President Donald Trump’s official social media director was found to have violated the Hatch Act on Friday, for invoking his White House position while engaging in a political attack, the Office of Special Counsel wrote in a letter dated June 5.
In a tweet on April 1, White House Social Media Director Dan Scavino urged the constituents of Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) to vote him out of office.
Three days later, the progressive watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed complaints against both Scavino and Amash. The former it accused of using his office — his Twitter account “showed him standing in the Oval Office next to the official presidential flag,” CREW said — for political ends.
The Office of Special Counsel agreed: Scavino, it said, “violated the Hatch Act.”
President Donald Trump’s official social media director was found to have violated the Hatch Act on Friday, for invoking his White House position while engaging in a political attack, the Office of Special Counsel wrote in a letter dated June 5.
In a tweet on April 1, White House Social Media Director Dan Scavino urged the constituents of Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) to vote him out of office.
Three days later, the progressive watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed complaints against both Scavino and Amash. The former it accused of using his office — his Twitter account “showed him standing in the Oval Office next to the official presidential flag,” CREW said — for political ends.
The Office of Special Counsel agreed: Scavino, it said, “violated the Hatch Act.”
Aside: I know #trumptrain is basically a flag to disable logical scrutiny, but
If he created them, he did so with Amash in place. So he'll take the jobs away again if Amash wins?
President Donald Trump’s official social media director was found to have violated the Hatch Act on Friday, for invoking his White House position while engaging in a political attack, the Office of Special Counsel wrote in a letter dated June 5.
In a tweet on April 1, White House Social Media Director Dan Scavino urged the constituents of Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) to vote him out of office.
Three days later, the progressive watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed complaints against both Scavino and Amash. The former it accused of using his office — his Twitter account “showed him standing in the Oval Office next to the official presidential flag,” CREW said — for political ends.
The Office of Special Counsel agreed: Scavino, it said, “violated the Hatch Act.”
[...]
He only got a slap on the wrist, of course.
Of course. It's not like anyone in the Trump administration had a previous issue with this exact same thing, less than two months prior.
Oh, wait. It did. And the article even explicitly states "Passantino also noted that the White House counsel’s office is training administration officials on ethics rules, including disclosure requirements, conflicts of interest, acceptance of gifts, travel regulations, records keeping laws, the Hatch Act, use of official resources and position, outside income and post-employment issues."
Passatino is White House Deputy Counsel to the President for Compliance and Ethics. Good job you're doing there, mate.
Trump Can Accept Payments From Foreign Governments, U.S. Argues
Government says emoluments clause doesn’t bar Trump businesses
The foreign emoluments clause doesn’t apply to fair-market commercial transactions, such as hotel bills, golf club fees, licensing payments and office rent, the government argued in a brief asking a judge to throw out a lawsuit brought by a watchdog group, which claims Trump’s business dealings violate the Constitution. If accepted by the court, the argument would eliminate a major legal obstacle blocking Trump’s businesses from keeping money from foreign officials and companies owned by foreign governments.
I remember when accepting payments from foreign governments for charity was a huge campaign issue.
Trump Can Accept Payments From Foreign Governments, U.S. Argues
Government says emoluments clause doesn’t bar Trump businesses
The foreign emoluments clause doesn’t apply to fair-market commercial transactions, such as hotel bills, golf club fees, licensing payments and office rent, the government argued in a brief asking a judge to throw out a lawsuit brought by a watchdog group, which claims Trump’s business dealings violate the Constitution. If accepted by the court, the argument would eliminate a major legal obstacle blocking Trump’s businesses from keeping money from foreign officials and companies owned by foreign governments.
I remember when accepting payments from foreign governments for charity was a huge campaign issue.
Trump Can Accept Payments From Foreign Governments, U.S. Argues
Government says emoluments clause doesn’t bar Trump businesses
The foreign emoluments clause doesn’t apply to fair-market commercial transactions, such as hotel bills, golf club fees, licensing payments and office rent, the government argued in a brief asking a judge to throw out a lawsuit brought by a watchdog group, which claims Trump’s business dealings violate the Constitution. If accepted by the court, the argument would eliminate a major legal obstacle blocking Trump’s businesses from keeping money from foreign officials and companies owned by foreign governments.
I remember when a woman accepting payments from foreign governments for charity was a huge campaign issue.
