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

[Jollybear]

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.

This is the kind of stuff that frustrates me. You ignored every solid point i made in my former post. THEN your "explanation" was nothing other then an authoritarian assertion that trump cannot accept any payment or gift. Your interpretation your pushing in a authoritarian way. Also, you did not answer my question.

Ill ask it again. WHY is it wrong for trump to accept a payment or gift from a foreign leader? If you say because of the constitution, then your begging the question. Why do you believe the constitution says that?

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.

No, its not that simple. Read my former post before this one. I made airtight points in that post.

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.

All your doing is the same thing the other guy just did. No refutation to anything i said in the former post and no answer to my question.

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.

Thats rediculious. Its not swampy to have a innocent transaction where foreign leaders pay money in return for rooms at a hotel. There is nothing inherently evil about that.

In fact, the REAL swamp is these democrates trying to bully people, president, other leaders, business owners, people of society or other. THATS the real swamp! The swamp is these democrates picking on something that is totally innocent and yet they get away with it and waste our tax dollars being in office fighting against something that is totally innocent!

Its frankly, not just swampy, its downright upside down and discusting!

They call good evil and evil they call good. They call light darkness and darkness they call light.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

This is the kind of stuff that frustrates me. You ignored every solid point i made in my former post.

You didn't really make any points that contradicted anything anyone else has said.

THEN your "explanation" was nothing other then an authoritarian assertion that trump cannot accept any payment or gift. Your interpretation your pushing in a authoritarian way. Also, you did not answer my question.

So you think that enforcing the constitution is authoritarian?

No, its not that simple. Read my former post before this one. I made airtight points in that post.

You did not. You said basically nothing that contradicted anything anyone had written, just some vague argument about how the constitution is used to protect the people, and since Trump using his position to personally benefit by receiving money from foreign diplomats doesn't hurt us, there's no problem.

The fact that you think having a president in power who is willing to take money from foreign powers doesn't harm the people seems extremely bizarre.

Thats rediculious. Its not swampy to have a innocent transaction where foreign leaders pay money in return for rooms at a hotel.

There is when the owner and operator of the hotel is also a democratically elected representative of the people who is funding said visit with taxpayer funds and personally benefitting from payments from visiting foreign diplomats.

At this point, I have to ask; are you just trolling, or are you seriously this ignorant of the concept of diplomatic corruption?

In fact, the REAL swamp is these democrates trying to bully people, president, other leaders, business owners, people of society or other. THATS the real swamp! The swamp is these democrates picking on something that is totally innocent and yet they get away with it and waste our tax dollars being in office fighting against something that is totally innocent!

Its frankly, not just swampy, its downright upside down and discusting!

They call good evil and evil they call good. They call light darkness and darkness they call light.

"Nevermind the obviously corrupt president doing things that the constitution deems illegal - the real bad guys are the other guys! Those guys! Over there! Look at them, not over here! Don't look at this bloated, ignorant buffoon I voted for by mistake, look at the other people!"

 

[tytlyf]

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.

Look up the definition of emoluments clause to learn definition

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

He is a businessman, a terrible one. What's wrong with people coming to his hotel? Nothing when he isn't president. See emoluments clause.

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

The topic at hand has nothing to do with bribes.

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.

The problem is your information sources are telling you he did nothing wrong. Are you sure your information sources are telling you the truth?

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.

I suggest Trump stop skirting laws and acting unfit for the presidency. How often do you watch Fox?

 

[Stevicus]

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.

I agree with what you're saying, although I can sort of understand why people might not be making such a big deal over this - at least in the context of "draining the swamp."

A lot of it largely depends on how one defines "the swamp." Some people might look at "iron triangles" as being the primary manifestation of "the swamp," while others might look at the military-industrial complex and the intelligence community's various covert activities and consider that to be "the swamp."

By comparison, this sort of thing seems like "small potatoes." I'm not saying that makes it right, but it might explain why people might look at this from a more relativist perspective.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I agree with what you're saying, although I can sort of understand why people might not be making such a big deal over this - at least in the context of "draining the swamp."

A lot of it largely depends on how one defines "the swamp." Some people might look at "iron triangles" as being the primary manifestation of "the swamp," while others might look at the military-industrial complex and the intelligence community's various covert activities and consider that to be "the swamp."

By comparison, this sort of thing seems like "small potatoes." I'm not saying that makes it right, but it might explain why people might look at this from a more relativist perspective.

Yup, I agree.
This is comparatively small potatoes.
My somewhat hot take is that the US President is used to being able to make up the rules as he goes.
I've worked in plenty of businesses where the delegations of authority, tendering rules and oversight ends at the executive level (although a lot more where that's not the case).

I think he's honestly not used to thinking about rules, why they might be there or (frankly) his impact on anything apart from his own direct needs.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

All your doing is the same thing the other guy just did. No refutation to anything i said in the former post and no answer to my question.

You've asked a bunch of questions through the thread, so I'm not sure which one you mean. Pick one, and I'll write a full answer for you.
But my point stands. Basically every business I've worked in...and that's a lot of large businesses...has competitive tendering laws. Do you know why?

Thats rediculious. Its not swampy to have a innocent transaction where foreign leaders pay money in return for rooms at a hotel. There is nothing inherently evil about that.

Evil? No, I wouldn't say that. But Trump is no longer a businessman. He is the President. At best, this is a bad look. But it also fits a pattern of behaviour. He sees nothing wrong with blending politics with personal business. If you don't see anything wrong with that, I'm not sure what to tell you.

In fact, the REAL swamp is these democrates trying to bully people, president, other leaders, business owners, people of society or other. THATS the real swamp! The swamp is these democrates picking on something that is totally innocent and yet they get away with it and waste our tax dollars being in office fighting against something that is totally innocent!

1. I'm not a Dem.
2. This kinda seems a little ranty/trolly.

Its frankly, not just swampy, its downright upside down and discusting!

They call good evil and evil they call good. They call light darkness and darkness they call light.

Yeah...well...it all seems much simpler and less 'Armageddon-y' than you're pitching it here.

He's a businessman or he's President. He can't be both.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

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.

Which part of his behaviour is it that you think *needs* to be done?
The nepotism or the circumvention of competitive tendering rules in favour of his own businesses?

 

[Jose Fly]

This is the kind of stuff that frustrates me. You ignored every solid point i made in my former post. THEN your "explanation" was nothing other then an authoritarian assertion that trump cannot accept any payment or gift. Your interpretation your pushing in a authoritarian way. Also, you did not answer my question.

Ill ask it again. WHY is it wrong for trump to accept a payment or gift from a foreign leader? If you say because of the constitution, then your begging the question. Why do you believe the constitution says that?

Because it does. I posted this example earlier from when the King of Siam tried to give President Lincoln gifts (emphasis mine)....

To His Majesty Somdetch Phra Paramendr Maha Mongut,

King of Siam,

Great and Good Friend: I have received Your Majesty's two letters of the date of February 14th., 1861.

I have also received in good condition the royal gifts which accompanied those letters,---namely, a sword of costly materials and exquisite workmanship; a photographic likeness of Your Majesty and of Your Majesty's beloved daughter; and also two elephants' tusks of length and magnitude such as indicate that they could have belonged only to an animal which was a native of Siam.

Your Majesty's letters show an understanding that our laws forbid the President from receiving these rich presents as personal treasures. They are therefore accepted in accordance with Your Majesty's desire as tokens of your good will and friendship for the American People. Congress being now in session at this capital, I have had great pleasure in making known to them this manifestation of Your Majesty's munificence and kind consideration.

Under their directions the gifts will be placed among the archives of the Government, where they will remain perpetually as tokens of mutual esteem and pacific dispositions more honorable to both nations than any trophies of conquest could be.​

No, its not that simple. Read my former post before this one. I made airtight points in that post.

All your doing is the same thing the other guy just did. No refutation to anything i said in the former post and no answer to my question.

Thats rediculious. Its not swampy to have a innocent transaction where foreign leaders pay money in return for rooms at a hotel. There is nothing inherently evil about that.

In fact, the REAL swamp is these democrates trying to bully people, president, other leaders, business owners, people of society or other. THATS the real swamp! The swamp is these democrates picking on something that is totally innocent and yet they get away with it and waste our tax dollars being in office fighting against something that is totally innocent!

Its frankly, not just swampy, its downright upside down and discusting!

They call good evil and evil they call good. They call light darkness and darkness they call light.

Thanks for your time.

 

[Stevicus]

Yup, I agree.
This is comparatively small potatoes.
My somewhat hot take is that the US President is used to being able to make up the rules as he goes.
I've worked in plenty of businesses where the delegations of authority, tendering rules and oversight ends at the executive level (although a lot more where that's not the case).

I think he's honestly not used to thinking about rules, why they might be there or (frankly) his impact on anything apart from his own direct needs.

My observation is that a lot of people who break the rules are counting on most everyone else not knowing the rules.

On the other hand, I've also encountered those in companies or other organizations who claim that a rule exists, yet when someone really checks for sure, there is no such rule. That's when I learned the difference between "policy" and "practices."

And then there are the ad hoc "rules" made by department heads who come into work in a bad mood and decide they have to make a "rule." My guess is that Trump makes all kinds of "rules" like that - and they probably change from day to day. Working for a boss like that must be complete hell, which might explain why so many of his people quit.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

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?

What on Earth are you talking about?

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.

You seem remarkably naive on this issue and ignorant about how government corruption works.

Have you ever heard of a kickback?

Kickback (bribery) - Wikipedia

 

[Jollybear]

You've asked a bunch of questions through the thread, so I'm not sure which one you mean. Pick one, and I'll write a full answer for you.
But my point stands. Basically every business I've worked in...and that's a lot of large businesses...has competitive tendering laws. Do you know why?

Go ahead and tell me why these tendering laws you talk of are good.

Evil? No, I wouldn't say that. But Trump is no longer a businessman. He is the President.

Hes both. His family is running his business. But, he still has his business.

At best, this is a bad look.

It dont look bad to me. Why does it look bad to you? It looks perfectly innocent to me. Leaders pay money for rooms at a hotel. Looks just fine. And is just fine.

But it also fits a pattern of behaviour. He sees nothing wrong with blending politics with personal business. If you don't see anything wrong with that, I'm not sure what to tell you.

I know what you can tell me, tell me why you think thats wrong?

1. I'm not a Dem.

Good, im happy to hear that. What are you then?

2. This kinda seems a little ranty/trolly.

Ah, no, its not ranty and trolly, thats a smear.

Furthermore, if by me saying the democrats are bullying something innocent is ranty and trolly, then why is it when you say trump was doing wrong by this, that wasnt ranty and trolly?

Furthermore, by telling me it was trolly, is that your way of trying to make me appear like im breaking forum rules just because you disagree with me? Because if thats the intent, its pretty phony.

Yeah...well...it all seems much simpler and less 'Armageddon-y' than you're pitching it here.

He's a businessman or he's President. He can't be both.

Says who, you? Why cant he be both? His family is running the business, hes running the presidency, whats wrong here?

Whats wrong with foreign leaders paying for rooms at his hotel? He gets money for his business, they get rooms. Nothing is harmed. Whats wrong with that?

Nothing.

 

[Jollybear]

Because it does. I posted this example earlier from when the King of Siam tried to give President Lincoln gifts (emphasis mine)....

To His Majesty Somdetch Phra Paramendr Maha Mongut,

King of Siam,

Great and Good Friend: I have received Your Majesty's two letters of the date of February 14th., 1861.

I have also received in good condition the royal gifts which accompanied those letters,---namely, a sword of costly materials and exquisite workmanship; a photographic likeness of Your Majesty and of Your Majesty's beloved daughter; and also two elephants' tusks of length and magnitude such as indicate that they could have belonged only to an animal which was a native of Siam.

Your Majesty's letters show an understanding that our laws forbid the President from receiving these rich presents as personal treasures. They are therefore accepted in accordance with Your Majesty's desire as tokens of your good will and friendship for the American People. Congress being now in session at this capital, I have had great pleasure in making known to them this manifestation of Your Majesty's munificence and kind consideration.

Under their directions the gifts will be placed among the archives of the Government, where they will remain perpetually as tokens of mutual esteem and pacific dispositions more honorable to both nations than any trophies of conquest could be.​

Thanks for your time.

You still havent answered my question. And anyone that does not answere my question is wrong in my book.

Ill ask it again. Why is it wrong for forign leaders to pay him for rooms at his hotel?

Also, if this is wrong, ill just go ahead again and point out the democrats double standard. Joe biden and obama recieved gifts from foreign leaders. Obama given pricey gifts from foreign leaders

 

[Jollybear]

What on Earth are you talking about?

You know darn well what im talking about. You know how to read. Read what i said and answer it. Dont waste my time responding like that.

You seem remarkably naive on this issue and ignorant about how government corruption works.

Ya, ok, foreign leaders paying for a hotel is corrupt, ya, sure, if you say so.

People like you need to be more grateful for how dam good you have it in america. Why not go to a country where REAL corruption is happening instead of making up corruption like foreign leaders paying for a hotel.

Have you ever heard of a kickback?

Kickback (bribery) - Wikipedia

Trump providing rooms at a hotel isnt trump eccepting a bribe. I already told you that and its a logical statement.

Further, even if they go to another hotel, he could STILL eccept a bribe.

Where they meet has no bearing or none bearing on bribes given, not given, eccepted or not eccepted.

Do you understand any logic?

Do you understand its corrupt to try to punish someone who hasnt even done wrong?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You still havent answered my question. And anyone that does not answere my question is wrong in my book.

Ill ask it again. Why is it wrong for forign leaders to pay him for rooms at his hotel?

Also, if this is wrong, ill just go ahead again and point out the democrats double standard. Joe biden and obama recieved gifts from foreign leaders. Obama given pricey gifts from foreign leaders

Your own source tells you the difference:

"Nearly all of the gifts were turned over to the government."

Even though the gifts were given to Obama he did not keep them. He knew that he legally could not keep them. If Trump gave Doral to the government then I suppose he could have done that. But we all know he did not.

 

[Jose Fly]

You still havent answered my question. And anyone that does not answere my question is wrong in my book.

Ill ask it again. Why is it wrong for forign leaders to pay him for rooms at his hotel?

Because as President Lincoln noted, it's illegal for a President to accept any gift or payment from a foreign leader or government.

Also, if this is wrong, ill just go ahead again and point out the democrats double standard. Joe biden and obama recieved gifts from foreign leaders. Obama given pricey gifts from foreign leaders

Good grief dude....go read that article and pay attention this time.

 

[Jollybear]

Because as President Lincoln noted, it's illegal for a President to accept any gift or payment from a foreign leader or government.


Good grief dude....go read that article and pay attention this time.

What makes it wrong for foreign leaders to pay trump for rooms at his hotel? Why is that wrong?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Go ahead and tell me why these tendering laws you talk of are good.

They're a pain in the neck at times, but they're designed to ensure both the appearance of propriety, and to avoid overcharging, graft and corruption via provision of contracts in return for favours, friendships, etc.
They are commonly paired with approved supplier lists, for ease of implementation, and would typically kick in over a threshold.
Rules are particularly stringent where public monies are used, since redistribution of public money gathered via taxation to private pockets is an obvious point of corruption. Many, many countries have problems with this, although the degree varies.

Hes both. His family is running his business. But, he still has his business.

He shouldn't. He should have divested himself of shares and put The money raised from it in a blind trust, independently managed. This basic ethical position has been followed by former Presidents of both sides of politics. It's only the unusual laws limiting the President's legal exposure which makes this an ethical, rather than legal consideration.

It dont look bad to me. Why does it look bad to you? It looks perfectly innocent to me. Leaders pay money for rooms at a hotel. Looks just fine. And is just fine.

You can state that as much as you like. Both sides of politics agreed it was inappropriate. When you see bilateral agreement from a US Parliament, you might want to consider there is more to the rationale here than you seem willing to admit or understand.
Leaders pay money to businesses indirectly controlled by another world leader. This is not based on the hotel being judged best, or best value or anything other than Trump's evaluation. If you see nothing wrong with that, fair enough, but you're clearly a Trump cheerleader at that point.

I know what you can tell me, tell me why you think thats wrong?

I've lived in a country previously where this sort of thing happened routinely. Whether you think Trump was corrupt in this case, or misguided (I go for misguided) this is exactly how corruption works. Government funds channelled to areas personally benefitting individuals without due oversight.

Good, im happy to hear that. What are you then?

Swing voter in Australia. Centrist, basically, although that makes me socially left by US standards. Economically I'm probably slightly right.

Ah, no, its not ranty and trolly, thats a smear.

It's an opinion about what you posted.

Furthermore, if by me saying the democrats are bullying something innocent is ranty and trolly, then why is it when you say trump was doing wrong by this, that wasnt ranty and trolly?

Your entire post wasn't trolly or ranty in my opinion. But towards the end you were playing the man instead of the ball. (Err...does that saying translate?)

Furthermore, by telling me it was trolly, is that your way of trying to make me appear like im breaking forum rules just because you disagree with me? Because if thats the intent, its pretty phony.

Nope. I'm pretty chilled on that sort of stuff. I come here to talk to people of various flavours. I don't expect them to agree. Just thought you started going on about lefties and Dems, and whatever. Both folks in the centre and right of politics have had issue with this too. It's not a witch-hunt, it's an ethics issue.

Says who, you? Why cant he be both? His family is running the business, hes running the presidency, whats wrong here?

Because he is involved in decisions where he has a vested interest, such as with Turkey. It's hamstrings his ability to make decisions on behalf of the US without fear and favour.
You can disagree with my take, but separation of decision making at the Presidential level with personal profit-taking is a key tenet of a healthy democracy.

Whats wrong with foreign leaders paying for rooms at his hotel? He gets money for his business, they get rooms. Nothing is harmed. Whats wrong with that?

Nothing.

Why was his hotel selected?
How would a hotel have been selected in a dictatorship?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Also, if this is wrong, ill just go ahead again and point out the democrats double standard. Joe biden and obama recieved gifts from foreign leaders. Obama given pricey gifts from foreign leaders

1. It's quite possible to find examples of impropriety on the left. This makes no difference to whether Trump is in the right.
2. Are you sure you understand how that process works, because it's not analogous to this situation.

 

[Jose Fly]

What makes it wrong for foreign leaders to pay trump for rooms at his hotel? Why is that wrong?

Um....I just answered that.

Because as President Lincoln noted, it's illegal for a President to accept any gift or payment from a foreign leader or government.

 

[Shad]

.

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

.​

Ergo as it was free it wasn't in violation of the clause.