Red Faced, Trump Backs Out Of Using Doral Resort As Host Of G7 summit

[Skwim]

.

​

"Attention shoppers, 'Art of the Deal' can now be found in the Half-Price Bin at the rear of the store." ..

"Following widespread bipartisan criticism, President Donald Trump said Saturday his Doral resort in Florida would not host next year's Group of Seven summit of world leaders after all.

"Based on both Media & Democrat Crazed and Irrational Hostility, we will no longer consider Trump National Doral, Miami, as the Host Site for the G-7 in 2020," he tweeted. "We will begin the search for another site, including the possibility of Camp David, immediately."

The president had been under fire for the choice, announced Thursday by acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, because it could ultimately benefit him financially. Mulvaney said world leaders would be able to stay at his resort at cost.

But even pundits on Fox News, Trump's favored news outlet, criticized the move as a violation of the Constitution's emoluments clause, which forbids gifts of any kind to a president from foreign leaders.

On Thursday former Judge Andrew Napolitano said on Fox News that the choice would entail "about as direct and profound a violation of the emoluments clause as one could create."

"The constitution does not address profits," he said. "It addresses any present, as in a gift, any emolument, as in cash, of any kind."

Trump initially defended the move, saying on Twitter, "I thought I was doing something very good for our Country by using Trump National Doral, in Miami, for hosting the G-7 Leaders."

The House was expected to vote next week on a non-binding resolution condemning the decision to hold the G7 at Trump National Doral next year, according to two House leadership sources.

Trump tweeted that his Miami resort had a many advantages, including "tremendous ballrooms & meeting rooms," and that the hosting would come "at ZERO COST to the USA."

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court revived a lawsuit brought by Maryland and the District of Columbia that challenges Trump's ownership of a luxury hotel five blocks from the White House as a violation of the emoluments clause.

The hotel has been popular with foreign dignitaries visiting Washington.

Last month, the Pentagon reported military spending at Trump's Turnberry resort in Scotland was nearly $200,000 between 2017 to 2019.

It was reported in summer that the U.S. Air Force was using nearby Prestwick Airport for refueling and for stopovers that also had some service members staying at the posh resort on the taxpayers' bill.

Mulvaney said Thursday that after considering roughly a dozen locations in the United States to host the G7 that Doral was the clear winner.

It was "almost like they built [Doral] to host this type of event," he said."
source

.​

 

[Stevicus]

.

View attachment 33682 ​

"Attention shoppers, 'Art of the Deal' can now be found in the Half-Price Bin at the rear of the store." ..

"Following widespread bipartisan criticism, President Donald Trump said Saturday his Doral resort in Florida would not host next year's Group of Seven summit of world leaders after all.

"Based on both Media & Democrat Crazed and Irrational Hostility, we will no longer consider Trump National Doral, Miami, as the Host Site for the G-7 in 2020," he tweeted. "We will begin the search for another site, including the possibility of Camp David, immediately."

The president had been under fire for the choice, announced Thursday by acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, because it could ultimately benefit him financially. Mulvaney said world leaders would be able to stay at his resort at cost.

But even pundits on Fox News, Trump's favored news outlet, criticized the move as a violation of the Constitution's emoluments clause, which forbids gifts of any kind to a president from foreign leaders.

On Thursday former Judge Andrew Napolitano said on Fox News that the choice would entail "about as direct and profound a violation of the emoluments clause as one could create."

"The constitution does not address profits," he said. "It addresses any present, as in a gift, any emolument, as in cash, of any kind."

Trump initially defended the move, saying on Twitter, "I thought I was doing something very good for our Country by using Trump National Doral, in Miami, for hosting the G-7 Leaders."

The House was expected to vote next week on a non-binding resolution condemning the decision to hold the G7 at Trump National Doral next year, according to two House leadership sources.

Trump tweeted that his Miami resort had a many advantages, including "tremendous ballrooms & meeting rooms," and that the hosting would come "at ZERO COST to the USA."

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court revived a lawsuit brought by Maryland and the District of Columbia that challenges Trump's ownership of a luxury hotel five blocks from the White House as a violation of the emoluments clause.

The hotel has been popular with foreign dignitaries visiting Washington.

Last month, the Pentagon reported military spending at Trump's Turnberry resort in Scotland was nearly $200,000 between 2017 to 2019.

It was reported in summer that the U.S. Air Force was using nearby Prestwick Airport for refueling and for stopovers that also had some service members staying at the posh resort on the taxpayers' bill.

Mulvaney said Thursday that after considering roughly a dozen locations in the United States to host the G7 that Doral was the clear winner.

