Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   Federal appeals court rules against Trump in a lawsuit alleging he's violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: News, Appeal, United States Constitution, United States, federal appeals court, Donald Trump, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, Barr Florida election supervisors, President of the United States  
•       •       •

2765 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 May 2020 at 9:13 AM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



55 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-05-14 9:07:03 AM  
Does he even need an excuse to rage tweet all day anymore? Is that just the new normal?
 
2020-05-14 9:14:02 AM  

arrogantbastich: Does he even need an excuse to rage tweet all day anymore? Is that just the new normal?


Did he ever?
 
2020-05-14 9:15:14 AM  
I assume this received the automatic appeal to the next higher court?

Soon, we'll need a special SCOTUS just for all of Trump's cases...
 
2020-05-14 9:15:20 AM  

arrogantbastich: Does he even need an excuse to rage tweet all day anymore? Is that just the new normal?


New?
 
2020-05-14 9:17:04 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


Incoming.
 
2020-05-14 9:18:31 AM  
If only there was some crisis going on where Trump could demonstrate his leadership skills.
 
2020-05-14 9:18:39 AM  
So... on to SCOTUS, where it will be ruled in his favor 5-4?

/buttery males
 
2020-05-14 9:19:09 AM  
Trump is a handsome man!  I can see how all of the women want him and all of the men want to be him!

That wonderful hair! That glowing complexion! That welcoming expression! That sultry vagina neck!

thehill.comView Full Size


/swooooooon
 
2020-05-14 9:19:10 AM  
Let's see if he schedules a press conference to show how in control he isn't.
 
2020-05-14 9:20:22 AM  
I thought everyone knew he was breaking the emoluments clause and decided to just let it slide.
 
2020-05-14 9:20:25 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-14 9:20:30 AM  
It'll make it to SCOTUS when, next year when it won't matter?
 
2020-05-14 9:21:07 AM  

OldRod: I assume this received the automatic appeal to the next higher court?

Soon, we'll need a special SCOTUS just for all of Trump's cases...


With the people picked by ... this Senate? No thanks.

Maybe if it was randomly chosen, but there's a non-zero chance all of them would be judges picked by Trump and Moscow Mitch, i.e. partisan hacks...

Crap. We're screwed, aren't we?
 
2020-05-14 9:22:20 AM  

tcaptain: [Fark user image 640x354] [View Full Size image _x_]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-14 9:22:42 AM  
A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled against President Trump in a lawsuit alleging that he's violated the Constitution's emoluments clauses.
The decision from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals keeps the case alive, rejecting the president's efforts to preserve immunity from the suit, which was filed by the attorneys general from Washington, D.C. and Maryland.


The journalist looked at his cheat sheet.  He crossed off Who, What, When, Where, How and looked for a Why.  Seeing it in the word "Maryland" he hit send on his article and went back to drinking coconut water and vodak.
 
2020-05-14 9:24:14 AM  
Appeal, delay, and rule in favor of trump 5-4 or kick the can down the road to a point where it won't matter.  It's not clear cut like the dude owning a peanut farm that would be an obvious violation.
 
2020-05-14 9:25:15 AM  
My faux wife and I were back in DC last year visiting my sons and granddaughter.  We were doing some sightseeing around town.  When we passed the Post Office monstrosity she said "lets go in, I want to see what it looks like."  I told her if she went in our faux marriage was over (I wasn't serious).  But she got the message and we didn't go in.  She will be reminding me of that this morning.  The good news is (if this is even possible) she hates trump more than I do.k.  Also, she has a much stronger stomach than I do.
 
2020-05-14 9:26:59 AM  

OldRod: I assume this received the automatic appeal to the next higher court?

Soon, we'll need a special SCOTUS just for all of Trump's cases...


Aren't all these lawsuits distracting our Greatest President from Transitioning Our Great Country that he Made Great Again to even more Greatness? How can he do all of this Tremendous work if the Courts keep stopping him. Maybe we don't need the courts, I don't know. Somebody should look into that.
 