Trump Can Accept Payments From Foreign Governments, U.S. Argues
Government says emoluments clause doesn’t bar Trump businesses
The foreign emoluments clause doesn’t apply to fair-market commercial transactions, such as hotel bills, golf club fees, licensing payments and office rent, the government argued in a brief asking a judge to throw out a lawsuit brought by a watchdog group, which claims Trump’s business dealings violate the Constitution. If accepted by the court, the argument would eliminate a major legal obstacle blocking Trump’s businesses from keeping money from foreign officials and companies owned by foreign governments.
I remember when accepting payments from foreign governments for charity was a huge campaign issue.
Eric's foundation is being investigated by the NY AG and the impetus is the Forbes story. And as is the custom for Trump chairities, it does not have the necessary registrations.
Eric's foundation is being investigated by the NY AG and the impetus is the Forbes story. And as is the custom for Trump chairities, it does not have the necessary registrations.
I really wish we could have started these investigations like 12 months ago.
+42
Options
BlackDragon480Bluster KerfuffleMaster of Windy ImportRegistered Userregular
Eric's foundation is being investigated by the NY AG and the impetus is the Forbes story. And as is the custom for Trump chairities, it does not have the necessary registrations.
I really wish we could have started these investigations like 12 months ago.
The original Trump Foundation has been under investigation for quite awhile, and there's the RICO case that's still moving against Trump University.
Trump family financials have been under scrutiny, but in the jacked up Byzantine paper maze that is the Trump Organization, getting anywhere on any of them takes a shitload of time.
No matter where you go...there you are. ~ Buckaroo Banzai
D.C., Md. attorneys general to sue Trump, saying foreign payments to his businesses violate Constitution’s anti-corruption clause
This is entirely uncharted water, right?
I believe that's the third one of those. Or maybe the Congressional Dem lawsuit hasn't been filed yet. They plan to. And there's an independent good government group with one as well. And yeah, to the best of my knowledge it's never really been a thing. House/Senate have the most obvious case for standing since the Constitution allows emoluments with Congressional permission.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Attorneys general in DC and Maryland to file papers Monday to sue President Trump.
Washington Post Article
By Aaron C. Davis
June 12 at 12:47 AM
Attorneys general for the District of Columbia and the state of Maryland say they will sue President Trump on Monday, alleging that he has violated anti-corruption clauses in the Constitution by accepting millions in payments and benefits from foreign governments since moving into the White House.
The lawsuit, the first of its kind brought by government entities, centers on the fact that Trump chose to retain ownership of his company when he became president. Trump said in January that he was shifting his business assets into a trust managed by his sons to eliminate potential conflicts of interests.
But D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine (D) and Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D) say Trump has broken many promises to keep separate his public duties and private business interests. For one, his son Eric Trump has said the president would continue to receive regular updates about his company’s financial health.
The lawsuit, a signed copy of which Racine and Frosh provided to The Washington Post on Sunday night, alleges “unprecedented constitutional violations” by Trump. The suit says Trump’s continued ownership of a global business empire has rendered the president “deeply enmeshed with a legion of foreign and domestic government actors” and has undermined the integrity of the U.S. political system.
“Fundamental to a President’s fidelity to [“faithfully execute” his oath of office] is the Constitution’s demand that the President ... disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers. Never before has a President acted with such disregard for this constitutional prescription.”
The suit could open a new front for Trump as he navigates investigations by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and congressional committees of possible collusion between his associates and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign.
It's a long article but the meat is right up top. What I didn't quote gets into some of the process among other things.
Edit: It's like jumping in the pool without dipping a toe first.
Now that Melania and Barron are moving into the White House does Trump Tower in New York still have to be constantly secured by the Secret Service along with all the expenses that causes?
0
Options
Mx. QuillI now prefer "Myr. Quill", actually...{They/Them}Registered Userregular
Now that Melania and Barron are moving into the White House does Trump Tower in New York still have to be constantly secured by the Secret Service along with all the expenses that causes?
The hope is it wouldn't.
But I can see Trump charging NY to protect it from people who might wanna try and vandalize the eyesore.
Now that Melania and Barron are moving into the White House does Trump Tower in New York still have to be constantly secured by the Secret Service along with all the expenses that causes?