It was "almost like they built [Doral] to host this type of event," he said."
source

.​

Well, there's a Motel 6 in Fort Stockton, TX that I've stayed at a few times. It's not so bad. Maybe they could hold the summit there.

 

[fantome profane]

Well, there's a Motel 6 in Fort Stockton, TX that I've stayed at a few times. It's not so bad. Maybe they could hold the summit there.

From what I hear anyplace not infested with bedbugs would be a step up from Doral.

 

[Jollybear]

.

View attachment 33682 ​

"Attention shoppers, 'Art of the Deal' can now be found in the Half-Price Bin at the rear of the store." ..

"Following widespread bipartisan criticism, President Donald Trump said Saturday his Doral resort in Florida would not host next year's Group of Seven summit of world leaders after all.

"Based on both Media & Democrat Crazed and Irrational Hostility, we will no longer consider Trump National Doral, Miami, as the Host Site for the G-7 in 2020," he tweeted. "We will begin the search for another site, including the possibility of Camp David, immediately."

The president had been under fire for the choice, announced Thursday by acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, because it could ultimately benefit him financially. Mulvaney said world leaders would be able to stay at his resort at cost.

But even pundits on Fox News, Trump's favored news outlet, criticized the move as a violation of the Constitution's emoluments clause, which forbids gifts of any kind to a president from foreign leaders.

On Thursday former Judge Andrew Napolitano said on Fox News that the choice would entail "about as direct and profound a violation of the emoluments clause as one could create."

"The constitution does not address profits," he said. "It addresses any present, as in a gift, any emolument, as in cash, of any kind."

Trump initially defended the move, saying on Twitter, "I thought I was doing something very good for our Country by using Trump National Doral, in Miami, for hosting the G-7 Leaders."

The House was expected to vote next week on a non-binding resolution condemning the decision to hold the G7 at Trump National Doral next year, according to two House leadership sources.

Trump tweeted that his Miami resort had a many advantages, including "tremendous ballrooms & meeting rooms," and that the hosting would come "at ZERO COST to the USA."

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court revived a lawsuit brought by Maryland and the District of Columbia that challenges Trump's ownership of a luxury hotel five blocks from the White House as a violation of the emoluments clause.

The hotel has been popular with foreign dignitaries visiting Washington.

Last month, the Pentagon reported military spending at Trump's Turnberry resort in Scotland was nearly $200,000 between 2017 to 2019.

It was reported in summer that the U.S. Air Force was using nearby Prestwick Airport for refueling and for stopovers that also had some service members staying at the posh resort on the taxpayers' bill.

Mulvaney said Thursday that after considering roughly a dozen locations in the United States to host the G7 that Doral was the clear winner.

It was "almost like they built [Doral] to host this type of event," he said."
source

.​

I have a question.

If foreign leaders are PAYING (its not even a gift, but even if they gave a gift, whats wrong with that?) For the hotel and all of its done voluntarily, no one is forced, its all agreed upon, the tax payer is not burdened,

What is wrong with it?

Like seriously, what is wrong with these left wing, dingbat democrats? They want to criticize EVERYTHING and that everything is nothing.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I have a question.

If foreign leaders are PAYING (its not even a gift, but even if they gave a gift, whats wrong with that?) For the hotel. And all of its done voluntarily. No one is forced. Its all agreed upon. The tax payer is not burdened.

The US government would be paying a significant part of the cost.

What is wrong with it?

It creates the potential for bribery.

Do you understand why it would be illegal for the President to accept a briefcase full of cash from a world leader who wants preferential treatment?

Well, holding the conference at a Trump hotel, Trump would be giving any world leader there to give him a metaphoric briefcase full of cash in the form of his share of the profits from whatever they buy while at the conference.

Holding the conference at the Doral resort would make it very easy to bribe the President. That's why people are upset about the idea.

 

[tytlyf]

If foreign leaders are PAYING (its not even a gift, but even if they gave a gift, whats wrong with that?) For the hotel and all of its done voluntarily, no one is forced, its all agreed upon, the tax payer is not burdened,

Where the money comes from doesn't matter.

What is wrong with it?

Emoluments clause.

Like seriously, what is wrong with these left wing, dingbat democrats? They want to criticize EVERYTHING and that everything is nothing.

Criticism is warranted. Perhaps Trump should stop skirting the law for person gain? Some of us respect the Constitution. If you hate America so much, you're welcome to leave.

 

[Jollybear]

The US government would be paying a significant part of the cost.

Nomatter what hotel they go to then they would be paying it.

