>

But her emails!
Unfortunately, the Emoluments Clause has no claws. >

There are quite a few laws and regulations that had their teeth removed. Arguably if something is illegal but there's no punishment then it's not illegal, which I'm sure Republicans have thought of and it's why they're always removing penalties for their "white collar" crime. >

And any non-proportional fine is basically just a permit >

You mean like banks making hundred of millions on opening fake accounts and being fined like $30 million? Yeah that's just the cost of doing business. >

He was a bigger risk than the media wanted to report.  We all knew what the issues were and that he was and still is a huge risk. >

The fact that no bank in America would loan to him was a kinda important clue. >

No we realized it, just like we realize all the crimes he's committed while never being brought to justice.
We know. >

Um...don't go lumping me in that we.  I knew for fucking sure he was/is a risk to humanity, sanity, and the world. Half the fucking people in this country wouldn't listen to me though.  Apparently I couldn't speak troglodyte well enough. >

Trump being a risk was such a surprise..... >

No, I think most of us realized how big the risk was. >

I work for a large US bank. You’ve all heard of it. In 1994, trump tried to get an Agency loan through us. Several lenders would share the credit risk under one loan agreement. I was on the due diligence team which went through trump’s finances. He didn’t get the loan. 
He’s actually much worse than most people imagine. >

You've worked at the same place since 1994? >

Since 1989 actually. I work terrible hours and they pay me lots of money. As soon as my daughter graduates from law school, I will retire. >

I realized this 20 years ago. >

American Psycho was published in 1991....
There are multiple references in there about donald trump being a kind of role model to Patrick Bateman.... >

don't worry, the incoming house of representatives will be on it and we'll have a full understanding after a thorough house investigation.
/s. because it's politics. >


Nonetheless, it is frightening to think of a president of the United States being so deeply involved financially with a nuclear armed country under an authoritarian ruler with a long history of threatening and invading its neighbors. If there was any type of foreign financial entanglement that comes closest to what the Founders feared most when drafting the emoluments clause, it is this.

Good point, but it’s like a forensic scientist looking at a dead body and being like, yup, he dead. >

Lol nuclear arms aren't in the constitution NICE TRY >

No, MSNBC. We fucking knew. >

Who could have predicted this?! /s >

We are probably on a few months out from the GOP openly soliciting bribes with impunity. >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot)


Last month the House Ways and Means Committee published six years of former President Trump's tax returns - documents that should have been released years earlier, whether by Trump voluntarily, or by congressional subpoena.
These returns, and other financial information about the Trump Organizations' foreign business dealings, and his foreign bank accounts, should have been available to Congress at the beginning of 2017, not gradually leaked out over the course of the Trump administration, with these latest tax returns only being released in late 2022.
Putin did not test his business and personal relationship with Trump by invading Ukraine while Trump was president, while the Trump administration's policies often diverged from the American president's praise for his Russian counterpart.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Trump^#1 foreign^#2 account^#3 returns^#4 President^#5 >

Good summary, however it's more correct to say they COULD have been released in 2017. There was and still is no requirement for a President to turn over their taxes.