**Official Trump Conflict of Interest Thread**

[spurraider21]

so trumps ethics plan regarding his business is that his sons will run it and they pinky promise to the country never to talk to him about it

cool

[z0sa]

Elizabeth Warren Drops The Hammer On Trump With Bill To Implement the Emoluments Clause

Sen. Elizabeth Warren and a slew of Democrats are taking aim at Donald Trump with new legislation that would force him to release his tax returns and divest himself of potential financial conflicts of interest.

The legislation led the Presidential Conflicts of Interest Act of 2017 would require the president and vice president to comply with the Emoluments Clause of the Cons ution by requiring them to release their tax returns and divest themselves of any personal financial conflicts of interest.

It would also require cabinet appointees to recuse themselves if any potential presidential conflicts of interest came before their agencies.

Sen. Warren said,

“The American people deserve to know that the President of the United States is working to do what’s best for the country – not using his office to do what’s best for himself and his businesses.

The only way for President-elect Trump to truly eliminate conflicts-of-interest is to divest his financial interests by placing them in a blind trust.

This has been the standard for previous presidents, and our bill makes clear the continuing expectation that President-elect Trump do the same.”

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/01/...iticus+USA+%29

Any ideas on how Trash will tweet insults at Liz?

Progressive es kicking Trash in his tiny balls (existence unproven)

That's a no brainer. What are its chances of even getting out of committee though? Btw he has kids... you do know that right?

[boutons_deux]

Btw he has kids

so?

[Thread]

so trumps ethics plan regarding his business is that his sons will run it and they pinky promise to the country never to talk to him about it

cool

Good enough for me.

[boutons_deux]

...

[spurraider21]

Good enough for me.

I'll just bet it is.

[Thread]

I'll just bet it is.

& it'll be good enough for "them." All "they" can do is block his appointments. And the line of them is like around the block.

LM gets his royal ass kicked out the door last summer and now is back with a gun lookin' for payback.

Big deal. All he lost was a U.S. Presidency and every one he ever runs for---for the rest of his life. Whoop-de-doo. He can be still Senator for the rest of his life. Like Ted Kennedy. Big deal there. Drowns that Kopechne girl and all it cost him was the U.S. Presidency. She was still dead and her parents let her go for a bank draft.

Just shows ta go ya.

[boutons_deux]

Chaffetz made it clear this week that not only is he unlikely to investigate the myriad of likely conflicts of interest that Trump brings with him to office, he will instead lick Dear Leader’s boots, by using his power as the chair of the House Oversight Committee to harass and intimidate critics of the Trump administration.

Chaffetz is threatening to subpoena Walter Shaub, director of the Office of Government Ethics,

because Shaub correctly described Trump’s efforts to reduce his conflicts of interest as “meaningless.”

That opinion was issued after Trump’s lawyer Sheri Dillon gave a lengthy rundown of Trump’s plan, so any fool who was listening learned plenty enough to realize that

the Trump plan to end conflicts of interest is to talk a lot and do nothing that actually divests him of the conflicts.

“We need the Office of Government Ethics to act ethically.

Ironically, that’s not what they’re doing,” Chaffetz said in a statement that is so devoid of any relationship to honesty that it once again makes you wonder if the Republican Party is in fact a comic book-style international supervillain organization like Hydra.

The real irony here is that Chaffetz is supposed to be heading a committee that roots out corruption in government.

Rather than lift a finger

to investigate Trump’s business interests or

his purported links to Russian espionage or

his involvement in the scam Trump University or

the bribery scandal involving former Florida attorney general and soon-to-be White House employee Pam Bondi,

Chaffetz is using his power to intimidate a public official for offering a reasonable comment based on publicly available evidence that Chaffetz himself is free to look at, if he had a moment’s interest in actually rooting out government corruption.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-pol...ate-dissenters

But Chaffetz still intends to keep "investigating" Hillary's emails.

[boutons_deux]

Federal Ethics Chief Wants Meeting With GOP Oversight Chair To Be Public

The director of the Office of Government Ethics has requested that a private interview with House Oversight Committee leadership and staff be held in public, given “the significant public interest” in government ethics since Election Day.

