Trump has awarded next year’s G-7 summit of world leaders to his Miami-area resort

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ambassado12

I heard this a couple of days ago.

I think Trump was sitting back in his Oval Office and wondering. . . "What can I do that'll piss off the left next?"

To really piss off the evil left, surely he should just stay in power beyond two terms, you guys would love it as it would cause the left to meltdown, thats what this current POTUS is all about right, pissing off people, sanity evoporated a long time ago if this is the way of politics.

But I look forward to the year 2030 with President Trump in charge still, what could you want more than that as a conservative, Trump now and forever!!

But that would be a violation of the Constitution and would require a repeal of the 22nd Amendment.

If you are for the Constitution, then you can't be for more than 2 terms.

Fun fact... if the emoluments clause means what the Democrats say it means now, 7 of the first 9 Presidents would have broken it.

a reply to: Lumenari

you have a link to that? You do often demand links from others do you not?

Trump donates profits to Treasury

a reply to: Lumenari

So you admit trump is making a profit? yes or no?

Will he write that donation off on his taxes?

a reply to: tinner07

I don't think that means what you think it means. If it means any form of profit then if you are the CEO of Apple or Tesla, and somebody buys your phone or car then you are in violation of the emoluments clause. That is not what it was created for and the definition means.

Here is Mark Levin definition. It will probably go to the supreme court and Trump will win the case. He says if foreigners staying at the Trump hotel is a violation of the emoluments clause then so is foreigners buying Obama's books, which totally makes sense.

a reply to: tinner07

Trump said on Twitter he offered a no profit arrangement at the resort 😃

a reply to: Lumenari

He doesn't even have to donate the profits because that is not a violation. If that is the case then Obama would have to donate the profits of his book when foreigners buys his book. It's the same example. The leftists are just reaching for anything. It will probably be settle in Trump's favor when it reaches the Supreme Court.

a reply to: xuenchen

I wonder if Obama said the same thing when he sold his books to foreigners???

originally posted by: ambassado12

I wonder if Obama said the same thing when he sold his books to foreigners???

He made over 7 million beyond his Presidential pay check, but that is OK...nothing to see there.

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown

originally posted by: Gryphon66


No actual conservative would ever say any of that.

I cant say for certain whether this poster is a conservative but they generally give the impression they are

Trump from now until 2040 because - god

Someone can call themselves whatever they like, but conservatism in any reasonable meaning of the word does not advocate for the Constitution to be trampled.

I really believe our President offered his place just to get them going again. Did you notice it tool less than 24 hours to get a bill together to block him from doing it. Was going to be free!!..

a reply to: mikell

Was going to be free!

Not exactly according to Mick Mulvaney.

"roughly 50 percent savings."
www.nbcnews.com...

Roughly 50 percent , I'd bet that's roughly less than 50 percent , it's also a nice reputation boost for a resort that is said to not be doing well.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Someone can call themselves whatever they like, but conservatism in any reasonable meaning of the word does not advocate for the Constitution to be trampled.

Only liberals see it as a progressive living document that should be changed/updated to their desires.

originally posted by: mikell
I really believe our President offered his place just to get them going again. Did you notice it tool less than 24 hours to get a bill together to block him from doing it. Was going to be free!!..

I bet in 48 hours they could help the homeless, fix our borders, repair our infrastructure too, but none of that is a priority over removing Trump.

a reply to: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Someone can call themselves whatever they like, but conservatism in any reasonable meaning of the word does not advocate for the Constitution to be trampled.

Only liberals see it as a progressive living document that should be changed/updated to their desires.

Maybe neither of you clicked the link, it was not something I am advocating, it is a very prominent member of ATS

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Someone can call themselves whatever they like, but conservatism in any reasonable meaning of the word does not advocate for the Constitution to be trampled.

Only liberals see it as a progressive living document that should be changed/updated to their desires.

I guess Thomas Jefferson was a liberal then.

a reply to: UpIsNowDown

I did click the link, and was confused. I understood you to be speaking of the poster earlier in ths thread that seeks to trample the Constitution and call that conservatism to whom I responded originally.

I'm not sure what exactly constitutes a "very prominent member" at least in regard to ATS, but I'm aware of the author of the thread you linked, and I'm not surprised at all at the extremist content.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: mikell

Was going to be free!

Not exactly according to Mick Mulvaney.

"roughly 50 percent savings."
www.nbcnews.com...

Roughly 50 percent , I'd bet that's roughly less than 50 percent , it's also a nice reputation boost for a resort that is said to not be doing well.

but I was under the impression that Trump scrapped those plans and the G7 will not be at Doral. can you link to where it's still on? Thanks in advance.

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: thedigirati

You blurting out REEE randomly has nothing to do with what I'm saying

Sure it is. Because that's all you're saying.

Actually that's all you hear, anything above 5th grade primary school level is converted to reeeeee sounds

If you people could form thoughts at a 5th grade level, it would be a Christmas miracle.

If you had the capacity to see the irony of your post you likely wouldn't have posted that.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

I guess Thomas Jefferson was a liberal then.

Interesting point, Jefferson wanted each state to have their own currency, extremely limited federal government. He was an anti-Federalist that didn't want any Federal level Constitution.

Is that the point your are trying to make here, or are you just throwing his name out as your point in one of our founding fathers wanted an extremely limited Federal Goverment. To answer your question I would say no since the Libtards want an extremely overreaching federal Goverment that seem to have forgotten we are a republic.

Out side of Old Joe they are full socialist, are you a socialist too?