No telling what all than criminal did for foreign leaders for favors and money that is still hidden. The numerous crimes just keep adding up. Trump received at least $7.8 million in payments from foreign governments as president Trump violated the Constitution's foreign emoluments clause, which prohibits the president from accepting money payments or gifts "'of any kind whatever' from foreign governments and monarchs unless he obtains 'the Consent of the Congress' to do so. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...oreign-governments-president-repor-rcna132276
I haven't read it yet but wanted to comment on one of your statement. Legal or not (i'm not sure), the founders of was very concern about any public office in the US taking money from foreign entities. So, not at all the same or on par with Hunter.
Which I addressed in the part you didn't bold. It could have been grounds for an impeachment for Trump, but it wasn't pursued. Now, it's too late. When he was president, his receipt of money from a foreign government was itself a violation even if it was a completely innocent commercial transaction. Now that he's not president, you'd have to prove that those transactions were in actual fact bribes to be at all interesting. I see nothing to prove bribery, so they're just innocent and totally legal commercial transactions.
Except he’s running for President again. It might all be legal but certainly raises questions regarding conflicts of interests.
Eh, I just don't think it's very interesting until he wins again, and again doesn't give up his interest in his companies. At that point, it's impeachable. Right now, it's just a company doing business. Should we really expect a hospitality company to turn away a customer because they're on a business trip for a Chinese government department? That's a little ridiculous.
Except he didn’t give up his interests when he was president last time and hasn’t said he will give up his interests if he wins again. Running and holding higher office isn’t a right and voting should be a conscious and informed decision. A candidate who while in office showed a willingness to accept business from foreign sources with interests not aligned or Even adverse to the US should be considered compromised.
I didn't intend to just bold that part . What I'm trying to convey is its relevance for one of the individuals you mentioned who is running for office. The accusation pertains to his actions during his time in office, which holds more significance since actions often carry more weight than mere words. As for the other guy - he's not in office nor running for office, so that is irrelevant. Again, the founders were very concerned about foreign influence and did not allow any person holding office to profit from any foreign power. It should be (yet another) disqualifying attribute of the person. EDIT: Also, why wasn't this part of the impeachment for Trump? Because it was likely not known at the time. The House issued subpoenas for records in 2019, but it took until 2022 for the House Oversight Committee to obtain financial records. Trump fought it in court for years and didn't allow it to be released.
Trump is all about profiting off foreign leaders to make money off his businesses. Why would they pay ridiculous prices to help him profit? Tit for tat, foreign influencing, and deals that make them happy, like Trump signing an arms deal with the Saudi government worth more than $100 billion after receiving big bucks from them. What's interesting is how Trump calls Joe China Joe, but China poured more money into his properties than anyone, and gifted the Trumps with numerous patents.
Illinois voters file petition to remove Trump from Republican primary ballot State joins more than a dozen others in their requests, following Colorado and Maine barring former president from their ballots https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...oters-removal-trump-republican-primary-ballot
NY AG Tish James will likely "disgorge" Trump Inc, so Trump's NY controlled/based businesses might get sold on the county court steps before the 2024 election.
The Jamie Raskin report that the tweet links is years too late. It would have been great for an impeachment effort 5 years ago. And maybe it will be great for an impeachment effort 2 years from now. So the tweet itself is aimed at informing (or 'informing') the voters. But, southpaw doesn't lead with "Trump conducted his entire Administration in violation of the Emoluments Clause." He leads with "$5.6 million from China to Trump" as though there is something inherently dirty about renting hotel rooms to Chinese government officials. It goes on to show that Thailand spent over $11,000 (!!!) at Trump properties. Trump is not so cheap as to be doing favors for Qatar for a half-million, much less Thailand for $11k. The whole tweet misses the point. Raskin's report details how Trump continued to operate his properties in violation of the emoluments clause and has indicated over and over again how his business interests seem to steer his foreign policy. A tweet is short and can't say everything, but it turned Raskin's report on good governance into some kind of vague guilt-by-association whataboutism.
If biden said this joe rogan wouod be doing an entire episode on it. @rocketsjudoka the funny thing is trump says the most incoherent stuff ever and nobody ever flinches but somehow biden says one thing and it makes headlines for weeks. Trump is just as old as biden and it's greatest scam ever how folks think trump is somehow coherent and intelligent
The difference is the woke left has no real power in the party. Biden has shipped arms to Israel without issues in defiance of the woke left, he's about to sign the most anti immigration bill ever in spite of woke left wanting open borders and biden funded police department at a higher level than any other president. The woke left is loud but have no power in the party at all.