Ofc. The royal family might visit there sometime, and the emperor has to collect rent.
Numbers do not feel. Do not bleed or weep or hope. They do not know bravery or sacrifice. Love or allegiance. At the very apex of callousness you will find only ones and zeroes. Trepaneringsritualen
Updating my emolument suit tally: he's now being sued separately by a group of the affected companies, the state of Maryland, the D of C, and a group of house reps (but not the House itself).
Updating my emolument suit tally: he's now being sued separately by a group of the affected companies, the state of Maryland, the D of C, and a group of house reps (but not the House itself).
Is that correct?
IIRC there's one lady lawyer who's spending months or longer trying to sue him on multiple lawsuits. I've forgotten her name.
0
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Updating my emolument suit tally: he's now being sued separately by a group of the affected companies, the state of Maryland, the D of C, and a group of house reps (but not the House itself).
Is that correct?
IIRC there's one lady lawyer who's spending months or longer trying to sue him on multiple lawsuits. I've forgotten her name.
There's a small part of me that hopes that is Orly Taits. Or whatever her last name was
Trump’s Personal Lawyer Boasted That He Got Preet Bharara Fired
Marc Kasowitz, President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer in the Russia investigation, has boasted to friends and colleagues that he played a central role in the firing of Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, according to four people familiar with the conversations.
Kasowitz told Trump, “This guy is going to get you,” according to a person familiar with Kasowitz’s account.
Those who know Kasowitz say he is sometimes prone to exaggerating when regaling them with his exploits. But if true, his assertion adds to the mystery surrounding the motive and timing of Bharara’s firing.
[...]
Kasowitz’s claimed role in the Bharara firing appears to be a sign that the New York lawyer has been inserting himself into matters of governance and not just advising the president on personal legal matters.
Kasowitz has also said in private conversations that Trump asked him to be attorney general, according to four people familiar with the matter. Kasowitz said he turned down the role. Ultimately, Trump decided to give the position to then-Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions.
[...]
A lawyer that boasts about getting the president to fire a US Attorney fired like that is probably a really bad lawyer, right?
Trump’s Personal Lawyer Boasted That He Got Preet Bharara Fired
Marc Kasowitz, President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer in the Russia investigation, has boasted to friends and colleagues that he played a central role in the firing of Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, according to four people familiar with the conversations.
Kasowitz told Trump, “This guy is going to get you,” according to a person familiar with Kasowitz’s account.
Those who know Kasowitz say he is sometimes prone to exaggerating when regaling them with his exploits. But if true, his assertion adds to the mystery surrounding the motive and timing of Bharara’s firing.
[...]
Kasowitz’s claimed role in the Bharara firing appears to be a sign that the New York lawyer has been inserting himself into matters of governance and not just advising the president on personal legal matters.
Kasowitz has also said in private conversations that Trump asked him to be attorney general, according to four people familiar with the matter. Kasowitz said he turned down the role. Ultimately, Trump decided to give the position to then-Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions.
[...]
A lawyer that boasts about getting the president to fire a US Attorney fired like that is probably a really bad lawyer, right?
Trump's old lawyers wouldn't talk to them without their own lawyers and won't work with him now because he owes them money. Trump probably can't get good lawers anymore.
Trump’s Personal Lawyer Boasted That He Got Preet Bharara Fired
Marc Kasowitz, President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer in the Russia investigation, has boasted to friends and colleagues that he played a central role in the firing of Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, according to four people familiar with the conversations.
Kasowitz told Trump, “This guy is going to get you,” according to a person familiar with Kasowitz’s account.
Those who know Kasowitz say he is sometimes prone to exaggerating when regaling them with his exploits. But if true, his assertion adds to the mystery surrounding the motive and timing of Bharara’s firing.
[...]
Kasowitz’s claimed role in the Bharara firing appears to be a sign that the New York lawyer has been inserting himself into matters of governance and not just advising the president on personal legal matters.
Kasowitz has also said in private conversations that Trump asked him to be attorney general, according to four people familiar with the matter. Kasowitz said he turned down the role. Ultimately, Trump decided to give the position to then-Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions.
[...]
A lawyer that boasts about getting the president to fire a US Attorney fired like that is probably a really bad lawyer, right?
Trump's old lawyers wouldn't talk to them without their own lawyers and won't work with him now because he owes them money. Trump probably can't get good lawers anymore.