But, seperate from that, why cant they pay it themselves? Why cant it be like this > we the people will pay for your hotel if its a cheap one, IF you want a better one, we will pay x amount and you must pay the difference.

Whats wrong with that?

It creates the potential for bribery.

Key word, potential. No one, president or otherwise should be punished for something they will "potentially do". In otherwords, they should not be punished for something they havent done. And the democrats dont even know if he will take a bribe.

Do you understand why it would be illegal for the President to accept a briefcase full of cash from a world leader who wants preferential treatment?

Yes, i understand that. But, thats not going on here. He hasnt crossed any line. The democrats want to pound him before (if) he did or does anything wrong.

Well, holding the conference at a Trump hotel, Trump would be giving any world leader there to give him a metaphoric briefcase full of cash in the form of his share of the profits from whatever they buy while at the conference.

The only money trump would get is the money to pay for the hotel. And whats wrong with that? They get rooms, trump gets money. Thats the transaction. The transaction is not "give me money and ill do a bunch of foregn benefits for you".

Holding the conference at the Doral resort would make it very easy to bribe the President. That's why people are upset about the idea.

Wait a minute, wait a minute. Trump could STILL accept a bribe while there all at a different hotel! Lol. This is crazy! What is the logic here?

Where the money comes from doesn't matter.

Ok, and if foregn leaders pay trump to stay at his hotel, whats wrong with that?

Emoluments clause.

That doesent tell me anything at all.

Criticism is warranted. Perhaps Trump should stop skirting the law for person gain?

Personal gain? Hes a business man. Every business man wants people to come to there hotels. Whats wrong with that? Nothing!

He hasnt accepted NO BRIBES at all and theres ZERO proof that he WILL. Until or if he does, THEN PUNISH the man!.

Some of us respect the Constitution.

Ya and so do i respect the constitution. But i dont respect these left wing governments trying to hammer a president over the head when he never actually did something wrong.

If you hate America so much, you're welcome to leave.

Excuse me!? Take it back pale. I love america, i hate these left wing democrats who wanna punish every dam thing. With them you cant breath, move, do anything without it being something bad.

Its pathetic.

 

[Stevicus]

From what I hear anyplace not infested with bedbugs would be a step up from Doral.

Maybe they should consider setting up at a campground. Kind of a "back to nature" theme for the conference.

 

[Riders]

Tons of beautiful places better then his place i bet.

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court revived a lawsuit brought by Maryland and the District of Columbia that challenges Trump's ownership of a luxury hotel five blocks from the White House as a violation of the emoluments clause.

The hotel has been popular with foreign dignitaries visiting Washington.

Id like to see something done about trump or his family from the Marylands lawsuit.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Chuck-E-Cheese. It fits the mentality of world leaders today perfectly.

 

[Terese]

I love america, i hate these left wing democrats who wanna punish every dam thing. With them you cant breath, move, do anything without it being something bad.



Its pathetic.

Forgive me If i’m mistaken, but the reason democrats are “punishing” Trump in this issue is because what he’s doing is illegal. And if Democrats are punishing everything Trump does, well its probably because he’s been doing something illegal.

Regardless, Trump doesn’t have to pay any attention to the Democrats. But he has to pay attention to the law.

 

[Cooky]

Forgive me If i’m mistaken, but the reason democrats are “punishing Trump” in this issue is because what he’s doing is illegal. And if Democrats are punishing everything Trump does, well its because he’s been doing something illegal.

Regardless, Trump doesn’t have to pay any attention to the Democrats. But he has to pay attention to the law.

I think Trump does everything in his power to provoke and infuriate the Democrats and the Democratic Press... That's his 'return fire'.

This is political warfare, and nobody is innocent.

 

[Jollybear]

Forgive me If i’m mistaken, but the reason democrats are “punishing” Trump in this issue is because what he’s doing is illegal. And if Democrats are punishing everything Trump does, well its probably because he’s been doing something illegal.

Regardless, Trump doesn’t have to pay any attention to the Democrats. But he has to pay attention to the law.

But, what is he doing illegal by having a global meeting at his hotel? And why is that illegal?

That, for reasons i said above, make zero sense.

 

[Jollybear]

I think Trump does everything in his power to provoke and infuriate the Democrats and the Democratic Press... That's his 'return fire'.

This is political warfare, and nobody is innocent.

I wish the democrate party would obliterate out of existence. I think tghey are that evil and pathetic.

It still should be a two party system. As in, rerpublican and libertarian.

 

[Cooky]

But, what is he doing illegal by having a global meeting at his hotel? And why is that illegal?

That, for reasons i said above, make zero sense.