In a letter dated Monday, Shaub responded to House Oversight Committee Chair Jason Chaffetz’s (R-UT) request for him to meet with committee leadership and staff in response to the office's public statements, including a series of bizarre tweets Shaub’s office had sent urging President-elect Donald Trump to divest from his business interests.

A day before Chaffetz sent Shaub the interview request, the OGE chief delivered a speech at the Brookings Ins ution that was harshly critical of Trump’s plan to separate himself from his businesses, calling it “wholly inadequate.”

Shaub noted in his letter that over the weekend Chaffetz’s office had “modified your original request and proposed a private meeting with you and the Ranking Member and your respective staffs.”

Chaffetz had said Sunday that he would not go on a "fishing expedition" to look for Trump's potential conflicts of interest.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...+%28TPMNews%29

[RandomGuy]

This is a false statement. Simple biology proves your analogy wrong.

"nuh-uh" isn't really a critique, or even a decent rebuttal.

How does simple biology prove me wrong?

[boutons_deux]

...

[boutons_deux]

...

[boutons_deux]

...

[RandomGuy]

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...erests/508382/

Crib sheet gets longer.

Regardless, legality does not imply propriety. Unless Trump acts to put actual distance between himself and his business ventures—and today’s press conference seems to indicate that he won’t—these questions will likely continue throughout his time in the Oval Office. Already, the director of the Office of Government Ethics, Michael Shaub, has declared Trump’s plans insufficient, remarking, “I don’t think dives ure is too high a price to pay to be the president of the United States,” and a number of Senate Democrats have introduced legislation that would force Trump to divest or face impeachment. Below is an attempt to catalogue the more clear-cut examples of conflicts of interest that have emerged so far; the most recent entries appear at the top.

Those Indonesian Politicians
That Emirati Businessman
That Virginia Vineyard
That Las Vegas Labor Dispute
That Kuwaiti Event
Those Certificates of Dives ure
That Carrier Deal
That Blind-Trust Issue
Those Fannie and Freddie Investments
That Phone Call With Taiwan
That Deutsche Bank Debt
That Secret Service Detail
That Property in Georgia (the Country)
That Phone Call With Erdogan
That Hotel in Washington, D.C.
That Argentinian Office Building
Those Companies in Saudi Arabia
That British Wind Farm
Those Indian Business Partners
That Envoy From the Philippines

Article skips over the fact that Turkey has already arrested a Trump business partner in an attempt to influence his actions.

[RandomGuy]

If the Atlantic isn't to your taste:

Donald Trump: A list of potential conflicts of interest

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38069298

[RandomGuy]

SATURDAY, JAN 14, 2017 05:30 AM CST
This week in Donald Trump’s conflicts of interest: By divest, you mean meet with real estate investors, right?

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/14/this...vestors-right/

[SnakeBoy]

"nuh-uh" isn't really a critique, or even a decent rebuttal.

How does simple biology prove me wrong?

Seriously? You need me to explain to you why a fetus isn't biologically analogous to other parts of a woman's body? Here...
http://www.slate.com/articles/double...he_fetus_.html

The abortion issue is about at what point does a person receive fundamental human rights and science has nothing to do with that, so stop trying to use it to explain your position.

[RandomGuy]

Seriously? You need me to explain to you why a fetus isn't biologically analogous to other parts of a woman's body? Here...
http://www.slate.com/articles/double...he_fetus_.html

The abortion issue is about at what point does a person receive fundamental human rights and science has nothing to do with that, so stop trying to use it to explain your position.

Nothing in your article rebuts my contention that fetus' cannot survive outside a womans body, and in that way are analogous to any other tissue.

So it is safe to assume that you cannot.

The point then stands.

Why then, do you want to force women to remain pregnant?

[boutons_deux]

Trump biofuel proposals echo those of backer Icahn

Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump on Thursday appeared to weigh into a debate over a controversial U.S. biofuels program with a proposal that would back the position of billionaire investor Carl Icahn, one of his wealthiest backers.

In a factsheet on economic policy, the Trump campaign slammed a system of buying and selling biofuel blending credits that it said was bankrupting smaller oil refiners.

they echoed the position of Icahn, who recently called on federal regulators to level the playing field in the credits system to favor independent refiners like CVR Energy Inc (CVI.N), in which Icahn is the majority shareholder.

