China suddenly approves 9 Trump trademarks it previously rejected, what, no reason, why?


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/06/14/china-trump-trademarks.html


#2


#3

So strange


#4

What happened to blurring potentially offensive images?


#5

Remember when Trump gave that news conference with that comical stacks of manila folders?


#6

In related news, a Trump-related trademark has also been recognized in Japan.


#7

Trump 9 from China?


#8

The Cubans better get busy.


#9

Just runnin’ government like a business…

Can you dig it?


#10


#11

I’m sure that’s fine. Completely normal. No particular reason why they did that. I’m sure there was no quid-pro-quo. Nope. Emoluments what’s that.


#12

I feel like there isn’t even a question here. Obviously people want to read the emoluments clause as saying that you can’t accept anything beyond what a person who wasn’t in your office would get. I don’t think that’s what it says. I think taking the ordinary cost of rent from a representative at of a foreign government at one of his hotels should be all it takes. Even if he gave them a discount, even if he provided it at below cost. He charged a fee. I think proving quid-pro-quo is a goalpost move that would have been unthinkable not long ago.


#13

Yep. If you go up to a cart selling 5 donuts for a dollar, and hand over a dollar bill without saying anything, no one could think that dollar was a random gift. And if a stranger just handed you a dollar in the street, you’d refuse because of course they’re trying to get something from you.

There is no scenario where someone personally enriches the President without it constituting corruption. The problem isn’t that his financial corruption is debatable, it’s that it’s so blatant, and has been so totally ignored, that all people can do now is try to justify it.


#14

The whole point of the emoluments clause is to prevent foreign leaders or representatives from being able to influence our leaders. Trump still financially benefits from his businesses and right now people from other countries who want to get on the administration’s good side to help a negotiation, cut a deal or smooth over a dispute can use the President’s hotels, resorts and event facilities and make sure he’s aware that they did (“We’re honored to meet you, Mr. President. My staff and I just enjoyed a lovely breakfast at your hotel. The eight rooms we have are just lovely. We’ve even decided to have our annual tourism convention there. We’ve had a 10 year relationship with the Hilton, but your convention space was just amazing.”)

The administration is trying to argue that as long as they treat foreigners the same as any customer, then the emoluments clause isn’t being violated. But the trademarks issue HAS to be a straight up violation: his company (which he financially benefits from directly) has been granted something of tremendous value by a foreign government. It’s pretty much what the emoluments clause is for.


#15

Membership has its privileges.

or

It’s good to be the king.


#16

Yeah, and Trump put himself in an ethically untenable position before he even entered office. Had he actually been serious about being (a non-corrupt) president, he would have been divesting himself of his business starting years ago, like every other candidate. Once he got elected, it simply wasn’t possible to sell off his holdings without the sales becoming bribes. He was so completely unprepared for being president - in every respect - that it made a legitimate Trump presidency impossible.


#17

I hear people ask about what would be in the articles of impeachment if they were to impeach Trump over Russia. It’s like everyone’s just forgotten he was in violation of the constitution the second he took office.


#18

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.