Here's the NYT report:
A three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., found that the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia had no legal standing to sue Mr. Trump. The judges roundly rejected the premise of the case, which claimed that the Trump International Hotel, located blocks from the White House, is unfairly siphoning off business from hotels owned by the local jurisdictions. The lawsuit, which alleges violations of the Constitution’s anti-corruption or “emoluments” clauses, was about to enter the evidence-gathering phase....Trump's tweeted response to the decision:
“Even if government officials were patronizing the hotel to curry the President’s favor, there is no reason to conclude that they would cease doing so were the president enjoined from receiving income from the hotel,” the 36-page opinion said. “The hotel would still be publicly associated with the president, would still bear his name and would still financially benefit members of his family.”...
“Neither [emoluments] clause expressly confers any rights on any person, nor does either clause specify any remedy for a violation,” they wrote....
Word just out that I won a big part of the Deep State and Democrat induced Witch Hunt. Unanimous decision in my favor from The United States Court of Appeals For The Fourth Circuit on the ridiculous Emoluments Case. I don’t make money, but lose a fortune for the honor of..... serving and doing a great job as your President (including accepting Zero salary!).ADDED: To explain my reaction, "Good," here's what I wrote when I first heard about this litigation, in January 2017:
Quite apart from the substantive merits of the claim, it's hard to see how there are plaintiffs with standing to sue. How does the money paid in rent and hotel bills to the Trump organization cause concrete and particularized injury to anyone? You could say we are all injured by the possibility that commercial activities could influence the President's decisions, but that's the sort of generalized grievance that isn't enough.
But the filing of the lawsuit brings attention to the legal argument, which bolsters the political argument that the risk of influence is bad and should be eliminated. And in the end, almost certainly, the matter will be resolved in the political sphere and not the courts.
पोस्ट्स
५४ टिप्पण्या:
Just another junk case brought by soulless corrupt people who voted for Hillary Clinton knowing she took Billions in "donations" for obvious quid pro quos from numerous foreign governments and entities.
I've been joking about this Emoluments! case pushed by Harvard Law Professor Larry Tribe for a while.
If you read Tribe's Twitter, he has come completely unhinged, has abandoned all pretext of the law, and is simply obsessed with hating Trump.
He thinks the House should impeach Trump, and then make a finding of guilt, but not send it over to the Senate. Wacky.
He says hope is not lost -- there are 2 other Emoluments! suits percolating up through the courts!
It is Trump Derangement Syndrome writ large.
Not to mention Hillary's pay to play scam at the State Dept.
"You say your daughter is being held in Pakistan for opium use? Yes, we can help. But first, have you heard of the Clinton Foundation...?
I'd rather he won on the merits rather than on standing but, still, it's one less bit of harassment he has to deal with while trying to run the country.
I have read that he has lost about $3 billion in net Worth since January 2017. The rage and demonstrations must have affected his properties.
Interesting thread at Neo.
I have never heard of this guy Waters.
So I get why Trump supporters like [Trump], because he is doing what he said he was going to do and we hate him so much he makes us crazy.
Another set of observations [in the rest of the quotes the interviewer’s remarks are in bold]:
Is there a Democratic primary candidate you support?
Here’s what I think: [Trump] is gonna win again, because I say it myself and they all go “Ahhh!” when I say that. And I say, “Who are you gonna vote for?” Silence. There are 40 characters that are going to divide it all up. You know, the gay one I like. I’d vote for any of them, even though it would be really hard for me to vote for Elizabeth Warren who has never once said a funny thing in her entire life.
He is apparently a comedian and made some movies. He is not as crazy as most.
If you read Tribe's Twitter, he has come completely unhinged, has abandoned all pretext of the law, and is simply obsessed with hating Trump.
Tribe's transformation from respected Constitutional scholar to ranting, foaming lunatic is shocking. Trump ruins everything, especially his enemies.
Re the merits of the Emoluments lawsuit, under its legal theory no businessman could ever be President since foreigners might purchase their goods -- in other words, no President George Washington.
The constant harassment of Trump and his family are a warning to non-politicos: Stay out of our business or suffer the consequences.
I suspect that everyone knows that except for the of the really dumb lefties.
Blogger Earnest Prole said...
Tribe's transformation from respected Constitutional scholar to ranting, foaming lunatic is shocking. Trump ruins everything, especially his enemies.
7/10/19, 1:14 PM
Nah. He just exposed A Pest Called Tribe for what he is: a shockingly inept fool who got where he is through pure tribalism. There are more than a few of them.
Strike one - immigration ban on countries Obama deemed dangerous. Wrong
Strike two - Russian witch-hunt. Wrong
Strike three - POTUS who won’t take a salary and has lost millions to BE POTUS has another stupid democrat law card attack defeated
Strike infinity - propaganda media and fascist House of Representatives continue to drive this country into a shithole.
Elizabeth Warren who has never once said a funny thing in her entire life.
Maybe not intentionally. The whole genetic test debacle was pretty funny. Some of her positions are pretty funny, in a somewhat scary way... stuff like single payer healthcare (medicare for all), government funded child-care, and wealth taxes ect.