2020-05-14 9:27:10 AM  

FlashHarry: So... on to SCOTUS, where it will be ruled in his favor 5-4?

/buttery males


I don't even see the point of letting Trump related cases go through the lower courts.  Might as well just fast track all of them to the Supreme Court.

Would save a lot of time.

It's not like any other legal norms have applied to Trump, might as well set up an exemption to the path court cases have to follow too.

/harrrumph
 
2020-05-14 9:30:14 AM  
The comments here only prove that people open their faceholes after only reading the title and not the actual article.  All they ruled was that they would not be ruling on what he asked them to rule on AT THIS TIME:


The court did not rule on the merits of the case against Trump.

The majority in the 9-6 decision found that Trump had prematurely filed an appeal in the case before a district judge had ruled on his motion to remove him from the list of defendants in the suit. "Here, the district court neither expressly nor implicitly refused to rule on immunity," the majority wrote in a brief eight-page opinion. "It did not make any rulings with respect to the President in his individual capacity. To the contrary, the district court stated in writing that it intended to rule on the President's individual capacity motion.
 
2020-05-14 9:31:55 AM  

OldRod: I assume this received the automatic appeal to the next higher court?

Soon, we'll need a special SCOTUS just for all of Trump's cases...


Just thinking that!  He's going to set another record:  lies, deaths, unemployment claims, SCOTUS cases...
 
2020-05-14 9:31:56 AM  

AdmirableSnackbar: It'll make it to SCOTUS when, next year when it won't matter?


If he is not re-elected it was still a crime and he will be stripped of his best defense: "You can't touch me, im still ur prezidunce"
 
2020-05-14 9:32:05 AM  

TTFK: The comments here only prove that people open their faceholes after only reading the title and not the actual article.  All they ruled was that they would not be ruling on what he asked them to rule on AT THIS TIME:


About that.

First, welcome to the thread. Late. Second, when the link first appeared, it contained about 4 sentences with no explanations. It was easy to think this was a decision on the case.
 
2020-05-14 9:32:52 AM  

Kiler: OldRod: I assume this received the automatic appeal to the next higher court?

Soon, we'll need a special SCOTUS just for all of Trump's cases...

Aren't all these lawsuits distracting our Greatest President from Transitioning Our Great Country that he Made Great Again to even more Greatness? How can he do all of this Tremendous work if the Courts keep stopping him. Maybe we don't need the courts, I don't know. Somebody should look into that.


We've already transitioned to greatness

https://transitionintogreatness.com/
 
2020-05-14 9:33:20 AM  

FlashHarry: So... on to SCOTUS, where it will be ruled in his favor 5-4?

/buttery males


No.  It would have helped to have linked the decision itself, but it appears they declined to rule on what is called an "interlocutory appeal" - which is an appeal of a ruling by the court that decides fewer than all of the claims against a party.  Appeals courts don't like "piecemeal litigation," so this issue will have to be brought up again on appeal after the entire case is finished in the district court.  The appellate court won't even look at the merits of the issue being appealed if they determine it has been appealed too soon.  Federal appellate procedure is so exciting, isn't it?
 
2020-05-14 9:34:30 AM  

Destructor: TTFK: The comments here only prove that people open their faceholes after only reading the title and not the actual article.  All they ruled was that they would not be ruling on what he asked them to rule on AT THIS TIME:

About that.

First, welcome to the thread. Late. Second, when the link first appeared, it contained about 4 sentences with no explanations. It was easy to think this was a decision on the case.


You expect us to actually read the articles that are linked here?

I'm busy - I've got memes to post!
 
2020-05-14 9:34:49 AM  
That place is hemorrhaging cash and letting employees go.

So, it's exactly like his casinos.
 
2020-05-14 9:35:04 AM  

TTFK: The comments here only prove that people open their faceholes after only reading the title and not the actual article.


Damn, with that kind of astute insight you should write a book. You truly pick up on the most subtle of details.
 
2020-05-14 9:38:15 AM  
I wonder how many of Drumpf's lawyers have snapped & resigned like this:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-14 9:38:44 AM  

Officer Barrelroll: FlashHarry: So... on to SCOTUS, where it will be ruled in his favor 5-4?

