Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eugene

(61,891 posts)
Tue Aug 14, 2018, 10:59 AM Aug 2018

It's not an emolument, but it is piggish

Source: Washington Post

It’s not an emolument, but it is piggish

By Jennifer Rubin
August 14 at 9:15 AM

McClatchy reports:

At least 125 Republican campaigns and conservative political groups spent more than $3.5 million at President Donald Trump’s resorts, hotels and restaurants since January 2017, the month he was sworn in, according to an analysis by McClatchy.

-snip-

Let’s assume for a moment that none of the money collected came from a foreign state, and that no state benefits (domestic emoluments) — such as zoning changes or infrastructure payments — were conveyed. This is still grotesque. It is the essence of corruption to use your power to enrich yourself, to extract dollars from those who wouldn’t otherwise spend their money on whatever you are peddling.

If Trump were an ordinary executive branch employee, this conduct would most likely violate federal ethics laws. In general, federal ethics guidelines state: “Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain. . . . Employees shall not use public office for private gain.” Repeatedly staying at one’s own property and then requiring attendance of other government employees; hiking one’s membership fees to monetize the president’s newfound fame, charging Secret Service for golf carts and other equipment all arguably fall into this category.

More specifically, ethics rules state, “An employee shall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office in a manner that is intended to coerce or induce another person, including a subordinate, to provide any benefit, financial or otherwise, to himself or to friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity.” Likewise, a government employee is not supposed to “use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office to endorse any product, service or enterprise.”

-snip-

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/08/14/its-not-an-emolument-but-it-is-piggish/
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»It's not an emolument, bu...