Democrats On Oversight Committee Call For Investigation On Trump Conflicts

Nov 2012
11,041
9,253
nirvana
“You have the authority to launch a Committee investigation, and we are calling on you to use that power now,” Cummings and 16 other Democrats wrote. “You acted with unprecedented urgency to hold ’emergency’ hearings and issue multiple unilateral subpoenas to investigate [Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton] before the election. We ask that you show the same sense of urgency now.”




House Democrats Call For Oversight Committee Investigation Into Trumps Conflicts Of Interest.
 
Nov 2012
11,041
9,253
nirvana
Trump is not subject to the financial conflict of interest statutes.

18 U.S. Code § 202 - Definitions


Uh yes, he is.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Trump is putting himself on a course to do exactly that. The president-elect rode to office promising to “drain the swamp” and tamp down on corruption in Washington, DC. At least in the eyes of legal scholars, he instead looks poised to begin his presidency by breaking the highest law of the land for private gain.

And he will be held accountable, either by Congress, the people, or both.
 
Jun 2012
41,958
15,180
Barsoom
Uh yes, he is.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Trump is putting himself on a course to do exactly that. The president-elect rode to office promising to “drain the swamp” and tamp down on corruption in Washington, DC. At least in the eyes of legal scholars, he instead looks poised to begin his presidency by breaking the highest law of the land for private gain.

And he will be held accountable, either by Congress, the people, or both.
None of that applies to the President.
 
Sep 2015
9,379
5,220
Lehigh Valley Pa.,USA
If anybody should be investigated it is Elijah Cummings....All that SOB did on the House Benghazi Committee was disrupt stonewall and obstruct...Now this asshole thinks Trump should be investigated.....Fuck Cummings..
 
  • Like
Reactions: caconservative
Nov 2012
9,145
3,649
Chicago
“You have the authority to launch a Committee investigation, and we are calling on you to use that power now,” Cummings and 16 other Democrats wrote. “You acted with unprecedented urgency to hold ’emergency’ hearings and issue multiple unilateral subpoenas to investigate [Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton] before the election. We ask that you show the same sense of urgency now.”




House Democrats Call For Oversight Committee Investigation Into Trumps Conflicts Of Interest.
You're an idiot both the President and the Vice President have no obligation to separate their private concerns, businesses, etc. from their Governmental actions. However the rest of the Gov. employees do. Wise up and look it up. There is no conflict of interest clause in their job descriptions or rules of conflict. However Hillary as Sec. of State did violate the rules of office.-_-
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Dec 2015
18,014
17,136
Arizona
“You have the authority to launch a Committee investigation, and we are calling on you to use that power now,” Cummings and 16 other Democrats wrote. “You acted with unprecedented urgency to hold ’emergency’ hearings and issue multiple unilateral subpoenas to investigate [Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton] before the election. We ask that you show the same sense of urgency now.”




House Democrats Call For Oversight Committee Investigation Into Trumps Conflicts Of Interest.


Once again we are faced with unprecendented circumstances and this will continue under the Trump presidency. Trump himself (probably when he thought Hillary would win the presidency) is quoted as saying: “The law’s totally on my side, meaning, the president can’t have a conflict of interest,” he said.
Obviously, we all know how often Trump spews ONE thing and DOES another.
Apparently, the sitting U.S. president has (in the past) been exempt in the Foreign Emoluments Clause in the U.S. Constitution. AND here's the funny part--I laughed out loud: Congress assumed that the president could be trusted to do the right thing. Is that hilarious or what?? Well, our framers NEVER dreamed anyone like Trump would be our president.
“As a general rule, public officials in the executive branch are subject to criminal penalties if they personally and substantially participate in matters in which they (or their immediate families, business partners or associated organizations) hold financial interests,” the Congressional Research Service said in an October report. “However, because of concerns regarding interference with the exercise of constitutional duties, Congress has not applied these restrictions to the President. Consequently, there is no current legal requirement that would compel the President to relinquish financial interests because of a conflict of interest.”
BUT, I suppose IF THE GOP big dogs wanted to get rid of Trump THIS could be the way.....but they won't do a thing.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2013
2,702
1,710
United States
Uh yes, he is.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Trump is putting himself on a course to do exactly that. The president-elect rode to office promising to “drain the swamp” and tamp down on corruption in Washington, DC. At least in the eyes of legal scholars, he instead looks poised to begin his presidency by breaking the highest law of the land for private gain.

And he will be held accountable, either by Congress, the people, or both.
I wonder if you would've used the same clause against Clinton, who took money from foreign actors as part of a pay-to-play scheme while Secretary of State, and openly took donations from foreign governments to her and her husband's foundation.

Oh, no, silly me, of course you wouldn't have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person