/buttery males

I don't even see the point of letting Trump related cases go through the lower courts. Might as well just fast track all of them to the Supreme Court.

Would save a lot of time.

It's not like any other legal norms have applied to Trump, might as well set up an exemption to the path court cases have to follow too.

/harrrumph


Because it stimulates the economy. The lawyer part of the economy, anyway. Also the transcriptionists and gavel polishers and bailiffs and under-bailiffs. Humble work but it puts food on the table.
 
2020-05-14 9:38:51 AM  

SpectroBoy: AdmirableSnackbar: It'll make it to SCOTUS when, next year when it won't matter?

If he is not re-elected it was still a crime and he will be stripped of his best defense: "You can't touch me, im still ur prezidunce"


Yeah, like we're going to prosecute a former president. We don't punish politically connected people here in the US because it would mean that every politician and operative would be at risk of being held accountable for their corruption.
 
2020-05-14 9:39:29 AM  

oldfarthenry: I wonder how many of Drumpf's lawyers have snapped & resigned like this:
[Fark user image 300x300]


Only when the check bounces
 
2020-05-14 9:40:22 AM  
Maryland AG grandstanding while Baltimore sets another murder record.  What a schmuck
 
2020-05-14 9:41:08 AM  
This keeps the case alive.

Good.  I hope somewhere down the line he gets his ass prosecuted for the emoluments bit.  Of all the things Trump has done, that's one the pisses me off the most.  It might be when he's out of office, but that's ok. Please, somewhere, let there be a person who has the balls to do this.
 
2020-05-14 9:45:07 AM  

ViolentEastCoastCity: This keeps the case alive.

Good.  I hope somewhere down the line he gets his ass prosecuted for the emoluments bit.  Of all the things Trump has done, that's one the pisses me off the most.  It might be when he's out of office, but that's ok. Please, somewhere, let there be a person who has the balls to do this.


All of these things won't just disappear when he leaves office like he thinks they will.

But the emoluments thing isn't a jailin' offense. At least not the in the big picture of his lawbreaking.

The SDNY office is just laying in wait for the day he leaves office.
 
2020-05-14 9:46:20 AM  

ViolentEastCoastCity: This keeps the case alive.

Good.  I hope somewhere down the line he gets his ass prosecuted for the emoluments bit.  Of all the things Trump has done, that's one the pisses me off the most.  It might be when he's out of office, but that's ok. Please, somewhere, let there be a person who has the balls to do this.


Yeah, instead of the hotels, maybe he should just set up a phony foundation and take cash bribes directly from foreign governments.  The hypocrisy continues to astound me.
 
2020-05-14 9:54:28 AM  

Farkin_Crazy: ViolentEastCoastCity: This keeps the case alive.

Good.  I hope somewhere down the line he gets his ass prosecuted for the emoluments bit.  Of all the things Trump has done, that's one the pisses me off the most.  It might be when he's out of office, but that's ok. Please, somewhere, let there be a person who has the balls to do this.

All of these things won't just disappear when he leaves office like he thinks they will.

But the emoluments thing isn't a jailin' offense. At least not the in the big picture of his lawbreaking.

The SDNY office is just laying in wait for the day he leaves office.


Oh I know.  I don't expect him to go to jail for it.  I'm not sure what the punishment would be, but I really don't want it to just fall away.  Take his stupid post office hotel thing or something, and turn it into an immigrant charity.
 
2020-05-14 9:55:27 AM  

HectorSchwartz: ViolentEastCoastCity: This keeps the case alive.

Good.  I hope somewhere down the line he gets his ass prosecuted for the emoluments bit.  Of all the things Trump has done, that's one the pisses me off the most.  It might be when he's out of office, but that's ok. Please, somewhere, let there be a person who has the balls to do this.

Yeah, instead of the hotels, maybe he should just set up a phony foundation and take cash bribes directly from foreign governments.  The hypocrisy continues to astound me.


He could set up a phony foundation and steal money from kids with cancer.  That might be fun.

