Yes, but they'll also be moot. The only saving grace here is that the way SCOTUS mooted these suits by definition can't set precedent, so once the current justices die in office there'll be hope again.
Who snitched on his buddies, don't forget. He's always been trash. (Which, really, breaks my heart. I loved Home Improvement and The Santa Clause as a kid and I have to admit he's good in Galaxy Quest.)
Sigourney Weaver wrote it best... "Go fuck yourself, Tim"
The more we look, the more we find, the more the crazy’s love him. I don’t get it. Will be happy when he is no longer in front of my face at every turn.
Which, of course they don’t even believe or say that, because a logical system of ideology is not what they’re playing at. It’s just straight up smash-n-grab while the right wing propaganda flows unimpeded.
"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."
(formal) Payment for employment or an office; compensation for a job, which is usually monetary. synonyms ▲quotations ▼Synonyms: compensation, fee, payment, remuneration
I wonder how this will go down in court. It clearly says "person" and the money was paid to a corporation. Trump's businesses aren't holding any office, therefore the constitution wasn't violated. That's obviously horse shit, but they're arguing that the presidency isn't an office (CO ballot case). So if they win that it seems likely SCOTUS will drop a nuke on the emoluments clause too.
According to Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, Corporations are people. So lets put it to the test. If you can give unlimited campaign contributions to a PAC through a corporations, than a corporation, and it's executives, would equally be liable under the law for violating the constitution.
And entirely too many lefties, "I don't like either candidate so I won't vote."
Or worse (and thankfully a much smaller number), "I'm going to let trump get power again so things can really bad really quick so we can get The Revolution™ started."
Picking the lesser of 2 evils is unfortunately how our system functions. And not voting at all ensures that the candidate you hate the most has an easier time winning. And I'd prefer if the worst candidate doesn't get power so we can actually change things for the better.
I will definitely vote for Biden, but his disgusting simping for Israel makes me a lot less inclined to donate money to his campaign. I might end up only donating to anti-Trump PACs instead.
if you're voting for someone and not fighting with them after they win you're only doing half a democracy. people talk about "the lesser of two evils" but there's no realistic situation in which you agree with the person you're voting for on all things, so there is no strategy that doesn't include the "lesser evil". The fact is that Biden sucks shit. The other fact is that Trump is much worse on all things, including whatever you happen to be pissed of at Biden about. So the choice seems to be "do I spite the guy who pissed me off but actually make the situation worse, or do I do what's in my power to make the situation better, vote for the guy who pissed me off as a stopgap and then do everything I can to bully him into actually doing the right thing?"
Also, it is easy to say "I'm not voting for Biden, I want someone else" right now. There aren't any consequences.
But come November and suddenly the consequences become more immediate. Many more people say they will vote third party than actually do it once in the voting booth.
I haven't recognized the legitimacy of the court since Barrett and Kavanaugh were installed, and neither should you. Of course I understand the reality of them wielding a lot of power, but I used to think that when I disagreed with their rulings it was because they understand the law better than I do. Now I only entertain that notion for unanimous rulings.
Sorry for the lateness, this falls across a few of his ongoing and upcoming cases. Taking money from a foreign government and taking money for your business are both not legal for a president. Not that it matters if they don't charge him for it or convict him though.