The lawyers he gets probably aren't terrible in the courtroom, but they're going to be cut from the same cloth Trump is.
Trump’s Personal Lawyer Boasted That He Got Preet Bharara Fired
Marc Kasowitz, President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer in the Russia investigation, has boasted to friends and colleagues that he played a central role in the firing of Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, according to four people familiar with the conversations.
Kasowitz told Trump, “This guy is going to get you,” according to a person familiar with Kasowitz’s account.
Those who know Kasowitz say he is sometimes prone to exaggerating when regaling them with his exploits. But if true, his assertion adds to the mystery surrounding the motive and timing of Bharara’s firing.
[...]
Kasowitz’s claimed role in the Bharara firing appears to be a sign that the New York lawyer has been inserting himself into matters of governance and not just advising the president on personal legal matters.
Kasowitz has also said in private conversations that Trump asked him to be attorney general, according to four people familiar with the matter. Kasowitz said he turned down the role. Ultimately, Trump decided to give the position to then-Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions.
[...]
A lawyer that boasts about getting the president to fire a US Attorney fired like that is probably a really bad lawyer, right?
So this is basically another obstruction of justice charge, right?
Nearly 200 Democratic members of Congress agreed to file a lawsuit Wednesday against President Trump alleging that by retaining interests in a global business empire he has violated constitutional restrictions on taking gifts and benefits from foreign leaders.
The lead senator filing the complaint in federal district court, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), said Tuesday that the lawsuit has already drawn more congressional plaintiffs — 196 — than any legal action previously taken against a president. No Republicans had joined in the lawsuit so far, although they will be invited to do so, Blumenthal said.
Publicly available records do not indicate why the nine applications were initially rejected, or why the trademarks were then granted provisional approval eight to 15 weeks later.
“The speed with which these appeals were decided is mind-blowing,” said Matthew Dresden, an intellectual property attorney at Harris Bricken in Seattle. “I have never seen any decisions made that quickly. That suggests special treatment. But that’s just procedural. Substantively, it’s impossible to say whether any of this is unusual.”
You Yunting, a partner at DeBund Law Offices in Shanghai, said it’s not unusual for trademark rejections to be overturned on appeal. China’s Trademark Office database contained no indication Trump’s lawyers had appealed the trademark rejections, but said it can take months for such actions to be publicly noted. If the initial denial was only partial, some elements of the applications can move forward without an appeal, in which case reversals can be swift.
“Considering the political element, the authorities are definitely not going to admit special treatment, but the possibility cannot be excluded,” You said. “Even if the Trademark Office helped Trump, it would be very difficult to find the wrongdoing on the surface.”
Trump partner said in running to build FBI headquarters
A company that owns buildings with Donald Trump and the family of Jared Kushner is a finalist for a $1.7 billion contract to build the FBI’s new headquarters.
Vornado Realty Trust is one of three finalists to build a replacement for the bureau’s current headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C., the massive J. Edgar Hoover Building, according to Garth Beall, manager of Renard Development. Renard is hoping the federal agency running the bidding process, the General Services Administration, will choose a Renard site in Greenbelt, Maryland, for the new headquarters.
Vornado is a partial owner with the Trump Organization in two buildings, one each in New York and San Francisco. It is also a major investor in 666 Fifth Ave., the flagship skyscraper of the Kushner Cos.
Vornado is run by Steven Roth, who has been advising Donald Trump on his plans to revamp the nation’s infrastructure. He also is consulting with the White House Office of American Innovation, which is being led by Kushner.
Trump partner said in running to build FBI headquarters
A company that owns buildings with Donald Trump and the family of Jared Kushner is a finalist for a $1.7 billion contract to build the FBI’s new headquarters.
Vornado Realty Trust is one of three finalists to build a replacement for the bureau’s current headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C., the massive J. Edgar Hoover Building, according to Garth Beall, manager of Renard Development. Renard is hoping the federal agency running the bidding process, the General Services Administration, will choose a Renard site in Greenbelt, Maryland, for the new headquarters.
Vornado is a partial owner with the Trump Organization in two buildings, one each in New York and San Francisco. It is also a major investor in 666 Fifth Ave., the flagship skyscraper of the Kushner Cos.