/f*ck Trump in all things
 
2020-05-14 9:55:31 AM  

Farkin_Crazy: ViolentEastCoastCity: This keeps the case alive.

Good.  I hope somewhere down the line he gets his ass prosecuted for the emoluments bit.  Of all the things Trump has done, that's one the pisses me off the most.  It might be when he's out of office, but that's ok. Please, somewhere, let there be a person who has the balls to do this.

All of these things won't just disappear when he leaves office like he thinks they will.

But the emoluments thing isn't a jailin' offense. At least not the in the big picture of his lawbreaking.

The SDNY office is just laying in wait for the day he leaves office.


I have no faith that he will ever see one day of prison time, but I'm really hoping that he loses everything he owns. Taking away his wealth would be worse than prison to him and might even cause him to stroke out or jump off a building.
 
2020-05-14 10:06:54 AM  

Destructor: TTFK: The comments here only prove that people open their faceholes after only reading the title and not the actual article.  All they ruled was that they would not be ruling on what he asked them to rule on AT THIS TIME:

About that.

First, welcome to the thread. Late. Second, when the link first appeared, it contained about 4 sentences with no explanations. It was easy to think this was a decision on the case.


My comment came 23 MINUTES after the first one.  If all you have is this weaksauce, you really do have nothing left in the tank.
 
2020-05-14 10:27:35 AM  

TTFK: Destructor: TTFK: The comments here only prove that people open their faceholes after only reading the title and not the actual article.  All they ruled was that they would not be ruling on what he asked them to rule on AT THIS TIME:

About that.

First, welcome to the thread. Late. Second, when the link first appeared, it contained about 4 sentences with no explanations. It was easy to think this was a decision on the case.

My comment came 23 MINUTES after the first one.  If all you have is this weaksauce, you really do have nothing left in the tank.


My reply was written in a style for someone who came out, unprovoked, swinging, on the theory they could absorb a little criticism.

Bottom line: It was breaking news, there was a stub before the full article appeared that was light on details. Then, later, it filled out. Just trying to explain to you why things the way they are.

Not everyone is an idiot. And there's almost always a reason and a backstory.
 
2020-05-14 10:37:20 AM  

OldRod: I assume this received the automatic appeal to the next higher court?

Soon, we'll need a special SCOTUS just for all of Trump's cases...


There is only one appeal by right. Anything after that requires leave of the Court.
 
2020-05-14 10:39:01 AM  

tcaptain: [Fark user image image 640x354]


I really wish I had the power to hit anyone who posts that farking thing with a harmless but painful jolt of electricity.
 
2020-05-14 10:41:03 AM  

BMulligan: tcaptain: [Fark user image image 640x354]

I really wish I had the power to hit anyone who posts that farking thing with a harmless but painful jolt of electricity.


Why? We all know it's true.
 
2020-05-14 10:45:37 AM  

Nabb1: FlashHarry: So... on to SCOTUS, where it will be ruled in his favor 5-4?

/buttery males

No.  It would have helped to have linked the decision itself, but it appears they declined to rule on what is called an "interlocutory appeal" - which is an appeal of a ruling by the court that decides fewer than all of the claims against a party.  Appeals courts don't like "piecemeal litigation," so this issue will have to be brought up again on appeal after the entire case is finished in the district court.  The appellate court won't even look at the merits of the issue being appealed if they determine it has been appealed too soon.  Federal appellate procedure is so exciting, isn't it?


Ever have your briefing rejected by the Ninth Circuit because your footnotes are not in the same size type as the body text, so now you have to go print and bind another 15 copies of the briefs - at your own expense because it was your mistake missing an obscure local rule and you certainly can't bill the client for that, even though the client is a dick?

Good times.
 
2020-05-14 10:50:45 AM  

AdmirableSnackbar: BMulligan: tcaptain: [Fark user image image 640x354]

I really wish I had the power to hit anyone who posts that farking thing with a harmless but painful jolt of electricity.

Why? We all know it's true.