Icahn's office did not return an email and call when asked to comment.

"These regulations will give Big Oil an oligopoly by destroying the small to mid-size refineries," the factsheet on Trump's economic policies said.

"These requirements have turned out to be impossible to meet and are bankrupting many of the small and midsize refineries in this country,"

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN11M075

[spurraider21]

Nothing in your article rebuts my contention that fetus' cannot survive outside a womans body, and in that way are analogous to any other tissue.

So it is safe to assume that you cannot.

The point then stands.

Why then, do you want to force women to remain pregnant?

I don't think it's a fair comparison either and I'm in the pro choice camp.

If you had a brain dead comatose patient, but knew with near certainty that after a few months of maintenance he will wake up with no brain damage... Would it be ethical to pull the plug?

[Chinook]

I don't think it's a fair comparison either and I'm in the pro choice camp.

If you had a brain dead comatose patient, but knew with near certainty that after a few months of maintenance he will wake up with no brain damage... Would it be ethical to pull the plug?

Well does the brain-dead guy play the violin?

[DMC]

You're about to see something you've never seen before. We've never seen abuse on this scale (not since the 1800's at least) as we're about to witness.

Proof by prognostication is prevalent here. Just predict something and use your prediction as evidence.

[SnakeBoy]

Nothing in your article rebuts my contention that fetus' cannot survive outside a womans body, and in that way are analogous to any other tissue.

So it is safe to assume that you cannot.

The point then stands.

Why then, do you want to force women to remain pregnant?

I'm pro choice dumb . A fetus is not biologically analogous to other tissue of a woman's body. RandomGuy is a science denier.

[RandomGuy]

I'm pro choice dumb . A fetus is not biologically analogous to other tissue of a woman's body. RandomGuy is a science denier.

Okaaay, you are pro-choice.

You also seem to be missing my point, that is on you, not me. Maybe I can make it more plain.

A fetus is a group of cells entirely dependent on the mothers body to sustain itself, and in that way are analogous to any other tissue.

LOL Snakeboy


"Your point is bad, because REASONS!, science denier!"

Seriously? That is what you are going with?

C'mon man, you can do better.

[RandomGuy]

UPDATED: Trump’s Visa Ban Apparent Conflict of Interest

President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order Friday that suspended the entry of refugees into the United States for 120 days, and barred any form of entry from seven predominantly Muslim countries for 90 days.

The seven predominantly Muslim countries are Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. However, the list excludes Saudi Arabia.

The Order creates what might appear to be, but for which no evidence exists, a conflict of interest, as none of the countries involved in these executive orders include countries where the Trump Organization does business. The Trump Organization has business in over 20 countries across the globe, including Saudi Arabia.

Trump justified the Order by saying, “we want to ensure that we are not admitting into the country the very threats our soldiers are fighting overseas. We only want to admit those into our country who will support our country, and deeply love our people.”

While Trump has officially stepped down from every other office he holds, which number over 400, this does not necessarily separate him completely from the possibility of using his power to protect his business interests. His appointment of his sons, Eric and Don Jr., to head the Trump Organization, has raised some eyebrows.

Many libertarians have been su ious of Trump, due to the possibility of discrimination on the basis of religion. Trump has also stated that persecuted Christian refugees would get priority in entering the country.

“If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible,” said Trump in an interview with CBN News. “And the reason that was so unfair, everybody was persecuted in all fairness, but they were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.”

Just prior to signing the Order, Trump said that we must “never forget the lessons of 9/11, nor the heroes who lost their lives at the Pentagon,” which contributes to speculation that he might be abusing his power, as 15 of the 19 9/11 attackers came from Saudi Arabia.

Editorial update: This article was originally worded in such a way which implied that Donald Trump was, in fact, abusing the power of the office, when no evidence – and merely coincidence, currently – exists for such a claim. The article has been updated to emphasize that this is merely speculation based on the exclusion of Saudi Arabia and Trump’s comments about the September 11 attacks.

https://beinglibertarian.com/trumps-...tion-business/

Going back to the OP.

The hits keep on rolling.

Everything this guy does will force you to second guess whether his business interests are first in his calculations, or ours are.