I think the Democrats would complain about any idea he would come up with, regardless. Knowing that, I think he trolls them, while never actually intending to do it in the first place.

...But they deserve that by all rights. And keeping the Democratic "machine" on it's toes at all times is a tactic that serves in tiring it. Plus, Trump knows that crying wolf all too often causes people to take you less seriously.

The Trump method of dealing with the Democratic press is genius.

 

[Cooky]

I wish the democrate party would obliterate out of existence. I think tghey are that evil and pathetic.

It still should be a two party system. As in, rerpublican and libertarian.

I agree. But what I think Trump is doing is the only way of dealing with their bad behavior. It's what *needs* to be done... IMO.

 

[fantome profane]

I have a question.

If foreign leaders are PAYING (its not even a gift, but even if they gave a gift, whats wrong with that?) For the hotel and all of its done voluntarily, no one is forced, its all agreed upon, the tax payer is not burdened,

What is wrong with it?

Like seriously, what is wrong with these left wing, dingbat democrats? They want to criticize EVERYTHING and that everything is nothing.

no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

 

[Jollybear]

no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Well, i respect Napolitano, i however disagree with him. And not all constitutional scholars all agree either.

Look what i found here >

"Clause 8: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."

Explanation: Congress can't make you a Duke, Earl, or even a Marquis. If you are a civil servant or elected official, you can't accept anything from a foreign government or official, including an honorary title or an office. This clause prevents any government official from receiving foreign gifts without the permission of Congress.

What are Emoluments?
Clause 8, the so-called “Emoluments Clause,” specifies that no elected or appointed U.S. government official—including the president of the United States—may accept payments from foreign governments during their terms in office.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines emoluments as “returns arising from office or employment usually in the form of compensation or perquisites.”

Constitutional scholars suggest the Emoluments Clause was added to prevent American ambassadors of the 1700s, living abroad from being influenced or corrupted by gifts from wealthy European powers."

What the US Constitution Article 1, Section 9 Restricts

So, congress can give permission and it was to prevent being influenced by corruption.

Why Napolitano's interpretation makes zero sense to me. Because hes making it say no leader may take a gift arbitrarily.

The constitution is to PROTECT us.

By trump having leaders pay to have rooms at his hotel does NOT HARM US in any way shape or form. To say otherwise is foolishness.

Also, if Napolitano is right in his arbitrary interpretation, then what about the USA giving aid ("gifts") to other countries? That would be a double standard.

 

[Jose Fly]

But, what is he doing illegal by having a global meeting at his hotel? And why is that illegal?

That, for reasons i said above, make zero sense.

I'll try one time to explain this to you...

It's illegal for a President to accept any sort of gift or payment from a foreign leader or government.

President Trump declared that the G7 summit would be held at the Doral resort, which means world leaders would have to stay at the resort.

Donald Trump owns the Doral resort.

Thus all payments associated with the summit would go to Donald Trump.

Since he is the President, that is illegal.

It's just that simple.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Well, i respect Napolitano, i however disagree with him. And not all constitutional scholars all agree either.

Look what i found here >

"Clause 8: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."

Explanation: Congress can't make you a Duke, Earl, or even a Marquis. If you are a civil servant or elected official, you can't accept anything from a foreign government or official, including an honorary title or an office. This clause prevents any government official from receiving foreign gifts without the permission of Congress.

What are Emoluments?
Clause 8, the so-called “Emoluments Clause,” specifies that no elected or appointed U.S. government official—including the president of the United States—may accept payments from foreign governments during their terms in office.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines emoluments as “returns arising from office or employment usually in the form of compensation or perquisites.”

Constitutional scholars suggest the Emoluments Clause was added to prevent American ambassadors of the 1700s, living abroad from being influenced or corrupted by gifts from wealthy European powers."

What the US Constitution Article 1, Section 9 Restricts

So, congress can give permission and it was to prevent being influenced by corruption.

Why Napolitano's interpretation makes zero sense to me. Because hes making it say no leader may take a gift arbitrarily.

The constitution is to PROTECT us.

By trump having leaders pay to have rooms at his hotel does NOT HARM US in any way shape or form. To say otherwise is foolishness.

Also, if Napolitano is right in his arbitrary interpretation, then what about the USA giving aid ("gifts") to other countries? That would be a double standard.

Have you ever been involved in business process decisions for any reasonable sized business?
Simple things like competitive tendering laws are in place for a reason.

I don't get people who want the swamp cleaned, decry themselves American, yet will happily turn a blind eye to fundamentally poor business practise because it's their 'team' doing it.

FFS.