Posted on 01/04/2024 9:49:21 AM PST by bitt
House Democrats accused Trump of taking millions in foreign bribes while president after a seven-year investigation in an effort to distract from Biden’s crimes and impeachment inquiry.
Democrats, once again, accused Trump of violating the Constitution’s emoluments clause.
The emoluments clause is a provision that bars US presidents from accepting gifts from foreign governments without permission from Congress first.
House Democrats targeted Trump and accused him of violating the very rarely litigated emoluments clause of the US Constitution by claiming his luxury hotels which, at the time, were blocks from the White House were evidence Trump was receiving benefits.
“It is true that $7.8 million is almost certainly only a fraction of Trump’s harvest of unlawful foreign state money, but this figure in itself is a scandal and a decisive spur to action,” Ranking member of the House Oversight Committee Rep. Jamie Raskin said in the 156-page report.
USA Today reported:
Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released a 156-page report Thursday morning accusing Trump of exploiting the presidency to financially benefit himself and members of his family. Trump’s businesses, according to the report, received at least $7.8 million from corrupt and authoritarian governments including China, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
The report is the culmination of a nearly seven-year investigation. It says records and documents obtained by House Oversight Democrats reveal “a stunning web of millions of dollars in payments made by foreign governments and their agents directly to Trump-owned businesses, while President Trump was in the White House.”
Among the report’s findings and records available to the committee, China made the most payments to Trump’s businesses during his tenure, spending more than $5.5 million at Trump Tower in New York and two of Trump’s hotels in Washington and Las Vegas.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Yes, he signed he documents removing himself to his kids. It was on national TV
No there wasn’t. However he signed everything over to his kids and removed himself. It was on national TV.
House democrats doing their old duck didge and spin gig attempting to pull Biden out of his hell hole he created for everyone.
They nave change the stench just becomes greater.
I meant to say Yes there was a blind trust. All of Trump’s assets, including his cash holdings and real estate properties, will be placed into a trust for the entirety of his presidency. This info from Jan 2017 from a statement from his attorney.
It wasn’t a blind trust. Eric said he gave regular updates to his father and he was able to receive profits if the people running the trust, his sons, deemed it to be necessary.
May have been a trust, but it wasn’t blind.
Show us the evidence.
Trump had n copntrol over his businesses during the presidency.
This becae ppaon after Eric , Don Jr, and others testified before Congressional Committees various times.
But I reckon that does not matter to these wilting . losiner commies.
Soon we will be rid of them.
Gobble gobble slurp.
This became apparent after Eric , Don Jr, and others testified before Congressional Committees various times.
But I reckon that does not matter to these wilting , loser commies.
Soon we will be rid of them.
There was a court case early on in Trump’s Presidency about this issue. Judge tossed it out in a New York minute.
“Biden provided no apparent goods or services for the money he received“
This could be easily cleared up if the Biden family could provide evidence of any type of product they delivered.
Which leads one to believe
1) there was no product. This really was a bribe.
2) There is a product and they’re waiting for the time to provide such evidence when they get most benefit and reallly make the opposition look bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.