Another fake investigation bites the dust, but the TDS victims have many, many more.
"Medicare for all. Whether you like it or not. In fact, especially if you don't want it.
As Althouse notes, she understood this bullshit Emoluments! claim back in Jan 2017.
If I may tout my own prescient comment from 2.5 years ago:
"Since the upset election, here's the Left's response:
1. Silly recount by Jill Stein (#fail)
2. Lobby to abolish Electoral College (#fail)
3. Lobby/threaten electoral college voters to vote against Trump (#fail)
4. Blame Russians for hacking Podesta DNC emails
5. Blame Comey
6. Various riots/protests throughout the country
7. 60 Dem Representatives boycott Inauguration
8. Liberal women's march in DC with Pussy Hats
9. Lawsuit by liberal law professors on Emolument Clause
At what point, do these clowns lose all credibility?
Hillary lost Wisc & Michigan by less than 1 point, because she chose not to campaign there, and instead tried to win Arizona (#strategy fail). End of story.
1/22/17, 9:41 PM"
You should explore some of his films, Dr. Mike.
Nope. I'm more into "My Man Godfrey" or "The Bank Dick."
The left must be earning a lot of frequent flyer points from Acme. How many more anvils to the noggin can these idiots withstand?
If Trump had owned a grain mill it would have been different.
Think about this:
1. At Harvard, Laurence Tribe was the preeminent authority on Constitutional Law for decades.
2. Many federal judges are Harvard grads, indoctrinated by Tribe.
3. This includes political luminaries such as Barack Obama & Liz Warren, and thousands more.
And you wonder why the legal profession is all dicked up?
These are famous, erudite, professionals who write grammatically correct memos for big $$, yet get many important issues completely ass-backwards. At bottom, they are merely Leftwing political hacks.
At what point, do these clowns lose all credibility?
They have already admitted it's okay to lie in service to defeating (insert demonized group here). That ethical standards may be suspended to stop _________ . That violence is wrong but permitted when faced with _______ .
I have a theory that there is a high correlation between the bad things the Left does and their false accusations demonizing the right. If they cheat, they must accuse the Right of being murderers to make their sins feel less evil in comparison. If they murder, they must accuse the Right of committing genocide to make their sins feel less evil in comparison.
We see it every day here with Inga. She is ashamed of being a Democrat, so she spends hours trying to shame us with false smears, not to convince *us* but to convince *herself* that she's not really a bad person due to her continued support of the Democrat party. That's why she keeps repeating her assertions like an Affirmation, regardless of what evidence is provided proving her wrong. It's an incantation chanted to keep her self-esteem intact, she must pretend we are Monsters so her own ugliness is diluted and bearable.
...
As for the Left's credibility: for some reason people (even Althouse) continue to link to the likes of the NYTs and WaPo. CNN is still treated as if it were a legitimate broker of information.
People who lie about rape, like Dr Ford, are lionized by the Left when they should be shunned. And the only consequence she may face is losing a book deal about her lies, when society should shun her.
In short, the fault is partly ours for enabling and emboldening them. We are sick of the lies and gossip spread by the local fishmonger's wife. Yet every morning, we gather on her corner to clutch our pearls at her latest pronouncement.
The left must be earning a lot of frequent flyer points from Acme.
Nice one!
The Global Socialist Dems seem determined to cost Trump and everyone who supports him Billions of dollars in Atty fees. Their goal is not winning hoax cases. It is punishing those who dare to defend the Deplorables from the Dem traitor’s goal of exterminating us.
The Democrats are trying to make it illegal for any businessman ever to serve as the US President again.
The Democrats would like to use this emoluments argument to impeach and remove from office any future President who made his living largely from commercial business.
The Democrats want only professional politicians to be legitimate Presidents.
Professional politicians make their big money from pay-to-play schemes. For example, that's how the Clintons made their big money. As professional politicians, the Clintons did not do commercial business. That's the way Democrats want our political system to function.
Emoluments!
(I just like saying it. It makes me laugh).
The Global Socialist Dems seem determined to cost Trump and everyone who supports him Billions of dollars in Atty fees.
I wonder if, at some point, the judges (not Obama judges, of course) start awarding attorney fees ? Stormy Daniels and Avenatti are just an early example.
It was a good try for the political class to protect their jobs. If you make it illegal for a private sector person to become successful and parlay that success into a Presidency, then you protect the cronyism process that has selected our candidates.
Any day now, Larry Tribe will accuse Trump of running up the stock market just to enrich himself.
The S&P 500 hit an all-time high today - women and minorities most deeply affected.
“3. This includes political luminaries such as Barack Obama & Liz Warren, and thousands more.”
Warren didn’t attend HLS, just taught there. If she had, then the argument might have carried more weight that she was hired on her merits, ad not as an AA hire for her fake India heritage. The simple reality is that grad schools, including law schools, rarely hire grads of lower ranking schools as professors, and almost ever when there was as much disparity between Warren’s alma mater and Harvard.
Is this what people mean when they claim that the Trump administration is “corrupt”?
