Trump Seeks To Enrich Himself By Scheduling G-7 Summit At Trump Property

In what seems to be clear violations of the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses, the President is seeking to enrich himself and his family,

The United States is scheduled to hold the G-7 Summit in 2020 and, as he had hinted earlier in the year, President Trump has decided after what the White House claims to have been an exhaustive nationwide search, to hold the meeting at a resort owned by, you guessed it, Donald J. Trump:

President Trump has awarded the 2020 Group of Seven summit of world leaders to his private company, scheduling the summit for June at his Trump National Doral Miami golf resort in Florida, the White House announced Thursday.

That decision is without precedent in modern American history: The president used his public office to direct a huge contract to himself.

Trump’s Doral resort — set among office parks near Miami International Airport — has been in sharp decline in recent years, according to the Trump Organization’s own records. Its net operating income fell 69 percent from 2015 to 2017; a Trump Organization representative testified last year that the reason was Trump’s damaged brand.

Now, the G-7 summit will draw hundreds of diplomats, journalists and security personnel to the resort during one of its slowest months of the year, when Miami is hot and the hotel is often less than 40 percent full. It will also provide a worldwide spotlight for the club.

“What about Doral?” Trump asked aides earlier this year, according to acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, who announced the move. Mulvaney said a nationwide search conducted by Trump’s administration led to the conclusion that the president was right.

“Doral was far and away the best physical facility for this meeting,” he said. The administration examined 10 sites before choosing this one, according to Mulvaney, who then quoted an anonymous site selection official who he said told him, “It’s almost like they built this facility to host this type of event.” Mulvaney did not say what other sites were vetted — just that they were all worse.

Trump’s decision to select his own resort as host of the international gathering is a sign that he is becoming more brazen about flouting criticism from Congress and shattering ethical norms that have been observed by previous presidents with regard to separating the duties of their office from their financial well-being.

It also appears to signal the collapse of promises made by the president and Eric Trump, his son and the day-to-day leader of Trump’s businesses, at the start of the Trump presidency — when they pledged to create separation between the president’s private business and his new public office.

“I will be leaving my great business in total,” Trump said as president-elect in 2016.

“There are lines that we would never cross, and that’s mixing business with anything government,” Eric Trump said in 2017.

The Trump Organization on Thursday said it was “honored” to have been chosen by its owner, the president, for this event.

“We are excited to have been asked to host the 2020 G-7 Summit at Trump National Doral,” the company said in a statement.

But the company did not respond to questions about how much money it will make off this event.

Eric Trump did not respond to questions about how much the president’s company would charge the United States or foreign governments during the event. He also did not respond to questions about whether the Trump Organization would ask taxpayers to pay for upgrades to the site. One obvious concern for next year: There will be at least eight world leaders coming to this event, but at present Doral has just two “presidential suites.”

The State Department, which typically helps organize these events, declined to comment.

Mulvaney said the White House was not going to release information about the selection process.

“If you want to see our paper on how we did this, the answer is absolutely not,” he said.

There are some reports that the resort would be providing the rooms “at cost,” which makes it sound like the Trump Organization would at least technically not be making a profit off the event. However, this is not entirely clear. For one thing, as many travel industry analysts who have spoken to reporters have noted, business at Doral, one the lesser-known of Trump-branded properties in Florida, has been down in recent years. In addition to that, the G-7 Summit would occur during the summer months which for understandable reasons are typically a low-point for resorts in the Miami area. Reporter David Farenthold, for example, pointed out on Twitter last night that the months of June through August are typically slow months at Doral:

Even if the resort choose to discount its ordinary rates to host the summit, something that may not be permitted at least in connection with the White House and its accompanying support team according to Federal law, it would still be generating revenue off of space that is usually empty at the time and therefore not making money. Therefore, hosting the summit at Doral would be of significant financial benefit to The Trump Organization and, since he never fully divested himself from his various businesses, the President of the United States himself.

Quite obviously, this decision brings to question issues under the Emoluments Clause, which have received more attention in the past two and a half years than they did during the previous 230 years since the drafting of the Constitution. Generally speaking, an “emolument” is defined as ” the returns arising from office or employment usually in the form of compensation or perquisites.” The Constitution, though, distinguishes between emoluments from foreign sources and those from domestic sources. This decision, though, implicates both of the Emoluments provisions of the Constitution as well as other aspects of the law.

