Trump's lawyers say Trump SoHo exit undermines emoluments lawsuit

[DonViejo]

Source: Reuters




NOVEMBER 24, 2017 / 2:25 PM / UPDATED AN HOUR AGO

Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. lawyers representing President Donald Trump on Friday said the Trump Organization’s exit from a luxury hotel in lower Manhattan undermines a lawsuit in which rival hotels and restaurants are challenging his alleged illegal receipt of payments from foreign governments while in office.

The Department of Justice said the Trump Organization’s decision on Wednesday to give up management of the Trump SoHo by year end and drop the Trump name bolsters the argument for dismissing the lawsuit, whose plaintiffs also include the nonprofit watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

“This development undermines the hospitality plaintiffs’ reliance on alleged competition with the Trump SoHo to demonstrate standing,” or legal authority to sue, the Justice Department said in a letter to U.S. District Judge George Daniels in Manhattan.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to requests for comment.





Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-lawsuit-emoluments/trumps-lawyers-say-trump-soho-exit-undermines-emoluments-lawsuit-idUSKBN1DO2FK?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social

[hatrack]

1. Uh, no, it doesn't . . . .

Pathetic.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. Took the exact words outta my mouth!

[forgotmylogin]

15. Though we appreciate that you've stopped stabbing your victim...

...that does not negate the fact that you were stabbing a victim...

[TheDebbieDee]

2. I'm not an attorney but isn't it already too

Late? How can a person be not guilty RETROACTIVELY? Do Trump's attorneys have some kind of time machine or something?

Isn't this like closing the barn doors after the animals get out?

Are his lawyers STUPID?

[lagomorph777]

6. Well, if they go back to 2016 and sell ALL the properties, maybe...

But of course, any income he still has is some combination of licensing fees and loans from Putin. No property is needed to violate the Emoluments Clause.

[Thor_MN]

10. IF they give every dime that went to a Trump company from the election to now

to the IRS, plus a penalty of ten times that amount, plus removal of every Dolt45 executive order, removal of everyone he appointed, and resign...

Maybe just a short prison sentence - like 10 years.

[FakeNoose]

17. I'm not a lawyer either, but it seems they have to satisfy this lawsuit

... one way or another. It's possible the lawsuit wasn't for money damages (?) but I don't know.

Sometimes a lawsuit is enacted to get the party stop doing something, like stop using unfair advantage to compete with me, Mr. President. Stop using your elected position to benefit unlawfully in your businesses, Mr. President. For that type of lawsuit the damages might be $1, but OK now I stopped which is really the greater value.

Most likely these lawyers are looking to get paid more than $1, I would guess.

[Achilleaze]

3. "Now that we've been busted, we claim the right to weasel out of responsibility." - Repube Prexy

What a sleazeball the republican Draft-Dodger-in-Chief is.

[bucolic_frolic]

4. I would think they could still sue for the time period

there are damages involved in some way

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. So if I steal a car, all I have to do when I see the flashing lights in the rear view mirror is to

drive it back where I got it, shut the engine off, and leave the car there.

That takes care of everything.

[pbmus]

7. Didnt pull out soon enough. ....still pregnant...

[pnwmom]

8. If that is so then that supports the argument that he should sell ALL his properties. n/t

[They_Live]

13. That's what I was thinking too.

I'm surprised that they didn't use the old chestnut: "oh it says Trump on the front of it in really big letters, and we profit from it, but it's not ours, and we don't have anything to do with it. So, we're not responsible."

[TeamPooka]

9. This suit pertains for as long as the Post Office Hotel in DC is his. and maybe more but that at

least is a lock on this lawsuit.

[They_Live]

14. That one especially

but also all the other ones. All over the world. Foreign influence and such.

[SunSeeker]

11. Good grief, you don't need a law degree to see how stupid that argument is.

Divesting from Trump SoHo (and not until at the end of 2017 per the article!) does not make the violations up to the date of divestment disappear. And there is still the most egregious example, Trump's DC hotel, as well as all his golf courses. They all compete with private businesses unfairly, thus establishing standing for the private business plaintiffs.

[eppur_se_muova]

16. I'm not breaking the law NOW, so you can't charge me for breaking it in the past ! I rest my case.

45's argument in -- appropriately enough -- a nutshell.