I don’t know that I’d credit (well, “credit”) him with such, because we don’t hear about any of it despite some amount of scrutiny and, oh yes, his administration leaking like a fucking sieve.
I mean he could fucking sell the Presidential twitter account for ad money and be the most influential Influencer ever (please, please spare us the beach bikini shots though, guy). For half a million, two mentions of your name a week and your choice of cute nickname ! And then he could run away with the money before any ethical committee or emoluments clause ever came into play - what are they going to do after he’s deposed ? Impeach him retroactively ? But he’s not doing that. Hell he’s signal boosting Fox News for free !
That’s what I’m talking about. He’s a crook, but he’s got no imagination, no ambition as a crook. He’s a nickel and dime crook. And that’s really pathetic. And I know what I’m talking about : my own mayor was finally jailed after TWENTY YEARS of open crookery, bribery, tax dodging and false job granting. And the majority of the town’s people STILL SUPPORT HIM. Now that’s a crook you can… well, not respect, not really, but y’know. Obviously carries his balls in a wheelbarrow.
Unfortunately, 18 U.S.C. § 202 (c) specifically excludes the President from the definition of “officer or employee”.
(c) Except as otherwise provided in such sections, the terms “officer” and “employee” in sections 203, 205, 207 through 209, and 218 of this title shall not include the President, the Vice President, a Member of Congress, or a Federal judge.
Cornell Law School is an excellent resource, but in this case their hyperlink pointing to the definition of “officer or employee” on the § 208 webpage gives a definition which only applies to § 207.
“President Trump’s decision to award the Group of Seven summit of world leaders to his own struggling Florida resort brought a flood of pushback from Democrats and members of his own party.”
(WaPo so may be paywalled)
I assume that his controllers in the Republican Party told him to walk it back. If so, interesting that it was this of all things that threatened their support.
This was, for whatever reason, one of the GOP breaking points (along with the Syria withdraw). I’ve seen a lot of the right say that this was–again, for some reason-- a bridge too far when it comes to flagrant self-enrichment. All the other self-enrichment was ok, but this was some kind of break-point.
::shrug::
I like that he blames just the *dems *as the reason he changed gears. Makes him look and sound like an even bigger pussy. Why would you admit you caved to the dems?
I suspect this POTUS was not TOTALLY clueless about possible public reactions when announcing G7@Doral. Thus I also suspect this is yet another distraction from something seriously nefarious. Look at my right hand’s obscene gestures, not at my left hand holding the stiletto! What REALLY bad shit is being covered up?
What can I say? I don’t think it’s a good idea to subject the President to federal laws beyond injunction unless he’s impeached and convicted. I also think awarding himself a contract is a violation of the domestic emoluments clause, and therefore either a court can stop the deal in its tracks or the Congress can impeach the president over it.
I am afraid he would not market it “sleep on the bed where…” but “urinate on the bed where the horrible Ms. Merkel has slept”. He has experience with that, they say. And now that he knows how it works he would get that on video. His video, this time.
The breaking point for the GOP is that these were too public and they were unable to spin themselves a safe zone where they could “tut tut” Trumps actions while quietly allowing them to happen. These actions so enraged the voter pool (i.e. Independents) that they had thier hands forced. They were fine when they could spin some BS to muddy the waters but these were too open and too obvious for them to hide from.
This is what I’ve been trying to explain: what happens when a sitting president, with all of the powers that the Executive has, decides that the Constitution is no longer relevant, and what happens when the Senate (and Courts, and voters) enable him? This is a full-blown political crisis, the likes of which have probably not been seen since the 1870s.
Well this is kinda what happens when all the checks and balances are under the control of the same people.
Normally this is the point where the voters themselves act as the ultimate check, but thanks to your weird-ass, gerrymandered electoral systems that’s no going to work either. Even if we politely ignore the fact that a good fourth of the country is fully on board with the lunacy and only howls for moar, moar, MOAR to cuck the libz.