The first provision, known as the “Foreign Emoluments Clause,” is found in Article I, Section Nine, Clause 8 of the Constitution and prohibits any Federal official from receiving without Congressional consent “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.” This clause is implicated, of course, due to the fact that hosting the G-7 means that Doral would be accepting money from the representatives of no less than six foreign nations, and possibly more if representatives from non-member nations are invited as has happened in the past. With respect to this provision, it is worth noting that the clause does say that Congress can consent to the foreign emolument, but it doesn’t specify what form that consent must take. In any case, the provision means that Trump needs to get Congressional permission to hold the G-7 Summit at any of his properties whether its Doral, Mar-A-Lago, or anywhere else.

The second clause, known as the “Domestic Emoluments Clause,” can be found in Article II, Section 1, Clause 7 and states that the President “shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States or any of them.” This clause is relevant to the Doral decision since the United States Government, through the office of the President, would be giving money to a property operated by the President’s business. Unlike the Foreign Emoluments Clause, there is no escape clause whereby the transaction could be approved by Congress.

In addition to these Constitutional provisions, there are other potential violations of the law here that should be investigated. This includes the question of whether or not there was ever an objective search process, whether bids for hosting were considered from other locations and how those bids might have been handled, and whether or not the laws governing the solicitation and awarding of government contracts were followed.

Mulvaney’s comments notwithstanding, the idea that Doral was the “best” location for holding the Summit is utterly absurd. In the years since the first G-7 Summit in 1975, the United States has hosted the summit six separate times at locations that have included Puerto Rico, Williamsburg, Houston, Denver, Sea Island (Georgia), and Camp David. (Source) The idea that there is nowhere else in the United States that would be suited for a summit of this type is therefore absurd and laughable. Additionally, the fact that the White House is refusing to discuss the process that was undertaken to search for a location for the summit other than the one that happened to be mentioned by the President at the end of the last G-7 summit leads one to believe that there was no legitimate selection process at all.

In addition to Congressional investigations, there are likely to be lawsuits surrounding this decision in addition to those that have already been followed. This would join several other lawsuits that have been filed under these clauses. This includes one brought in Federal District Court in New York by a restaurant owner who claimed that the President’s continued ownership of the Trump hotel in Washington, among other properties, damaged his business. That suit was dismissed for lack of standing but reinstated by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Another suit was brought in Maryland by the State of Maryland and the District of Columbia. That suit was also dismissed for lack of standing and the current status of the case, which could be appealed to the Supreme Court, is unclear. Finally, there is a case brought by more than 200 Members of Congress and Senators in the U.S. District Court in Maryland. In October of last year, a Federal Judge rejected arguments that the Congressional Plaintiffs lacked status and the case remains open at the District Court level. This situation, meanwhile, this case seems to me to be exactly the kind of international and domestic self-dealing that the Emoluments Clauses were meant to address.

FILED UNDER: Donald Trump, Law and the Courts, Politicians, U.S. Constitution, US Politics, , , ,
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Kit says:

    I’m reminded of that scene in The Matrix: He’s beginning to believe!

    Congress won’t touch him. Voters are begging for more of the old doublethink. And now Trump finally feels ready to be himself. No more hiding! Well before the eighth year of his reign, we’ll have horses in the Senate, and Trump parading around in his new clothes. Maybe even a live reality TV show to take us behind the scenes…

    Well either that or he’s losing it as the walls start to collapse. Or maybe even both.

    ReplyReply
  2. Scott says:

    I put this comment in Open Forum so I’ll cut and paste it here.

    I don’t know the specific contracting rules for the White House but I do know Federal contracting and you usually have to put together a RFP, get bids, run a source selection, and legally fully justify that you selected the best contractor. There are exceptions but those are laid out in the Federal Acquisition Regulations and it takes time to write, vet, and get approval for those justifications. So I’m waiting for some other company to file a protest with the GAO. And, of course, the crafting of another article of impeachment for constitutional violations.

    In addition, we need to watch how much taxpayer money will be spent to “make suitable” the facilities and grounds. Not only will there be rental money coming in but also taxpayer “investment” money for things like security (cameras, etc), paint, fixtures, and more.

    ReplyReply
    13
  3. Daryl and his brother Darryl says:

    So let me get this straight. From now on, in this country, Government officials are free to award themselves contracts? No questions asked?

    I think it’s terrific that Republicans are all for shredding the Constitution in order to prevent Donald Trump’s 7th bankruptcy.

    ReplyReply
    19
  4. de stijl says:

    He’s too stupid to realize what he’s done here.

    And apparently so vain to ignore advice from counsel.

    Or he’s taunting us.

    ReplyReply
  5. mattbernius says:

    Looking forward to seeing our Trump supporters who are so deeply concerned about the possibility of, at a minimum, the appearance of impropriety in the case of Joe and Hunter Biden, defend this decisions.

    Oh wait, that’s right, they won’t because they are cowards who just shitpost and run.

    ReplyReply
    10
    1
  6. CSK says:

    I hope they get rid of the bedbugs.

    ReplyReply
  7. CSK says:

    Duplicate comment.

    ReplyReply
  8. Argon says:

    Well, what’s happening in GOP land is that some are concerned about the ‘optics’ of the decision. Not the legality, the ‘optics’. Whatever that means…

    ReplyReply
  9. Joe says:

    @de stijl:

    Or he’s taunting us.

    Bingo.

    ReplyReply
  10. Michael Reynolds says:

    Merkel and Macron should announce that they won’t attend. That should do the trick.

    As for why Trump would do it, there’s a particular kind of risk-taking that can be reassuring – he’s soothing himself with the knowledge that no matter how blatant his corruption his cult is so morally depraved they’ll endorse anything. Look for him to rape a child on the White House steps, just to really push the envelope on the see-no-evil good Germans and the hardcore, devoted toadies.

    ReplyReply
    11
  11. Teve says:

    This is when the cult leader realizes they’re all his brainless slaves and he can start bedding the womens.

    ReplyReply
  12. Joe says:

    Merkel and Macron should announce that they won’t attend. That should do the trick.

    I was thinking, Michael Reynolds, how interesting it would be if they were all “busy” that day and sent their senior staff in their stead.

    ReplyReply
  13. gVOR08 says:

    You know, there’s a way to look at this as good news. Looks like Erdogan, Putin, and Kim have decided to grab what they can now, estimating Trump won’t be around a lot longer. Maybe Trump’s making the same calculation. At this point, what’s one more article of impeachment?

    ReplyReply
  14. Pylon says:

    So their defence is going to be that they are doing this at “cost” and therefore not profiting. Newsflash – when your property is presently losing money by the truckload, getting a contract that will even cover costs is a huge windfall. Not that I trust their numbers and promises anyway.

    ReplyReply
    14
  15. Kathy says:

    In Mexico there would be an open invitation (much like an RFP open to everyone interested), or at the least a limited invitation for proposals from no less than three persons (actual people or corporations).

    If the president happened to own a suitable resort, BTW, it would be barred from submitting a proposal. The law states that companies owned even in part by a person with a job in the federal government, cannot submit bids or proposals for federal government acquisitions of goods or services.

    The only exception possible, is if there are no other suitable bids. And even then, the agency hiring the service has to have an iron-clad legal justification for this.

    This is not just banana-republic level of corruption on Trump’s part, but flagrant, incompetent banana-republic level of corruption.

    ReplyReply
  16. al Ameda says:

    So, the Emoluments Clause specifically exempts these kind of situations?

    ReplyReply
  17. mattbernius says:

    @Pylon:

    Not that I trust their numbers and promises anyway.

    Nor should you given their record of keeping double books:

    https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-inc-podcast-never-before-seen-trump-tax-documents-show-major-inconsistencies

    ReplyReply
  18. Guarneri says:

    LOL. And they say he’s crazy…..

    I hope he’s trolling and cancels the venue, while claiming he was trying to save money. You morons.

    And he gives his salary away, that money grubbing whore.

    ReplyReply
    2
    36
  19. Daryl and his brother Darryl says:

    @Guarneri:

    And he gives his salary away, that money grubbing whore.

    Between when Trump declared his candidacy in 2015, and June of 2018, over $16M had poured into Trump Organization-managed and branded hotels, golf courses and restaurants from his campaign, Republican organizations, and government agencies. Who knows what that number is now.
    Drew, you used to claim to be the worlds greatest businessman…but we always knew you’re just a moron.

    ReplyReply
    28
  20. Gustopher says:

    @Guarneri: So you won’t defend the action, just claim that he is doing it to pwn the libs?

