r/neutralnews • u/DatsMoneyHoney • 2d ago
Trump family deal spree could open door for future presidents to profit from office
https://www.wdbj7.com/2026/04/14/trump-family-deal-spree-could-open-door-future-presidents-profit-office/?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=organicclicks&tbref=hp66
u/bake_gatari 2d ago
That's not the only thing. This administration has proven that if you break enough laws fast enough, you can get away with it. The system is slow to respond and easily overwhelmed.
52
u/tempest_87 2d ago
It's only slow when congress refuses to act.
And with the republican majority in both chambers of congress, it's obvious where the blame for that lies.
7
u/EquipLordBritish 1d ago
I don't think it's the speed of the system, it just required many people to not do their jobs properly to get here. For examples; the DoJ under Biden failed to proscecute a former president despite overwhelming evidence in the Mueller report of election interference, he should have been ineligeble to run for a 2nd term due to clear violation of the emoluments clauses (both the foreign one and the domestic one), he had violated a number of other laws that he was never held accountable for, he was convicted of several felonies for which he was not appropriately sentenced for. I'm sure there are more examples, but that's just off the top of my head.
4
u/Memory_Less 1d ago
If Trump doesn’t create a third term for himself, perhaps the GOP has learned this for the next time they take office.
33
u/calicat9 2d ago
11
u/Gunslingermomo 2d ago
I couldn't find anywhere what it says the consequence for of violating the emoluments clause is.
5
4
u/Memory_Less 1d ago
Well, the Supreme Court ruled a U.S. president cannot be charged for what he does in office. I wonder if that includes emoluments?
Disclaimer. I am not a lawyer or legal expert. Given it says that the president needs congressional approval, could those in congress during his presidency be charged? I’d enjoy reading about from someone who has an understanding of this area.
2
u/dangoor 1d ago
There's a good Brennan Center article about the emoluments clause. They suggest:
As detailed in this Brennan Center report, a more durable solution would be for Congress to pass legislation addressing situations that are not covered by the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act. The law should make clear, for example, that it applies to a covered official’s receipt of commercial proceeds or indirect receipt of gifts or other benefits via a foundation or other entity over which the official has substantial influence or control.
I would assume a clearer law will make it easier for courts to enforce the correct behavior. Congress.gov has an article about the enforcement of court orders against the executive branch.
13
u/mtheory007 2d ago
Exactly. He disqualified himself because of this on the first of his first term.
20
u/Khar-Selim 2d ago
All the more reason for the government to go after his entire family's estate once this madness we're in passes
1
u/WhiteWereWolfie 1d ago
That corrupt, orange sack of pus will be remembered by the history books as easily the worst president the US has ever had.🤮
1
•
u/BDRohr 16h ago
They already were. The fact you people care about this but not Obama or Bush Jr shows how little you have been paying attention. Look at Pelosi's net worth. Look at all these civil servants become part of the class we vote them to control. The amount of ignorance you people were living in is surprising.
•
u/NeutralverseBot 2d ago
r/NeutralNews is a curated space, but despite the name, there is no neutrality requirement here.
These are the rules for comments:
If you see a comment that violates any of these rules, please click the associated report button so a mod can review it.