This from literally the very first Farker I ever got to highlight in Pants-Pissing Coward Yellow. Congratulations - you are the king of learned helplessness. Now, put your pathetic carcass to its highest and best use and go compost yourself while those of us who haven't surrendered get back to the job at hand.
 
2020-05-14 10:52:59 AM  

BMulligan: AdmirableSnackbar: BMulligan: tcaptain: [Fark user image image 640x354]

I really wish I had the power to hit anyone who posts that farking thing with a harmless but painful jolt of electricity.

Why? We all know it's true.

This from literally the very first Farker I ever got to highlight in Pants-Pissing Coward Yellow. Congratulations - you are the king of learned helplessness. Now, put your pathetic carcass to its highest and best use and go compost yourself while those of us who haven't surrendered get back to the job at hand.


I haven't surrendered at all, I simply know that our political leaders don't have the stomach to do what they need to do to protect the country. I know this because that's how they have behaved since before I was born. Voters like you put them there and support them still.
 
2020-05-14 10:57:43 AM  

BMulligan: Nabb1: FlashHarry: So... on to SCOTUS, where it will be ruled in his favor 5-4?

/buttery males

No.  It would have helped to have linked the decision itself, but it appears they declined to rule on what is called an "interlocutory appeal" - which is an appeal of a ruling by the court that decides fewer than all of the claims against a party.  Appeals courts don't like "piecemeal litigation," so this issue will have to be brought up again on appeal after the entire case is finished in the district court.  The appellate court won't even look at the merits of the issue being appealed if they determine it has been appealed too soon.  Federal appellate procedure is so exciting, isn't it?

Ever have your briefing rejected by the Ninth Circuit because your footnotes are not in the same size type as the body text, so now you have to go print and bind another 15 copies of the briefs - at your own expense because it was your mistake missing an obscure local rule and you certainly can't bill the client for that, even though the client is a dick?

Good times.


[Raises hand]

Not at the federal circuit level...But yeah...farkers....
 
2020-05-14 11:01:12 AM  

AdmirableSnackbar: BMulligan: AdmirableSnackbar: BMulligan: tcaptain: [Fark user image image 640x354]

I really wish I had the power to hit anyone who posts that farking thing with a harmless but painful jolt of electricity.

Why? We all know it's true.

This from literally the very first Farker I ever got to highlight in Pants-Pissing Coward Yellow. Congratulations - you are the king of learned helplessness. Now, put your pathetic carcass to its highest and best use and go compost yourself while those of us who haven't surrendered get back to the job at hand.

I haven't surrendered at all, I simply know that our political leaders don't have the stomach to do what they need to do to protect the country. I know this because that's how they have behaved since before I was born. Voters like you put them there and support them still.


Hmm. Actual enemy asset, or merely a useful idiot? No way to tell the difference anymore. Either way, it's well past time for the rest of us to scrape your kind off.
 
2020-05-14 11:04:19 AM  

BMulligan: AdmirableSnackbar: BMulligan: AdmirableSnackbar: BMulligan: tcaptain: [Fark user image image 640x354]

I really wish I had the power to hit anyone who posts that farking thing with a harmless but painful jolt of electricity.

Why? We all know it's true.

This from literally the very first Farker I ever got to highlight in Pants-Pissing Coward Yellow. Congratulations - you are the king of learned helplessness. Now, put your pathetic carcass to its highest and best use and go compost yourself while those of us who haven't surrendered get back to the job at hand.

I haven't surrendered at all, I simply know that our political leaders don't have the stomach to do what they need to do to protect the country. I know this because that's how they have behaved since before I was born. Voters like you put them there and support them still.

Hmm. Actual enemy asset, or merely a useful idiot? No way to tell the difference anymore. Either way, it's well past time for the rest of us to scrape your kind off.


LOL, OK. You believe me noticing the abject failure of our elected officials to address rampant corruption for decades means I'm an enemy asset or a useful idiot. You can't explain how, you just know I'm bad somehow.

Might be time for a nice rest home, old timer. The young people will fix what you've broken if you ever decide to give them a chance.
 
Displayed 50 of 55 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.