    Have you worked yourself up to supporting the sudden Syria withdrawal yet as pwning the Kurds?

    ReplyReply
    13
  21. Michael Reynolds says:

    @Guarneri:
    The presidential salary is 400 grand. That’s less than I make. And by giving that away, he buys your brainless subservience and that of your fellow cult members.

    It’s a rather basic con, essentially a variation on a pigeon drop where you and the conman ‘find’ a dropped wallet. The conman gives the mark proof that he’s honest by giving up something useless – often counterfeit currency – which convinces the mark to give up something real. You ‘got’ 400k in exchange for giving up anything Trump wants.

    You’re a sucker, dude.

    ReplyReply
    25
  22. al Ameda says:

    @Guarneri:

    LOL. And they say he’s crazy…..

    I’m not sure who ‘they’ is, but I’d consider ‘crazy’ those who unconditionally and uncritically support a man who lies as easily and as often as he breathes, and who continues to be the same vindictive malevolent grifter now that he’s been his whole adult life.

    Trump isn’t crazy, he’s been running this con his entire life, he’s never been said ‘no’ to. He expects people to do as he wants them to, and if they don’t he goes after them. He’s one of his beloved ‘deplorables.’ That seems about right.

    ReplyReply
    11
  23. Michael Reynolds says:

    I’ve switched from writing YA to adult thrillers (among other things) and the adult books center on a semi-retired conman and thief. The basic conceit is a sort of tongue-in-cheek notion of what I’d have become had I never met my wife and stayed in the crime game. It’s a weird brain-twister as it requires me to get back into that amoral, predatory frame of mind.

    Apropos of which, I’ll bet I could clean @Guarneri out of 100 large within a week. Arrogant, ignorant old men are prime targets and Mr. Great Businessman here is a classic. It’s important that the mark think they’re shrewd.

    ReplyReply
  24. grumpy realist says:

    @Michael Reynolds: Well, Drew is arrogant, anyway….

    Have never had the impression that he’s an old man, however. All his writing I’ve read puts him IMHO in the “young squirt who thinks Ayn Rand knew what she was talking about” basket.

    (I bet he believes bitcoin is the Greatest Thing Evah)

    ReplyReply
  25. Teve says:

    @grumpy realist: I keep track of that price just to laugh. If you bought a bitcoin on my birthday this summer you’ve now lost $4200. 🙂

    ReplyReply
  26. reid says:

    @Michael Reynolds: What proof do we have that he isn’t actually keeping his salary, anyway? I’m skeptical of any claims like that from him. He’s a known liar and extremely greedy.

    ReplyReply
    15
  27. DrDaveT says:

    @Scott:

    I don’t know the specific contracting rules for the White House but I do know Federal contracting and you usually have to put together a RFP, get bids, run a source selection, and legally fully justify that you selected the best contractor.

    …and that’s just on the government side. On the contractor side, the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) requires contractors on non-competed awards to submit cost and pricing data that is “truthful, accurate, and complete”. Underpricing is just as bad as overpricing.

    ReplyReply
  28. DrDaveT says:

    @Guarneri:

    And he gives his salary away

    To his own crooked charity?

    ReplyReply
    11
  29. mattbernius says:

    @Guarneri:
    Way to show up with Jack and Shit.

    Absolutely no defense other than “I hope he’s trolling (because even I understand how bad this is).”

    And he gives his salary away, that money grubbing whore.

    Yet he won’t disclose his income so we can see whether or not he’s actually losing money based on the significant increase in the use of his properties by both the Republican Parties and Foreign Nationals.

    Heck, even the choice to use Doral “at cost” (looking forward to transparency on that one) seems tied to the fact that business was slow there (at least according to one set of books… Trump keeps so many for the same properties). I wonder how that “at cost” compares to holding it at Camp David (which was specifically built for holding these events and has hosted the event in the past).

    I mean you went to the U of C business school, I think you probably attended at least one class where the topic of “loss leaders” came up.

    Beyond that, I see you continue your silent support of ethnic cleansing of an ally. Man, how does it feel to look in the mirror every day and know that, for the right amount of tax cuts, you’ll passively support atrocities?

    But again, we know that you just shitpost and leave — so it’s not like you have the necessary spine to actually respond to any posters.

    Your courage and integrity under fire is a inspiration to us all.

    ReplyReply
    13
  30. Michael Reynolds says:

    @grumpy realist:
    Nah, he’s old, like me. He’s not a naive young squirt, that would be less tragic than the reality which is that he’s an old man who time has passed by and who reacts with impotent rage. Rage, rage against the changing of the world. Ten years ago at Schuler’s place he was still capable of some coherence. But then again, so was Schuler.

    I don’t think it’s diminished capacity in the medical sense, it just seems an awful lot of older people call a halt to thinking about the future. They curl up like armadillos on a Texas freeway to await the great Grim 18-wheeler. And honestly I feel the temptation sometimes. It’s got to be more relaxing just to sit and stew in your own prejudices rather than struggle to keep up.

    ReplyReply
    10
  31. gVOR08 says:

    @Kathy:

    incompetent banana-republic level of corruption.

    Our system seems largely unable to deal with a corrupt president. The incompetence is the only thing saving us.

    I worry about the next GOP, who will have learned how to play faux populism from Trump, but may be competent at corruption and autarchy.

    ReplyReply
  32. KM says:

    @Guarneri:

    And he gives his salary away, that money grubbing whore.

    Actually, can you prove that? He won’t release his taxes and other financial information. Other then his crooked word – and the words of cronies proven willing to lie about virtually everything – what proof can be offered he’s *not* pocketing the money and just telling you suckers he’s being selfless? Does POTUS get a W-2?

    EDIT: should have read down – @reid beat me to it.

    ReplyReply
  33. Teve says:

    @gVOR08: “Malevolence Tempered by Incompetence” -Benjamin Wittes

    ReplyReply
  34. Blue Galangal says:

    @Guarneri:

    And he gives his salary away, that money grubbing whore.

    Does he, though? Have we seen any cancelled checks?

    ReplyReply
  35. Mikey says:

    Trump “gives his salary away” but American taxpayers have paid a couple hundred years’ equivalent of Presidential salary to Trump’s own resorts where he has spent part or all of nearly 300 days, and his cultists think this is a great deal.

    No wonder they’re such easy marks…

    ReplyReply
  36. Daryl and his brother Darryl says:

    There are some reports that the resort would be providing the rooms “at cost,” which makes it sound like the Trump Organization would at least technically not be making a profit off the event.

    I promise you that profit is built into “the cost”.

    ReplyReply
  37. Kathy says:

    @mattbernius:

    I wonder what “at cost” even means for a hotel.

    First, like airline fares, resort and hotel rates are largely a function of supply and demand. Don’t believe me? Check rates for hotels in Vegas mid-November vs New year’s eve, or vs Super Bowl weekend.

    Second, rates are easily changed. So if a suite goes for, say, $450 a night, Dennison can easily hike it to $900 and then offer it “at cost” for $500.

    Third, there’s the matter of resort fees, which are infamous by now. Like ancillary fees in airlines (bags, seat assignments, food, etc.), resort fees ar not formally part of the room rate, even if they include services like bottled water, WiFi, access to the fitness center, etc. These fees also cause a smaller tax liability.

    Fourth, combine all of the above and you’ll find out how easily something “at cost” can be outrageously expensive.

    ReplyReply
  38. KM says:

    Why is it even “at cost”? Shouldn’t he be doing the heroic and patriotic thing and offer to host G-7 for free? After all, we’ve been assured countless times by his toadies that “Trump’s not making a profit” or “taking a salary” but who says he should even break even? If it’s “so perfect it’s like it’s made for this”, should he want to show it off and the reputation boost it gets makes up for any lost revenue?

    Tell you what – he can have the summit there is nothing is compensated. Not him, not his family, not his business / trust/ foundation / WTFever. No renovations or upgrades paid for. No charges or bill whatsoever. He personally eats any and all costs because he’s the proud host showing off his property and it’s gauche AF to make guests pay for a party you invited them to. Also, any problems or inconveniences caused by the chaos this would bring to Miami and it’s airport should be charged to Trump. Money in an escrow up front as a sign of good faith.

    ReplyReply
  39. EddieInCA says:

    Second, rates are easily changed. So if a suite goes for, say, $450 a night, Dennison can easily hike it to $900 and then offer it “at cost” for $500.

    The “at cost” rate is the ABSOLUTE worst rate you can get at a hotel. That means the “rack rate”. It’s usually anywhere from200%-400% more than the actual price you paid for the hotel room.