Vornado is run by Steven Roth, who has been advising Donald Trump on his plans to revamp the nation’s infrastructure. He also is consulting with the White House Office of American Innovation, which is being led by Kushner.
If the proposals were in before he took office it would be hard for Trump to put his thumb on the scales at this point in the process and not get noticed. So if he does, hopefully someone will speak up. (And even if he doesn't there may be a protest from the other companies)
The optimal corruption vector would have been in crafting the RFP to favor that company, or giving them unfair access to information to enhance their proposal.
ArbitraryDescriptor on
0
Options
Doctor DetroitNot a doctorTree townRegistered Userregular
I'm gonna assume that any government building built with Trump's involvement is gonna be buggier than the bug room in the Temple of Doom.
Publicly available records do not indicate why the nine applications were initially rejected, or why the trademarks were then granted provisional approval eight to 15 weeks later.
“The speed with which these appeals were decided is mind-blowing,” said Matthew Dresden, an intellectual property attorney at Harris Bricken in Seattle. “I have never seen any decisions made that quickly. That suggests special treatment. But that’s just procedural. Substantively, it’s impossible to say whether any of this is unusual.”
You Yunting, a partner at DeBund Law Offices in Shanghai, said it’s not unusual for trademark rejections to be overturned on appeal. China’s Trademark Office database contained no indication Trump’s lawyers had appealed the trademark rejections, but said it can take months for such actions to be publicly noted. If the initial denial was only partial, some elements of the applications can move forward without an appeal, in which case reversals can be swift.
“Considering the political element, the authorities are definitely not going to admit special treatment, but the possibility cannot be excluded,” You said. “Even if the Trademark Office helped Trump, it would be very difficult to find the wrongdoing on the surface.”
Totally not corruption.
I'm assuming China's bring blatant because ultimately they want him impeached, and by going along with this they get to keep Trump happy - he's not going to care how obvious this is until it's too late. Win, win.
Publicly available records do not indicate why the nine applications were initially rejected, or why the trademarks were then granted provisional approval eight to 15 weeks later.
“The speed with which these appeals were decided is mind-blowing,” said Matthew Dresden, an intellectual property attorney at Harris Bricken in Seattle. “I have never seen any decisions made that quickly. That suggests special treatment. But that’s just procedural. Substantively, it’s impossible to say whether any of this is unusual.”
You Yunting, a partner at DeBund Law Offices in Shanghai, said it’s not unusual for trademark rejections to be overturned on appeal. China’s Trademark Office database contained no indication Trump’s lawyers had appealed the trademark rejections, but said it can take months for such actions to be publicly noted. If the initial denial was only partial, some elements of the applications can move forward without an appeal, in which case reversals can be swift.
“Considering the political element, the authorities are definitely not going to admit special treatment, but the possibility cannot be excluded,” You said. “Even if the Trademark Office helped Trump, it would be very difficult to find the wrongdoing on the surface.”
Totally not corruption.
I'm assuming China's bring blatant because ultimately they want him impeached, and by going along with this they get to keep Trump happy - he's not going to care how obvious this is until it's too late. Win, win.
Why would they want him impeached? The guy talked to Xi for 15 minutes and was conviced China has a historical claim to the Korean peninsula. He's a rube.
Publicly available records do not indicate why the nine applications were initially rejected, or why the trademarks were then granted provisional approval eight to 15 weeks later.
“The speed with which these appeals were decided is mind-blowing,” said Matthew Dresden, an intellectual property attorney at Harris Bricken in Seattle. “I have never seen any decisions made that quickly. That suggests special treatment. But that’s just procedural. Substantively, it’s impossible to say whether any of this is unusual.”
You Yunting, a partner at DeBund Law Offices in Shanghai, said it’s not unusual for trademark rejections to be overturned on appeal. China’s Trademark Office database contained no indication Trump’s lawyers had appealed the trademark rejections, but said it can take months for such actions to be publicly noted. If the initial denial was only partial, some elements of the applications can move forward without an appeal, in which case reversals can be swift.
“Considering the political element, the authorities are definitely not going to admit special treatment, but the possibility cannot be excluded,” You said. “Even if the Trademark Office helped Trump, it would be very difficult to find the wrongdoing on the surface.”
Totally not corruption.
I'm assuming China's bring blatant because ultimately they want him impeached, and by going along with this they get to keep Trump happy - he's not going to care how obvious this is until it's too late. Win, win.
