Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Football team’s stay at Doral resort could bolster lawsuit targeting Trump
Wash Post via MSN.com ^ | 1/9/2017 | Jonathan O'Connell

Posted on 01/09/2018 8:52:53 AM PST by dirtboy

A week-long stay by the University of Wisconsin football team at a Florida resort owned by President Trump is providing new potential fodder for a lawsuit alleging that the president's private business has put him in violation of the Constitution.

During a visit to Miami to play in last month's Orange Bowl, the University of Wisconsin — a public university — put up about 250 players, athletic department staff, senior university officials and board members at the Trump National Doral golf resort.

The university's stay may provide new ammunition to the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia, which sued Trump in June for allegedly violating anti-corruption clauses in the Constitution by accepting millions in payments and benefits from foreign and state governments to his private company.

In an interview, Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D) said that the football team's stay goes against the Constitution's domestic emoluments clause, which prohibits the president from accepting benefits or financial rewards from state governments.

"Something like that is a problem, without question," Frosh said in an interview. "It's another example of how the potential for corruption is enormous."

[snip]

The Doral resort was not selected by the school but by the Orange Bowl Committee, which organizes the game and signed a multiyear deal with Doral in 2014, before Trump ran for president.

(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: emoluments; emolumentsclause; golf; nothingburger; thestupidburns; trumpworld
I guess they aren't going to let the facts get in the way here.
1 posted on 01/09/2018 8:52:53 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

It was on a contract signed 4 years ago.


2 posted on 01/09/2018 8:54:53 AM PST by mplc51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Another example of Democrats acting like vindictive little children.


3 posted on 01/09/2018 8:55:08 AM PST by Pravious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Dems worrying about corruption. No need to do any core exercises, plenty of laughing should do the trick


4 posted on 01/09/2018 8:55:23 AM PST by PSUGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Donate the profits to a pro-life charity and get double the rage from liberals.


5 posted on 01/09/2018 8:55:51 AM PST by LukeL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

This issue has already been thrown out of court once, but hey, let’s waste state taxpayer funds to attack a political strawman.


6 posted on 01/09/2018 8:57:44 AM PST by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

So, did people who bought Obama’s book(s) after he got elected violate the constitution? The vast majority of the book sales were after he go elected.


7 posted on 01/09/2018 8:59:24 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

“I guess they aren’t going to let the facts get in the way here.”

Got it in one comment.../thread...LOL

Watching the morons splutter and stammer when such facts are thrown in their face is worth the price of admission. It certainly makes it easier when such baloney makes it to my Facebook page so I can sort the wheat from the chaff. More than President or Chief Executive, Trump now qualifies for the title of Chief Catalyst because he causes change.


8 posted on 01/09/2018 9:01:11 AM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I don’t think you even have to be much of a Trump supporter to think that this issue over a 4 year old contract is a very feeble matter.


9 posted on 01/09/2018 9:03:20 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mplc51

It was on a contract signed 4 years ago.


Because. Russians!!!


10 posted on 01/09/2018 9:05:17 AM PST by Flick Lives (https://goo.gl/GxGKQh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion; dp0622

Ping.


11 posted on 01/09/2018 9:08:28 AM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

The emoluments clause doesn’t prohibit the President from owning a private business.

Only Democrats seem to think making a profit should be a crime.

They can’t argue against Trump’s policies so they argue with straight face he is illicitly benefiting from his businesses.

This is the party of no ideas and no alternative in 2018.


12 posted on 01/09/2018 9:12:52 AM PST by goldstategop ((In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

i guess these leftists never stop to think about how much this kind of thing makes them look like a-holes to normal people.


13 posted on 01/09/2018 9:26:37 AM PST by jospehm20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Trump now qualifies for the title of Chief Catalyst because he causes change.

Would that be...

Wait for it...

Trump Change?

14 posted on 01/09/2018 9:29:51 AM PST by rjsimmon (The Tree of Liberty Thirsts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The emoluments clause doesn’t prohibit the President from owning a private business.

Exactly so. The Constitution clearly states that the President shall not receive payment from the US government or any of the State governments. Says nothing about payment for private business or holdings.

15 posted on 01/09/2018 9:36:20 AM PST by rjsimmon (The Tree of Liberty Thirsts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Nothing in the Constitution, a document these liberals have never read, states that a president cannot engage in commerce while president.


16 posted on 01/09/2018 9:38:11 AM PST by CodeToad (CWII is coming. Arm Up! They Are!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: circlecity
"So, did people who bought Obama’s book(s) after he got elected violate the constitution? The vast majority of the book sales were after he got elected."

Good catch. And many of the purchases were undoubtedly made by public libraries.
17 posted on 01/09/2018 10:21:59 AM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rjsimmon

Very nice, J Jonah...oh wait, that was JKsimmons. Oh well, still a pretty sweet take.

Seriesly, though, there are some beautiful, not-to-be-missed spots in Wisconsin and Minnesota. Hope you can complete the 50.


18 posted on 01/09/2018 11:31:22 AM PST by gnickgnack2 ( Another bad day for Trump, he only got seven major things accomplished .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

::did people who bought Obama’s book(s) after he got elected violate the constitution::

No - with the logic used here, HE would have violated the constitution for selling his books after he became - ugh! still hate to say it - whatever he became - destroyer of the U. S. fits!


19 posted on 01/09/2018 3:51:17 PM PST by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson