Just in from law professor Zephyr Teachout:
Diane:
Donald Trump is not selling his businesses. Therefore, he will be violating the foreign bribery/emoluments clause of the Constitution.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 specifically prohibits anyone holding office in our government to receive either “emoluments” or gifts from foreign states. Emoluments, in this part of the Constitution, means “payments.”
Trump’s lawyer, during today’s press conference, misinterpreted the plain meaning of the emoluments clause of the Constitution in a way that makes the phrase “emoluments” equivalent to “gifts” and therefore superfluous.
We have no reason to trust Trump on this. A bribe from Kings Louis XIV to Charles II for war neutrality between their countries was uncovered by parliamentary investigation, and the same will be required here: Congress must exercise its basic Constitutional responsibility and refuse Trump’s ability to accept any foreign payments absent full disclosure, review, and approval.
Thousands of people signed our petition yesterday to support Elizabeth Warren’s new bill to take on presidential financial corruption. Now we need to call Congress and ask our representatives what they’re going to do about Trump’s violations of the emoluments clause of the Constitution.
Can you call your Member of Congress and ask them what they’re going to do about Trump’s financial conflicts of interest?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Think of it as a learning experience for all. Who the hell had heard of “emoluments” before. I would have thought it was some form of detergent. Now all righteous Americans have the opportunity to learn what it means.
LikeLike
I thought it was after dinner mints for moles.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, Yess YES!
He is not merely serial liar, a fraudster and a charlatan, a pervert!
He is a criminal and a TRAITOR,who is shredding our CONSTITUTION.
Now, let’s throw him to the courts — we the people need to SUE, to prevent his inauguration…even if it means Pence becomes president.
Trump is certifiable, not merely incompetent.
WHO WILL STAND UP AND SAY THE EMPEROR IS NOT WEARING ANY CLOTHES?
This man must NOT be inaugurated!
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/11/21/the-emoluments-clause-is-donald-trump-violating-its-letter-or-spirit
LikeLike
After watching and listening to today’s circus like conference involving continued fake news…it pretty much sounded like legally Trump…or should we say his sons who will be taking over completely for the business, will NOT be doing any further foreign deals for the duration of his presidency. Supposedly above and beyond required by his position by law…That was how I understood the conference as presented by his legal representative.
LikeLike
You don’t need a new “foreign deal” to receive payments under an existing “foreign deal,” (otherwise known as a contract).
LikeLike
Yup!
No conflicts when his sons own the business!
That settles that.
LikeLike
Thus openminded believes the lawyer Trump paid to address his legal issues.
Sounds credible to me??
LikeLike
Conflict of interest doesn’t apply to POTUS.
LikeLike
This isn’t about the conflict-of-interest statute. It’s about the Constitution.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s what Nixon said.
LikeLiked by 1 person
excellent comparison
LikeLike
“Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.”
Donald Trump Jr. 2008
The 2008 sale of a mansion in Palm Beach to Russian oligarch Dmitry Rybolovlev.
Partnering with Aras Agalarov, the “Trump of Russia,” on a project in Moscow in 2013 that didn’t come to fruition.
“Hosting the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013, when he still owned it, earning a cut of the money spent to lure it there — including some from Agalarov. ….” Washington Post.
“During a Republican debate in November, Trump said that “I got to know him very well because we were both on “60 Minutes,” we were stablemates, and we did very well that night.”
” In 2014, Trump said he met Putin and that he spoke “directly and indirectly” with him.”
Washington Post
sO WHEN WAS HE FULL OF IT
LikeLike
The really sad thing about this is that although the Emoluments Clause’s language is fairly clear (as far as the Constitution goes), although it is plainly designed to address the exact situation that Trump is in here, and although what’s at stake is arguably the most fundamental principle to the proper functioning of representative government, Trump probably will not be seriously challenged. There may not be any precedent for this situation, and Trump is trying to exploit that fact. But often, the principles that have no precedents in case law are the most obvious and uncontroversial ones, precisely because the principle is so universally accepted that everyone models their ethical conduct to conform with it. Much is made of the distinction between ethics and law. But Trump’s complete disregard for ethical norms may end up validating his disregard for the law here.
LikeLike
I wish I were still teaching government. I’d use this in my class.
LikeLike
Somewhere in the links to these posts, I read of a 3rd-tier engineer in one of Reagan’s cabinet depts who applied to do consulting work during off-hours for the Mexican govt. He was denied, under the emoluments clause.
LikeLike
I’m not a fan of DT, but Killery has received billions into her foundation for years without anything happening. Russia also received 20% of our uranium that way, through her while she was SOS.
LikeLike
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/
Wrong
LikeLike
Doesn’t matter.
LikeLike
Anyone who uses the sobriquet “Killery” is on instant ignore. It’s not clever, it’s not new, it’s very trite.
LikeLike
alphawolf1, you are a fan of Putin. You troll here, which tells us all exactly how nervous Putin is that the guy who he can’t wait to blackmail into doing his dirty work is being looked at more closely.
LikeLike
“Although he’s never made this claim—and indeed often forced us to think about it more than we want to—Trump’s sex life is his own affair. But his personal and family business ties to foreign autocrats—whether Russian, Chinese, or Emirati—should have been fully aired long before now. Today’s Twitterstorm doesn’t change that. Nor should it deny even Donald Trump the same presumption of innocence any American would be entitled to (though I wouldn’t want to argue the point with any of the Central Park Five).
And if the most serious charge proves true? If Trump or one of his employees did knowingly conspire with the agents of a hostile power to influence the American election in exchange for promises regarding US foreign policy? Trump’s mentor Roy Cohn sent the Rosenbergs to the electric chair for a lot less.”
https://www.thenation.com/article/americans-deserve-to-know-the-specific-allegations-on-trump-and-russia/
LikeLike