued for fraud over 3,500 times. Just sayin.
And then there is this...
Are you suggesting that the POTUS should NOT get paid? Let me guess, you still believe trump isn't taking a salary? Well, prove it, all you have to do is pull up his tax ret.....oh wait.
Former Wharton Professor: 'Trump Was the Dumbest G*ddamn Student I Ever Had'
Photo Credit: Nicole S Glass / Flickr
The late professor William T. Kelley taught marketing at Wharton School of Business and Finance, University of Pennsylvania, for 31 years, ending with his retirement in 1982. Kelley, who also had vast experience as a business consultant, was the author of a then-widely used textbook called Marketing Intelligence:The Management of Marketing Information (originally published by P. Staples, London, 1968). Kelley taught marketing management both to undergraduate and graduate students at Wharton. Dr. Bill was one of my closest friends for 47 years when we lost him at 94 about six years ago. He would have been 100 this year.
Donald J. Trump was an undergraduate student at Wharton for the latter two of his college years, having graduated in 1968 .
Professor Kelley told me 100 times over three decades that “Donald Trump was the dumbest goddam student I ever had.” I remember his emphasis and inflection — it went like this: “Donald Trump was the dumbest goddamn student I ever had .” Kelley told me this after Trump had become a celebrity, but long before he was considered a political figure. Kelley often referred to Trump’s arrogance when he told the story that Trump came to Wharton thinking he already knew everything.
This has relevance now because as recently as this week, President Trump challenged the Secretary of State of the United States to an IQ contest. This came within two days after NBC reported that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called the President a “moron” or a " f**king moron ." The president has frequently bragged that he was a great student at a great school (Wharton). Thus, the public is entitled to a contrary view from somebody who was there (Dr. Kelley), and I faithfully report it here.
Bill Kelley was one smart cookie. His textbook was standard in his time in the then-new field of “marketing intelligence” and the necessity of using computers and databases to manage it. (See onlinelibrary.wiley.com which credits Bill for coining the quoted phrase.)
Kelley’s view seems to be shared by other University of Pennsylvanians. See thedp.com , from the Daily Pennsylvanian, stating:
Thanks and R.I.P., Bill Kelley! The words still ring in my ears: “Donald Trump was the dumbest goddamn student I ever had .”
The daily kos huh? Anything from a reputable non biased publication?
I thought not.
What is your orange hero trying to hide not releasing his tax returns?
Actually the judge said no such thing.....even your seeded article shows that!
He presided over a civil lawsuit only! Trump could have very much indeed breached the Emoluments Clause, but it wasn't in the purview of this judge to make that ruling!
So, you're saying he might have, but no real law enforcement agency has referred charges. Hmmm, I have to wonder why? Maybe because they know the law a lot better than what you think you know?
Or......maybe Congress hasn't opened an investigation! You did read that was posted right?! I'll try post it again just in case you missed it (or willfully refused to acknowledge)
Law enforcement isn't required.......but you knew that didn't you
Yet Trump SAID that he would. Now that he doesn't have the excuse that his taxes are being audited, he could and should release his 2017 tax return. He won't and his followers don't care that he didn't keep his promise.
I find it ironic that the excuse for Trump has become 'There's no law against it' or 'There's no law forcing him to...'.
And he didn't. And that really must burn your ass that he didn't do something he's NOT required by law to do.
No emoluments violation.
No collusion.
No obstruction.
Three strikes and you are out!
Here is your participation trophy losers!
>.---.- zoom zoom!
So Trump had to get Putin to do what Putin was already doing and has done for years? Interfere in the US elections. So far the only proven attempt to use Russia to influence the election has been Hillary and the DNC getting the dossier.
It was in Russia's best interest to continue the weak Obama foreign policy so why would Vlad want Trump?
"Not me or anyone in my campaign had any meetings with any Russians!!!"
Donald Trump.
Seems weird that all of those people lied about the meetings in the first place...I mean, if there was nothing illegal about any of it. But you want to believe it was Hillary that colluded with Russia to.....what....lose the election? That's some next level spin you have going on there. I think you are forgetting that the dossier was originally funded by republicans, the DNC just picked up the tab. And why are you mad about it anyway? Trump Jr. met with russians to get dirt on Hillary....and there is wikileaks, and the stolen emails... So it was ok for trumps russian friends to dig up dirt on Hillary, but if the DNC does it you get pissed? Really? LMAO!!!
