Donald Trump is a billionaire, a multi-billionaire. Just how many billions, well, we’re not quite sure: Forbes lists the President’s net wort at $3.7 billion, but others have disputed that. What we do know, however, is that he has plenty of money, and said that he would accept only $1.00 per year salary as President.
The Democrats, however, are looking for any little edge they can find:
by Jill Disis and Cristina Alesci | February 8, 2017: 1:57 PM ET
House Democrats are invoking an obscure federal statute to demand information about President Trump’s luxury Washington hotel.
Democrats on the House Oversight Committee want the General Services Administration to determine whether Trump is violating the hotel lease.
Trump rents the space for the Trump International Hotel from the GSA, making him effectively landlord and tenant at the same time. A clause appears to prohibit an elected official from being party to the lease.
Earlier this week, the GSA told Democrats on the committee that it had not yet decided whether Trump’s presidency triggered a violation of the lease. It also declined to provide information on the hotel’s monthly revenue.
On Wednesday, eight Democrats sent a letter invoking a 1928 provision called the Seven Member Rule. The Democrats say that provision requires executive agencies to provide any information requested by at least seven members of the Oversight Committee.
The GSA did not immediately return a request for comment.
There’s more at the original.
There is no serious concern that President Trump is somehow enriching himself at government expense. His complicated business holdings have made the traditional “blind trust” route of insulating presidents’ private wealth from their public service — and decision taking — impractical to the point of impossibility. He sold all of his shares in publicly-traded companies last June, and the shares would have been the easiest part of his wealth to have put into a blind trust.
What the Democrats are doing is putting up a massive resistance effort against President Trump, an effort that is meaningless as far as actually governing this country, but one designed to pick at any scab, trying to find some weakness. The confirmation votes on his cabinet nominees shows just how poorly the Democrats are behaving on this: despite all of his friendships with Democrats in the Senate, only one, Joe Manchin (D-WV), voted to confirm Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III1 (D-AB) to be Attorney General, and not a single Democrat voted for Betsy DeVos to become Secretary of Education. Rex Tillerson’s confirmation as Secretary of State, one which should have gone without a hitch, drew 43 negative votes from the Democrats, while only four supported him.2
That the Democrats are simply playing the obstruction game for politics has been made obvious by the upcoming Supreme Court confirmation for Judge Neil Gorsuch. From the Delaware Liberal:
February 8, 2017 at 12:25 pm
According to NRO, 9 Dems have said NO to SCOTUS filibuster… enough to kill…
Coons – DE Blue
Blumenthal- CT Blue
Manchin – WV Red
Durbin – IL Blue
Heitkamp – ND Red
McCaskill – MO Red
Tester – MT Red
Donnelly- IN Red
Shaheen – NH Blue
Naturally, The First Street Journal will give you more information than the Delaware Liberal, so I went ahead and put it in an easy-to-read chart. None of the Democrats in blue states are up for re-election in 2018, while all of the Democrats in red states are up for re-election that year.
It’s easy to see: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is smart enough to see that, if the Democrats filibuster Judge Gorsuch’s nomination, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will simply use the so-called ‘nuclear option’ to confirm him anyway, now that Orrin Hatch has showed him what a real backbone is. Senator Schumer doesn’t want to lose the filibuster option — at least, not while the Democrats are in the minority! — but the Democrats want to show how nobly they are resisting President Trump.
The solution? Get enough Democrats together who either need to not filibuster this nomination because they face tough re-election battles in red states, along with Democrats holding safe seats in blue states, who don’t face the voters in two years. It’s just enough to break a filibuster, but it’s blatantly obvious. Other than Senator Manchin, none of those Democrats voted to end debate for Messrs Tillerson or Sessions, or Mrs DeVos. Why would they then state that they won’t filibuster Judge Gorsuch, who is up for a much more important position?
We all know why!
- Yes, I know: he goes by Jeff Sessions, but his full name is such an amazing Southern name that I just have to use it! ↩
- Technically, one of the four was supposed independent Angus King of Maine, but he caucuses with the Democrats. Bernie Sanders is listed as an independent, but he not only caucuses with the Democrats, he ran for the Democratic presidential nomination, which he lost to Hillary Clinton because there was just no way that the Democrats were going to nominate someone who couldn’t beat Donald Trump. ↩