Is this the issue [conflict of interest] that is actually going to bring Trump down?

Conflict of interest. It’s definitely not sexy or particularly salacious except in the most clear-cut of circumstances where some policy decision is definitely against U.S. interests but clearly benefits a Trump enterprise. Would anything less than the most clear-cut of circumstances prompt Congressional Republicans to hold hearings and authorize investigations?

Trump’s decision to not put his businesses and business interests in a blind trust and just leave the management to his children doesn’t really remove the possibility of a conflict of interest one bit, since he would still want his children and their business to succeed while he acted as head of state. Since there is no “wall-off” in the making and his children have remained active in the transition process and would still see Trump on a fairly regular basis, he would likely still be apprised of the status of these businesses and their major dealings.

Most troubling, though, is Trump’s statement today at the New York Times:

It seems little more than a rewording of Nixon’s infamous line:

Nope.

I’m not sure. I think it will depend on how far he pushes it. If he treats his Office as a cash machine for his business, then, yes, I could see a path that leads to impeachment. If he can restrain himself and not put the US up for sale in every conversation he has with foreign governments, then he might last 4 years.

The news about Farage and the wind farms in Scotland lead me to believe that he may not be able to separate his business from his Office.

He’s right. Conflict of interest laws don’t apply to the President.

Take, for example, his 20 year legal battle trying to stop flights out of Palm Beach International Airport from passing over his Mar-a-Lago resort.

He’s now claiming it as a part-time Presidential residence, so the FAA will make it a no-fly zone, solving his business problem. He’ll also be appointing the FAA administrator.

I don’t see a conflict of interest if he actually lives there part-time. The airspace around George W. Bush’s Crawford, TX, was a no-fly zone while he was in office. The Obamas’ vacation home also had a no-fly zone when they stayed there. It’s just SOP for a president.

He will be appointing members of the National Labor Review Board. Which recently ruled against him in a unionization issue at his Vegas hotel.

His new D.C. hotel was built in an old post office and leased from the General Services Administration. As President, Trump will be(as landlord) negotiating with Trump (as tenant).

He’s already promoting his D.C. hotel as the best place for visiting foreign diplomats to stay at.
Not only better deals for his overseas properties but money from the hotel rooms.

No, this is not the same. Trump’s vacation home is a business and his assuming of the presidency settles the 20 year dispute in Trump’s business’ favour. I’m not saying this is some scam he’s running, it seems legitimately his vacation home and that far it’s SOP to make it a no fly zone. Past that, it’s rather uncomfortable conflict of interest wise.

The Man of Drumpfft is simply diversion. He’s said a million times before the election that it’s “rigged”.

There’s a reason for that.

Trump’s statement is about one narrow facet of law, and it’s factually correct. Nixon’s statement is all-encompassing and is simply not true. One might argue that a president won’t be prosecuted while in office, but all bets are off when he’s out of office. Hence Ford’s pardon.

Added descriptive thread title

[/moderating]

I understand this to be true. Where things get murky for me is when the future president of the United States tells a representative of a foreign government that he wants something done because it will benefit his HOTEL in that country. What is next? There are a number of examples in this thread alone. I would hope that the might and majesty of the US isn’t up for sale just to better the Trump business empire. If he uses his Office in that manner, then I would hope that the Congress takes full advantage of the laxness of the language of the Articles of Impeachment and removes him.

The laws are going to be irrelevant. The arc of the story as its told in the media will not be kind to don the con, now that the election is over. It’s a new phase. There are cycles to this. No more Emails to cover, no more benghazi. You know rodents have to chew or die. And they will be chewing orange.

FOX news used to be interesting because it was on fire with the lies. Now they seem just boring and tired. Even if I was conservative I wouldn’t be able to keep awake.

Do you really think don the con is a product of something else other than the media that fed this thing for 18 months?

By the way, we seem to have some overlap with this thread.

Assuming that there is not a disruptive Clinton challenge to election results in multiple states, I think Trump will find some legal wrangling work around that prevents ‘conflict of interest’ downfall. He may…<perhaps in order of likelihood>…

  1. need to divest of the company into multiple IPOs and hope that loyal cronies will coordinate matters behind the scenes (IOW, the situation is legal on paper) and good marketing campaign to wink wink encourage Americans to buy shares of stock (Everybody wins if they own a piece and value/dividends increase, right?). The Trump kids act as unofficial advisors behind the scenes while holding major stakes in generic real estate ETFs or ‘blind’ stock funds.

or

  1. ignore the most relevant rules/laws/ethics and uses the courts to beat back legal challenges and kick the can down the road while consolidating power

or

  1. some weird legal wrangling technique of which I am not aware (I am not a lawyer and whatnot) and backroom deals behind the scenes involving Clinton and Trump inner circles.

or

  1. escalate the currently brewing toward civil war. Imagine a combination of the worst aspects of the elections of 1860, 1876, 1960, and 2000. I definitely root against this ugly outcome. History should be a guide for cooler heads to prevail.

or

  1. have (invite?) extra-terrestrial alien creatures conquer Earth out of frustration at the situation they are witnessing.

or

  1. spit some decisive religious prophecy that turns out to be true.

or

  1. declare all the world’s a stage for some other culture’s reality show on some distant planet far or laughing galaxy. They step in to rescue their showrunners or otherwise seek resolution. This was just elaborate parody of ‘West Wing’ with media script and all…Emmy awards are won and whatnot.

If none of the above, then resignation or impeachment or some other constitutional ineligibility event likely occurs.

I pick #1 above as most likely, of course, as already implied being at the top of my list.

Trump is basically saying:

“The king can do no wrong”

It’s how he views his decision-making ability.

What would it take for the issue to result in his downfall? Congress aren’t going to care enough to cop the inevitable backlash from Trump’s base if it tries to bring Trump down.

Trump’s constituents aren’t going to care; they already voted for him knowing what he’s like. They will just regard his pocket-lining as part of his unashamed “winner” persona. His nose would have to be so far into the trough they felt that he was personally affecting them before they would care. And Trump is already popularly perceived as so wealthy and lavish that it won’t be at all obvious if/when his wealth and the lavishness of his lifestyle goes up a notch due to corruption.

I think this angle has a very good chance of bringing him down. His arrogance knows no bounds, and arrogant people get sloppy and go over legal lines. There are literally hundreds of thousands of lawyers in this country that would gladly work pro bono to facilitate this, and many are better than the lawyers here has.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

So in the list of things which will Absolutely Positively Bring Down Trump ™, this is number…?

Americans learn geography and world history when they go to war. Now they get to learn about the emolument clause when Trump is elected.