The First Plastic First Family

[_moksha]

You think a bunch of people are going to join the club to rub elbows with the President? What?

The trade delegations from many nations will now covet Mar-a-Lago membership. The Russian Embassy might have a permanent posting there. The membership fee might double again to $400,000 in a few months if there are enough new applications. The Trump's are not ones to pass on business opportunities.

[_Some Schmo]

Tell me what evidence there is that the folders were empty or the papers were blank. I've seen the assertion, I haven't seen the evidence that supports it.

The folders themselves were blank. He threw a bunch of folders with a bunch of reams of paper onto a huge pile on a table and said, "here's the paperwork." Whether they were blank or not is somewhat irrelevant since he wouldn't let anyone see any of them to verify he'd done what he said he'd done.

You can say, well then, you can't prove it, and you'd be right, but you also be demonstrating your own strange credulity in deference to Drumpf.

I'm getting a little sick of Drumpf running obvious cons and his loyalists playing idiotic intellectual games to excuse him. He's a damned conman, for Christ's sake.

[_Chap]

You think a bunch of people are going to join the club to rub elbows with the President? What?

The trade delegations from many nations will now covet Mar-a-Lago membership. The Russian Embassy might have a permanent posting there. The membership fee might double again to $400,000 in a few months if there are enough new applications. The Trump's are not ones to pass on business opportunities.

The little penguin tells it how it is!

Moksha 2020!!!!

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Tell me what evidence there is that the folders were empty or the papers were blank. I've seen the assertion, I haven't seen the evidence that supports it.

I literally posted an upclose of the folders showing they were blank. We also had a corporate lawyer discuss the particulars and why those folders were just a prop.

C'mon.

- Doc

[_Xenophon]

Tell me what evidence there is that the folders were empty or the papers were blank. I've seen the assertion, I haven't seen the evidence that supports it.

I literally posted an upclose of the folders showing they were blank. We also had a corporate lawyer discuss the particulars and why those folders were just a prop.

C'mon.

- Doc

Wouldn't it have been just as easy for Trump to show us the actual information. It's like him claiming there is nothing damaging in his tax returns while also steadfastly refusing to release them. Maybe there is nothing there and maybe there is a bunch of great information in the folders but since he lacks transparency... we are filled with doubt.

[_subgenius]

If I recall correctly, President of the US is the one political office not constrained by conflicts of interest, though most, if not all other Presidents made it a point to avoid conflicts of interest, or, at least, the appearance thereof. So we can't legally go after him for mere conflicts of interest. Going after him violation of the emolument clause would seem to be valid, however.

So, if a foreign government official bought a copy of "The Audacity of Hope" after Obama was sworn in, then he was guilty of the same violation? (yes, Obama receives royalties from book sales)
http://www.newsweek.com/whats-going-oba ... ies-211436

Glad you held such a Constitutional high ground for the last 8 years, otherwise you straw-grasping would just look foolish

Tell me what evidence there is that the folders were empty or the papers were blank. I've seen the assertion, I haven't seen the evidence that supports it.

I literally posted an upclose of the folders showing they were blank. We also had a corporate lawyer discuss the particulars and why those folders were just a prop.

C'mon.

- Doc

well, that is just a flat out lie. You posted no such picture nor does any such picture exist...what you actually posted was some moron's tweet (from his car) that showed a folder, a closed folder, with no reasonable view of whether the paper was blank, and this moron captioned "its blank"...
you considering this as being "evidence" is either intentionally deceptive or ignorant...you chose

[_Some Schmo]

Wouldn't it have been just as easy for Trump to show us the actual information. It's like him claiming there is nothing damaging in his tax returns while also steadfastly refusing to release them. Maybe there is nothing there and maybe there is a bunch of great information in the folders but since he lacks transparency... we are filled with doubt.

Exactly.

And even if he were to show us that he'd legally handed his businesses over to his sons, that doesn't cut it ethics-wise. The US Ethics Committee said so. And what was the response? To attack the Ethics Committee, in typical juvenile Drumpf fashion.

[_Chap]

If I recall correctly, President of the US is the one political office not constrained by conflicts of interest, though most, if not all other Presidents made it a point to avoid conflicts of interest, or, at least, the appearance thereof. So we can't legally go after him for mere conflicts of interest. Going after him violation of the emolument clause would seem to be valid, however.

So, if a foreign government official bought a copy of "The Audacity of Hope" after Obama was sworn in, then he was guilty of the same violation? (yes, Obama receives royalties from book sales)
http://www.newsweek.com/whats-going-oba ... ies-211436

Glad you held such a Constitutional high ground for the last 8 years, otherwise you straw-grasping would just look foolish

Somehow, I don't think that Obama's book royalties from volumes purchased by foreign princes or potentates were remotely of the order of magnitude of what Trump stands to gain from (say) getting permission to build a new hotel in a foreign country, or hiring out rooms in his Washington hotel for functions run by foreign governments. (Do you know the maxim de minimis non curat lex?)

Now Trump is president, he is going to start winning bigly from the business that will be put his way by a large number of foreign powers anxious to win his favor. What would be astonishing would be if he did not make large gains from such sources.

[_Xenophon]

Somehow, I don't think that Obama's book royalties from volumes purchased by foreign princes or potentates were remotely of the order of magnitude of what Trump stands to gain from (say) getting permission to build a new hotel in a foreign country, or hiring out rooms in his Washington hotel for functions run by foreign governments. (Do you know the maxim de minimis non curat lex?)

Now Trump is president, he is going to start winning bigly from the business that will be put his way by a large number of foreign powers anxious to win his favor. What would be astonishing would be if he did not make large gains from such sources.

It isn't exactly apples to apples because it remains to be seen exactly how much President Trump stands to earn as president but here is a breakdown of what Obama earned while in office ($7.5m from royalties) vs what Trump makes in a year from his various properties (data from 2016). But even a 1% increase on his properties would be substantially more. This again raises the reasoning behind why blind trusts are important.

Obama breakdown (second infographic for presidential timeframe only): http://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2017/01/20/how-barack-obama-has-made-20-million-since-arriving-in-washington/#5619cb4d4d48

Trump 2016 breakdown: http://moneynation.com/how-much-money-d ... in-a-year/

[_Res Ipsa]

You aren't understanding what I am asking, Chap, so knock off the mockery. What's the connection between the winter white house and the increased membership rates? What's the rationale for upping the rates? You think a bunch of people are going to join the club to rub elbows with the President? What?

That's what I'm asking. Would you like to answer my questions? I don't need a primer on what Trump owns and how he built his fortune. I'm from the EC for pete sakes, like I don't already know.

Exactly. People will join for the chance to rub elbows with the most powerful man in the country.

Tell me what evidence there is that the folders were empty or the papers were blank. I've seen the assertion, I haven't seen the evidence that supports it.

I literally posted an upclose of the folders showing they were blank. We also had a corporate lawyer discuss the particulars and why those folders were just a prop.

C'mon.

- Doc

In the course of my career, I've reviewed thousands of law firm files. Not a single one ever consisted of loose papers in blank file folders. Papers are secured to the folders using Acco fasteners so they stay in order and can't fall out. Documents in folders are either tabbed or separated by dividers. Folders are always labeled with client and matter and something that describes the contents. Whatever those things were, they weren't law firm files.