    I travel alot. A whole lot. I’m Executive Platinum on American and Platinum on Delta. I’m Globalist with Hyatt and Platinum Elite with Marriott. I pay about $100-$150 per stay at a Hyatt or Marriott. Sometimes a bit less, occasionally a bit more if your in NYC or SF or Seattle. The rack rate for those rooms – listed on that little card (usually on the back of a closet door, or the back of the bathroom door) – is usually $450-$600. No business traveler ever pays the rack rate, unless is for a convention, government function, or other even where a corporation is paying the tab.

    So if Trump is saying he’s going to give the rooms “at cost”, he’s intending to fleece the governments of each country coming to the G7.

    ReplyReply
    10
  40. Kathy says:

    @gVOR08:

    The incompetence is the only thing saving us.

    There’s that.

    For example, Dennison might have grandly announced he was divesting fully, selling all his interest, and his children’s (if any) to some Joe Schmoe free and clear, through a loan Dennison himself would magnanimously offer with a ridiculously low interest rate, or free of interest even.

    Of course, Joe would be just the front, while the trump Spawn would really keep running things, and everyone would know but no one could prove a thing. The media might not even report it (it’s far more complicated than this simple outline), except perhaps for all those silly foreigners who think just because Trump’s name is on a hotel, they’d ingratiate themselves to Trump.

    But that’s advanced, competent corruption at the banana republic level. Far above Trump’s pay grade.

    I wonder how he does on kickbacks.

    ReplyReply
  41. Kathy says:

    @EddieInCA:

    Here’s an idea for an investigative journalist, or one on the White House beat:

    If this stands and the G-7 is held at Trumps’ resort, said journalist ought to book two stays at the property before the event, one in high-season and one in low-season, taking note how much they paid between room rate, taxes, and resort fees (if any). Then when the G-7 takes place, ask to see how much is being charged for the same room.

    ReplyReply
  42. Modulo Myself says:

    His resorts are the pits. No human being would want to go there. You can get reservation tonight for 2 at the steakhouse at the Doral, which is always a good sign. And here’s an image of a martini at a Trump place.

    ReplyReply
  43. Kathy says:

    @Modulo Myself:

    That looks terrible, but unsourced photos lack a back story. For all we know, the customer asked for it that way (unlikely). I recall an acquaintance who ordered beer at room temperature, served in a glass filled with ice (I don’t drink beer, but I get the impression this somehow makes it taste even worse).

    I don’t drink Martinis, either, but I know Martini jokes:

    1)
    Joe: Why is there booze and bar equipment on your camping gear?
    Bill: Oh, that’s to be used in case we get lost on our hike.
    Joe: What?
    Bill: Sure. If we get lost, we find a safe spot and make a Martini.
    Joe: How does that help?
    Bill: The moment we’re done, a dozen people will show up and say “That’s not how you make a Martini!”

    2)
    Septimus, a professor of Latin Studies, goes into a bar and asks the bartender for a dry Martinus.
    “Don’t you mean a dry Martini, Professor?”
    “No, my good man. A dry Martinus. It’s far too early in the day to order a double.”

    ReplyReply
  44. Hal_10000 says:

    I think I’ve quoted this before on this forum, but worth repeating:

    “From vices timidly concealed to vices openly displayed. One follows the other as sure as decay follows death.” – Appius Silanus, “I, Claudius”

    Trump isn’t even pretending any more. He’s openly corrupt. Like the Caesars of old.

    Hey, that means he was right about the Rome thing! Huh.

    ReplyReply
  45. Jim Brown 32 says:

    Raggedy ass motel….smh

    ReplyReply
  46. EddieInCA says:

    @Kathy:

    If this stands and the G-7 is held at Trumps’ resort, said journalist ought to book two stays at the property before the event, one in high-season and one in low-season, taking note how much they paid between room rate, taxes, and resort fees (if any). Then when the G-7 takes place, ask to see how much is being charged for the same room.

    I just did a search on what should be a very high end weekend, Dolphins/Patriots. A regular room can be had for $176 and a suite for $346. Plus a $28.25 resort fee daily.

    BUT…. Long before Trump purchased the property, and it was known as just Doral, I stayed there and played the course. I’ve not gone back since Trump purchased it, but golfing friends of mine have been there and they tell me its a disaster. The website looks great. The reality… not so much. Those of you who travel know what I mean when I say a place is dated. Trump purchased the property and hasn’t done anything to really upgrade it. The Resort is losing money.