She wanted dirt on Trump and paid Russians through Fusion to get it. Putin wanted her and not Trump. She was the known patsy after her stint at State. Another Obama term would have made Vlad happy.
She lost the election because of the same reason she lost to Obama in the '08 primary. I'll bet you don't remember why.
They don't!
Putin meddled in US elections long before this one. They actually think Trump had to conspire with Putin to get Putin to do what Putin has been doing for years. On top of that they think Putin kept her from going to PA, WI and MI. They also forget why Obama beat her in '08.
Please post a link to support that Russians were paid by Fusion. I'll wait.
Trump didn't make an arms deal with Ukraine. Just like Obama, he signed off on American arms manufacturers selling arms to Ukraine. The FACT is that arms manufacturers all over the world are selling to the Ukraine and it's a good bet that American manufacturers pitched a fit about being kept out of the market.
So all those stories of "golden showers" were given to Fusion out of the kindness of a prostitute's heart?
Why deflect? Post a link that proves that Russians, ANY Russians were paid by Fusion. You made the assertion, prove it.
Why be in denial?
And you got all that from this one case? This judge did not say that there was no emoluments violations.....so what are you reading?
No I didn't get that from just this one case. Your point in commenting about that was what?
I assume his point was that you were either purposefully lying about what the judge said or are entirely clueless about what the judge said.
At the very least it's clear that you don't understand what a "lack of standing" means.
>-.---.-
Zoom zoom!
You might want to read the entire article before commenting. Judge Daniels made it very clear that he rejected the suit based entirely on jurisdictional issues.
By the way, this administration has publicly endorsed everything from Ivanka's clothing and accessory lines, to Melania's 'First Lady' brand products that include wine, a skin care line, chocolate, and salami. (Salami? First Lady Salami? I don't care what anyone says, but the mere existence of First Lady Salami deserves a rousing, world-wide chorus of WTF?). Trump himself used his position to obtain The Trump Organization's brand and copyright privileges in countries that have routinely denied those requests in the past. Namely? China. I'm sorry, but that one is a clear breach of ethics in that it benefits only the Trump Organization. At least he wasn't lying when he said he would be the 'biggest jobs president ever'. He just forgot to say in which country that would happen.
Personally speaking, the amount of time Trump spends on self-enrichment endeavors bothers the shit out of me. It should bother the shit out of you, too.
That is the easy way out for a judge. Don't want to rule then pick out the low hanging fruit.
Since there has never been a ruling by SCOTUS on emoluments no judge is going to be the first to stick his neck out.
Finding anyone who has been harmed by so called emolument will prove so difficult that finding any judge willing to do so is going to be a needle in the haystack.
Where does it state in the Judge's ruling that there were 'no emoluments violation'? Again, I'll wait.
Nowhere!
The judge punted because he didn't want to be the first judge ever to rule on emoluments. That is what is telling.
Thank you for admitting to your fabrication.
It's unfortunate that in doing so, you posted another...
I guess you don't understand the legal system. That explains your posting.
This "judge" is obviously a far right wing partisan.
Oh, give it a rest. You watch too much CNN. You should be more concerned with the upcoming Congressional, and probably the DOJ, investigations about the Obama administration's meddling in and obstructing Project Cassandra, which dealt with the DEA and other agencies cracking down on drug running and other crimes being committed by Hezbollah. Obama thought this would hinder his disastrous "deal" with Iran.
Really? Every time trumps travel ban lost in the courts, the very fist thing the right wing did was scream, "LIBERAL JUDGES!!!!!!". Same with trump's "trump u" fraud case...trump was attacking that guy before the ruling was even made as a "racist Mexican liberal".
So no, I will NOT, "give it a rest".
His comment went right over your head didn't it?
Thank you! The funny part about it is the judge is a Clinton appointee!
May all the liberals get laryngitis screaming at the sky next month when President Trump celebrates his first year in office.
If that's the case, you have had laryngitis for the last 8 years.
Nope. I don't engage in pointless childish behavior like that.
And he can celebrate the 109 days of golf that he has had since he has been in office...91 million taxpayer dollars spent on.....golf... I remember you used to have all kinds of quips about Obama golfing...but trump golfs literally 10x as much, and you don't have even one complaint? LMAO!!!
Is there where I can use the word hypocrite?
Trumps golfing is offset by how many millions have been wasted by the left on the pointless Mueller investigation.
I never criticized Obama for playing golf. All presidents need time away and golf is a great way to do that.
That article was written in February. 10 million in ONE MONTH.
So please DO give us your best estimate of the cost of Trump's golf weekends.