Posted on 12/15/2016 10:27:28 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts promised on Thursday that she, along with four other Democratic senators, will introduce legislation to force President-elect Donald Trump to divest entirely from his business empire.
"Americans deserve to know that the president is doing what's best for the country — not using his office to do what's best for himself," she tweeted. "The only way for @realDonaldTrump to eliminate conflicts-of-interest is to divest his financial interests and place them in a blind trust."
The Massachusetts Democrat wrote that Sens. Ben Cardin of Maryland, Chris Coons of Delaware, Dick Durbin of Illinois, and Jeff Merkley of Oregon will introduce the legislation next month that seeks to implement the Emoluments Clause, a passage in the Constitution that forbids government officials from receiving gifts from foreign governments.
As The Washington Post reported last month, a payment from a foreign official or state-owned company to a Trump hotel or other company bearing his name may violate the clause. So could favorable legislation or treatment overseas from a government aimed at benefiting a Trump property. But, some have argued that the clause does not apply to the presidency.
After canceling a highly anticipated press conference set for Thursday on what he would do regarding his business empire, Trump announced in a series of tweets early this week that "even though I am not mandated by law to do so," he would leave his businesses prior to inauguration.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
This is exactly what I’ve been saying since the first time this foolishness started. I don’t want DJT to sell so much as a bedsheet (or show his taxes - that is personal information and none of anybody’s business) Did Washington sell off all his assets? NO. Did Jefferson sell off all his assets? NO. Did Madison sell off all his assets? NO. I don’t know what Teddy Roosevelt or FDR did but I’ll bet the farm they didn’t dispose of ANY of their many assets. I can’t overstate how much I despise these people.
Now THERE’s airheaded self-importance for you. Trump announced his pending deadline for divesting his holdings several weeks ago. Due to the workload of cabinet building, etc. the date was moved back 2 weeks. But Fauxcahontas is just whistling Maresy Doats. Trump has already done it, without any input from Fauxcahontas.
Oh, so to be president, one must have all their property seized. Nice.
Just watch everyone, this psycho will run in 2020. Don’t dismiss her threat lightly, she’s a Bernie that doesn’t come across like a nutty uncle.
So Lizzie the dizzy wants to impose a bill of attainder on Mr. Trump.
The democrats haven’t read the Constitution.
5.56mm
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts needs to divest of her fake Indian heritage....
“Good bye angry woman....It’s the cheek bones...”
No... look at the anger in her jaw....
This sounds suspiciously like a Bill of Attainder.
“No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.” US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Para 3
Bill Clinton’s SIX MONTH LATE BLIND TRUST and The Death Of Vincent Foster
Bill Clinton’s assets were not delivered to the trustee’s office on Inauguration Day. Or the day after. Or the day after that, or the next week, or the week after that, or the next month, or the month after that!
On July 20th, 1993, six months to the day after Bill Clinton vowed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, the trust declarations still languished, unfinished, on the desk of the man tasked to complete them, White House Deputy Council Vincent W. Foster.
One of the requirements imposed on the Presidency is that the personal wealth of the first family be placed in a blind trust for the term of office.
The reasons for this step should be obvious. The first family, with access to inside information, is in a position to personally profit from that information. There’s a name for that. It’s called “insider trading” and its a crime.
The reason that the trust is “blind”, with the first family unaware of just exactly how their funds are invested, is to prevent awareness of personal welfare from influencing matters of National Policy.
Since its inception, each President has had the blind trust completed and in the hands of a trustee at inauguration time., as required.
It is a minor but salient point that the blind trust is considered the President’s personal business, to be completed with his own lawyer prior to assuming office. As Vincent Foster was part of the White House staff, and paid for by the taxpayer, it was inappropriate for him to be working on Clinton’s personal business. Admittedly a technical matter, but germaine.
But, appropriate or not, Foster had the job of completing the six month late trust declarations.
What is a trust declaration? A trust declaration is a list. A list of assets. A house. A condo. These bank accounts. Those stocks. The Clintons do not claim to be exceptionally wealthy compared to other presidents. Indeed, the Clinton’s public posture is of relative poverty. Why then would a simple listing of their assets drag on for six months?
Vincent Foster, the man tasked with making up that list of assets and submitting them, delayed completion for 6 months. Why?
There is only one way that a list of assets can have a problem, and that’s if the list is incomplete, or fraudulent. As the preparer, had Vincent Foster submitted trust declarations he knew to be incomplete or fraudulent, he would face criminal prosecution were the fraud uncovered.
That the trust does not include all the Clinton assets was revealed by Carolyn Huber’s testimony regarding a file cabinet in the private residence with (among other items) paperwork on the Clinton’s “condo”, an asset which should be under the care of the trustees.
What assets would not be in the trust, and why?
Assets whoes origins don’t bear close scrutiny, for one. With recent revelations of highly questionable donations from Lippo Group, money laundering through a California Buhddist Temple, and four dead 1992 Clinton Campaign fundraisers, the reports of cash flowing from the CIA’s gun and drug operation at Mena airport gain credability. It’s certain that such tainted assets would not look good on the trust declarations. That Clinton took cash from at least two drug criminals is now proven fact.
The Clintons, in particular Hillary, have a prior history of highly questionable stock and commodities trading practices, of which “Cattle-gate” is the most famous. A lesser well known fact is that during the abortive health care reform, Hillary Clinton made a small profit by short-selling pharmaceutical stocks. That’s insider trading, its illegal, and its the very activity the blind trust (still incomplete at the time) was intended to prevent.
Knowing that the trust is fraudlent, and knowing that Foster was in a position to know of the fraud, his obvious reluctance to complete the declarations becomes understandable. Were the fraud ever revealed, Foster himself would face jailtime. Resignation would be preferable.
That Foster’s resignation would have been a problem is clear. It would have brought even more attention to the already late blind trust and what it contained, or to be more accurate, what it didn’t contain.
In the days before Foster’s murder, both Webster Hubbell and Marsha Scott had long private meetings with Vincent Foster. Marsha admitted to the press that Vincent was struggling with a decision. What that decision was is never explained, as her entire FBI interview was redacted on the grounds of “National Security”.
+1 ^^^ this
Do you really think the idiots in the Massachusetts legislature wouldn’t have appointed her anyway? She’s a nut. Fits right in with the Dem party there. They didn’t need the 17th.
Answer: Elizabeth Warren
Question: Who is even more unlikable than Hillary Clinton?
IMHO, Trump is required to set up a blind trust for his businesses.
What ever Trump does for the Warren it will never be enough... if he disowned his children she would want him to murder them next. Hatred runs deep is the fake Indian...
No, there is no requirement tart a president put his assets into a blind trust. It may simply things for one, but no law requires it.
Trump made his Money and then he went to Washington D.C.
Hillary went to Washington D.C. and then she made her Money.
Ick, she needs to schedule a teeth cleaning.
how about she get kicked out of senate for being a fraud Indian?
Trump made it very clear during the campaign that he was planning on having his children run his business should he win (which they couldn’t do if he places the business in a blind trust). Where were Warren’s complaints then? He built something productive and successful for his children to eventually take over. It’s enough that he’s removing himself from personal involvement in the business.
That he is also guaranteeing that the Trump organization will take on no new projects while he is in office (which will be a sacrifice for his sons running the organization) is going well beyond what he needs to do. If there are no new projects, then there should be no discussion of bribery via business deals or whatever Warren is afraid of.
well since this seems as though is going to be a common lib talking point, the obvious first question is, is it against the law for a sitting president to own a business and what are the precedents?
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.