Why would they want him impeached? The guy talked to Xi for 15 minutes and was conviced China has a historical claim to the Korean peninsula. He's a rube.
Yeah, Trump is busy gleefully tearing down American hegemony which is just about perfectly in line with Chinese interests.
Any political chaos on the homefront paralyzes us in foreign affairs. China and Russia want us focused on ourselves and not on them doing shit we don't want them doing. Like, taking over the South China Sea or re-annexing Ukraine.
Posts
Aside: I know #trumptrain is basically a flag to disable logical scrutiny, but
If he created them, he did so with Amash in place. So he'll take the jobs away again if Amash wins?
http://www.govexec.com/oversight/2017/03/white-house-conway-ethics-violation-mistake/135810/
Oh, wait. It did. And the article even explicitly states "Passantino also noted that the White House counsel’s office is training administration officials on ethics rules, including disclosure requirements, conflicts of interest, acceptance of gifts, travel regulations, records keeping laws, the Hatch Act, use of official resources and position, outside income and post-employment issues."
Passatino is White House Deputy Counsel to the President for Compliance and Ethics. Good job you're doing there, mate.
Not at all!
Caveat: it is when a Democrat does it.
Eric's foundation is being investigated by the NY AG and the impetus is the Forbes story. And as is the custom for Trump chairities, it does not have the necessary registrations.
I really wish we could have started these investigations like 12 months ago.
The original Trump Foundation has been under investigation for quite awhile, and there's the RICO case that's still moving against Trump University.
Trump family financials have been under scrutiny, but in the jacked up Byzantine paper maze that is the Trump Organization, getting anywhere on any of them takes a shitload of time.
~ Buckaroo Banzai
This is entirely uncharted water, right?
I believe that's the third one of those. Or maybe the Congressional Dem lawsuit hasn't been filed yet. They plan to. And there's an independent good government group with one as well. And yeah, to the best of my knowledge it's never really been a thing. House/Senate have the most obvious case for standing since the Constitution allows emoluments with Congressional permission.
It is. They have to first prove that they can sue the president, which has never actually been done as far as I'm aware.
The court case for this will be fascinating to watch.
It's a long article but the meat is right up top. What I didn't quote gets into some of the process among other things.
Edit: It's like jumping in the pool without dipping a toe first.
The hope is it wouldn't.
But I can see Trump charging NY to protect it from people who might wanna try and vandalize the eyesore.
Reason: Panda4You
Numbers do not feel. Do not bleed or weep or hope. They do not know bravery or sacrifice. Love or allegiance. At the very apex of callousness you will find only ones and zeroes.
Trepaneringsritualen
Is that correct?
IIRC there's one lady lawyer who's spending months or longer trying to sue him on multiple lawsuits. I've forgotten her name.
There's a small part of me that hopes that is Orly Taits. Or whatever her last name was
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Trump's old lawyers wouldn't talk to them without their own lawyers and won't work with him now because he owes them money. Trump probably can't get good lawers anymore.
The lawyers he gets probably aren't terrible in the courtroom, but they're going to be cut from the same cloth Trump is.
So this is basically another obstruction of justice charge, right?
Kyle is an MSNBC producer
https://apnews.com/a891967cfe12428cb2f7ad05f8fcf594/China-overturns-rejections-of-9-Trump-trademarks Totally not corruption.
https://apnews.com/0b8ee973efe047e4ac0f6cb966799bb6/Trump-partner-said-in-running-to-build-FBI-headquarters
~ Buckaroo Banzai
If the proposals were in before he took office it would be hard for Trump to put his thumb on the scales at this point in the process and not get noticed. So if he does, hopefully someone will speak up. (And even if he doesn't there may be a protest from the other companies)
The optimal corruption vector would have been in crafting the RFP to favor that company, or giving them unfair access to information to enhance their proposal.
But will its showers electrocute you?
I'm assuming China's bring blatant because ultimately they want him impeached, and by going along with this they get to keep Trump happy - he's not going to care how obvious this is until it's too late. Win, win.
Why would they want him impeached? The guy talked to Xi for 15 minutes and was conviced China has a historical claim to the Korean peninsula. He's a rube.
I will buy the history book named "Fractal Assholes, America from 2016-2018"