    Additionally, has anyone ever been in Miami in June. It’s over 90 degrees every day, and it rains, literally, every day between 3 and 5pm. Every. Day.

    #Cult45 just doesn’t get now, and never will, what a maroon their Dear Leader actually is.

    ReplyReply
  47. An Interested Party says:

    All of this wouldn’t work as fiction…at least in fiction, we’d see a much better class of grifter…it’s like Archie Bunker inherited millions and then ended up being president…actually, scratch that…even Archie Bunker had more integrity and more decency than this trash in the White House…

    ReplyReply
  48. Jim Brown 32 says:

    @EddieInCA: Ive played there, there are easily 50 courses in Florida better than Doral.

    ReplyReply
  49. Michael Reynolds says:

    It’s much worse than all the above speculation. Doral has only two presidential suites: remodeling. They’ll have to build helipads on the golf course and when they’re done: rebuild the golf course. Advance crews will be in for hundreds of nights. Trump will rip off millions.

    ReplyReply
  50. OzarkHillbilly says:

    Way late and chances are nobody will see this but I have to add it anyway: Trump awarded the G7 to his resort in Doral – without telling anyone in Doral

    It was billed as “far and away” the best venue when the acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney declared that Donald Trump had awarded next year’s G7 summit to the president’s own luxury golf resort in Florida.

    Yet buried in the ballyhoo of the extraordinary announcement was an even more surprising revelation (or maybe not): nobody had bothered informing the locals.

    The city of Doral and its police department that will supposedly host and protect world leaders and their entourages at US taxpayers’ expense were caught on the hop by the proclamation.

    So too were the Miami-Dade police department, and the senior officials of the county’s tourism bureau, who usually have the job of securing blocks of hotel rooms when events of such international importance come to town.

    ReplyReply
  51. grumpy realist says:

    @EddieInCA: One of the most amusing stays I ever had was at a Days Inn which had obviously gone through several layers of remodeling from its original 1960s days of tackiness. The walls were mainly covered with white stucco–except for near the sink, which was brown. Carpet was airport green, while the furniture was Naugahyde orange and plastic veneer over particle board. Something else was blue. And then of course the huge, HUGE TV stuck on the desk so you could watch it while lying in bed.

    Everything was pristine clean, the bed was perfect, and the sheets were spotless, but oh lord the color matching….

    I wrote it up on Hotels.com later, gave it 5 stars, and said “everyone should stay in a hotel like this at least once. It is a fantastic remedy to every single Martha-Stewarted-out-of-your-lives place you have ever been inflicted with.”

    I still find it hilarious.

    ReplyReply
  52. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Argon: Just a variation on the usual con. They want to leave the impression that it only looks [edit:] illegal unconstitutional. Hence “optics.”

    ReplyReply
  53. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Kathy: Which points out a significant difference between Mexico and the US. While Mexico has a statute prohibiting such situations we only have a non-enforceable compact of principles by which to prevent abuse.

    (Without implying anything about Mexico in specific, simply going from your conclusion) I wonder what it is that banana republics know/understand about human nature that our founders didn’t?

    ReplyReply
  54. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Teve: True, but the people who sold to grumpy would be just fine. It’s a volatile commodity similar to gold. The secret is to sell it to people who are just getting on the escalator/elevator.

    ReplyReply
  55. Liberal Capitalist says:

    @Gustopher:

    Have you worked yourself up to supporting the sudden Syria withdrawal yet as pwning the Kurds?

    Actually, what I have heard from a local Trumper is:

    … this is just another example of how NATO is a failure. This is clearly a NATO action, and a stab-in-the-back to America.

    Another example of why we should not fund them, nor involve ourselves with actions that do not benefit America.

    See… easy. Not trump at all. Just a 50 year old nationalist talking point.

    ReplyReply
  56. Mister Bluster says:

    Chump caves:
    “Based on both Media & Democrat Crazed and Irrational Hostility, we will no longer consider Trump National Doral, Miami, as the Host Site for the G-7 in 2020. We will begin the search for another site, including the possibility of Camp David, immediately. Thank you!” he tweeted.
    Politico

    Gotta’ wonder who in the White House talked him out of this dumb idea.

    ReplyReply

Speak Your Mind

*