LOL - libtards defeated again! Hey how do you guys feel about Plugs Biden making $15 million since he left the vice presidency? Harry Truman would call him a crook, just as he would call Clintoon and Obama crooks
Many of us who watched the 2010 Charter Amendment election in D.C. to make the attorney general an elective position predicted just this sort of politicized activity. The AG previously performed ministerial functions.
https://ballotpedia.org/Washington,_D.C._Attorney_General_Selection_(2010)
"Trump wins the emoluments case."
What about the botanicals?
40 years ago Tribe's hornbook on Con Law helped me with the intricacies of substantive due process. Then 20-odd years later when the Lewinsky matter arose and the MSM was shoving a camera in front of every con law expert in the country, I noticed Tribe was strangely absent. I went back and looked at his book. What he had written about impeachment would've been very unhelpful to then- President Clinton. I realized then what a rank partisan Tribe was.
I hope someone burns down his she-shed.
"It is unclear whether the Fourth Circuit’s decision will influence the judges on the District of Columbia Circuit as they consider the emoluments lawsuit filed by congressional Democrats.”
Not sure how these things are done, but I can’t believe that liberal jurists want this to go before the Supreme Court soon. Surely most people know that the Supreme Court is very unlikely to say anything remotely resembling what liberals have been claiming about this. I think Pres. Trump would be happy to clear one more card off the table.
(Someone should check on Chuck. He may have choked to death post Gin binge)
Chuck -- pick up the Gin! It is ready.
If I get a buncha strange charges on my credit card from various inner city Detroit whorehouses and crack dens, I'll know this experiment went horribly wrong:)
Remember that there were no emoluments issues when Hillary was collecting hundreds of millions of dollars for her political operation/foundation as Secretary of State.
After all, who wants to deprive her of her emoluments? She could get dishpan hands!
The Left will never quit. If not this, something else. His tax returns.
Bay:
I'm rewriting "Frankenstein, Part II." It is now called "Frankenstein in Love."
Think "The Fugitive" meets "Beauty and the Beast."
And more screen time for Frau Althouse; no relation to Ann Althouse.
Something for Victor Davis Hanson to add to the next "..and when that didn't work" column.
"Chuck -- pick up the Gin! It is ready."
He got to 50?
Would our hostess have stayed at Trump Tower in Chicago if Trump weren't the President?
Blogger Original Mike said...
"Chuck -- pick up the Gin! It is ready."
He got to 50?
BAG negotiated a bet where he pays Chuck upfront...
"BAG negotiated a bet where he pays Chuck upfront..."
That's crazy.
I'm shocked that Chuck took the bet. Today's posts had to be particularly difficult to ignore from his perspective. Credit due, nonetheless...
Frankenstein was also the first CliFi novel, climate fiction, as it had a lot of Little Ice Age thematic elements.
The "Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym” by Edgar Allen Poe was kind of similar in some ways.
If anybody is looking for a title to a comic novel, here is one: “From Ineluctable to Unelectable, The Hillary Clinton Story.” You could include a lot of election night coverage as she went from mortal lock to gin soaked loser.
Congress has standing to enforce the emoluments clause through an oversight or impeachment hearing. That’s enough.
Blogger EDH said...
"Trump wins the emoluments case."
What about the botanicals?
Nah, it’s them essential oils that does it for me!
If Trump were as vulgar as they say, he would say,
"I got your emoluments right here".
Congress has standing to enforce the emoluments clause through an oversight or impeachment hearing. That’s enough.
Those grapes were probably sour anyway!
Mike Sylvester - not just "professional politicians", but lawyers. Look at every Dem nominee for the Presidency or VP slot in the last 40 years and count the non-lawyers.
I wonder how many of the current clown car of current contenders is a lawyer. They should just eliminate any and all non-lawyers from the debates, as they don't stand a chance. The Democrat Party is a corrupt criminal lawyer's guild masquerading as a political party.
Well, Trump really should have liquidated his assets and put them in a blind trust like every other president in modern times. I don't care that it would have been especially costly for him--he's the one who wanted to be President of the United States, and he shouldn't have run if he wasn't willing to make that sacrifice.
The fact that he wasn't willing to do so, and the fact that he's willing to flout the emoluments clause by continuing to take payments from foreign countries and foreign state-owned enterprises, should be galling. (Recall that there's zero constitutional problem accepting payments from foreigners who aren't states, or any problem accepting payments from foreign states with congressional permission.) The courts, in the case brought by the Dems in congress, should compel him to hold these payments in escrow and submit them to Congress for its consent. This is not a political question. Rather, it is the same as if a president tried to appoint someone who required the consent of the Senate without submitting the appointment to the Senate. Even if the Senate did not object, we would not say that such an illegal appointment is a political question and the only remedy was impeachment. The courts would be obliged to nullify the appointment and to order the president to submit the appointment to the Senate for its consent. So it should do in this case.
"The fact that he wasn't willing to do so, and the fact that he's willing to flout the emoluments clause by continuing to take payments from foreign countries and foreign state-owned enterprises, should be galling.”
I remember how galled Democrats were about the money that the Clintons were taking in from foreign states. Well I am exactly that galled, no more, no less..
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा