Trump, the I'll be to busy to play golf, President.

[lilpixieofterror]

That would have to be about the only implementation of that particular amendment in nearly 200 years (give or take ).

[mossrose]

Can I call them or what?

Yes. But apparently Chuck didn't read the very first line of the op which compares Trump to Obama, instead picking on your comments instead.

Talk about hypocrisy.

Other than that, I could care less about this thread, so, buh-bye.

[rogue06]

Yes. But apparently Chuck didn't read the very first line of the op which compares Trump to Obama, instead picking on your comments instead.

Talk about hypocrisy.

Other than that, I could care less about this thread, so, buh-bye.

Unthinking knee jerk responses appear to be his modus operandi

[oxmixmudd]

Did you know the Secret Service pays ex presidents to live at their house?

An ex president is not subject to the emoluments clause, and that is existing policy, not a scheme to pad his pockets

Are you really incapable of understanding why trump playing golf at his own resorts every 5 days and what you just mentioned are unrelated?

Are you really unable to understand why using millions of dollars of taxpayer money to play golf at his own resorts every 5 days is wrong?

[Charles]

Yes. But apparently Chuck didn't read the very first line of the op which compares Trump to Obama, instead picking on your comments instead.

Talk about hypocrisy.

Other than that, I could care less about this thread, so, buh-bye.

Unthinking knee jerk responses appear to be his modus operandi

I see you are both still dependent on personal attacks to try to make a convincing case.

You may have noticed that the comparison in the first post was not used to take focus away from the topic of the thread? It is usually a good idea to analyze such things a bit before going for personal attacks.

Happy new year.

[Cow Poke]

Unthinking knee jerk responses appear to be his modus operandi

Yeah, besides that, it's how he operates.

[lilpixieofterror]

An ex president is not subject to the emoluments clause, and that is existing policy, not a scheme to pad his pockets.

Are you really incapable of understanding why trump playing golf at his own resorts every 5 days and what you just mentioned are unrelated?

Are you really unable to understand why using millions of dollars of taxpayer money to play golf at his own resorts every 5 days is wrong?

[Leonhard]

One issue is that as a candidate, he criticized Obama for excessive golfing and implied he would stay away from the course himself.

I think you can criticize Trump for saying that, but I don't think it makes sense to criticize the activity of playing golf.

[Leonhard]

That is a bit slimy. I agree.

A bit?

Yes, a bit.

[KingsGambit]

I think you can criticize Trump for saying that, but I don't think it makes sense to criticize the activity of playing golf.

On a more general level, I think it's fair to expect that elected presidents may end up adopting different postures than they campaign on based on the realities of the job. Dick Cheney famously correctly predicted that Obama would adopt more stringent anti-terrorism stances once he gained access to the briefings he would receive in office, for instance.

[rogue06]

Yeah, besides that, it's how he operates.

And the way he works too

[Cow Poke]

And the way he works too

And how he rolls! (would you really call that work?)

[rogue06]

On a more general level, I think it's fair to expect that elected presidents may end up adopting different postures than they campaign on based on the realities of the job. Dick Cheney famously correctly predicted that Obama would adopt more stringent anti-terrorism stances once he gained access to the briefings he would receive in office, for instance.

Even with his pen and phone he never closed Gitmo.

[oxmixmudd]

Trumps hotels are not private property in that sense. The are businesses that serve the public, and the monies spent there go directly to the bottom line of those businesses, and thus add to the profits which feed into Trump's bank account, net worth, and personal success as a buisiness man.

Trump is is channeling public money into his business, not merely visiting his private property. And that represents a serious conflict of interest. That doesn't exist if the President is simply visiting his own private property, e.g. Bush going to his ranch.

To put a finer point on it. If I, at by place of business, where to form a small company and then make sure bids from my employer went to that company, I would be fired for conflict of interest and possibly go to jail (this actually happened to one of the managers at my previous employer who drove bids from the company to a business his wife owned - he was fired and IRC served time).

You are excusing actions that generally are not tolerated by any above board business and generally not officially tolerated in government either.

[lilpixieofterror]

Trumps hotels are not private property in that sense. The are businesses that serve the public, and the monies spent there go directly to the bottom line of those businesses, and thus add to the profits which feed into Trump's bank account, net worth, and personal success as a buisiness man.

Trump is is channeling public money into his business, not merely visiting his private property. And that represents a serious conflict of interest. That doesn't exist if the President is simply visiting his own private property, e.g. Bush going to his ranch.

To put a finer point on it. If I, at by place of business, where to form a small company and then make sure bids from my employer went to that company, I would be fired for conflict of interest and possibly go to jail (this actually happened to one of the managers at my previous employer who drove bids from the company to a business his wife owned - he was fired and IRC served time).

Problem is your theory is a classic case of TDS. The government is using facilities not owned by the government. Since the third amendment prevents the government from stationing government agents, in these facilities, they have to pay for it.

You are excusing actions that generally are not tolerated by any above board business and generally not officially tolerated in government either.