WTF Community

Day 1114

1/ The White House plans to reassign a national security official who testified against Trump during the impeachment inquiry. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who reported his concerns over Trump’s July 25 telephone call with Ukraine’s leader to NSC officials, will be moved from the National Security Council staff to a position at the Defense Department. Trump, when was asked whether he wanted Vindman to leave, said “Well, I’m not happy with him.” Trump also suggested that his impeachment should be “expunged […] because it was a hoax.” And, when asked if his Democratic political opponents “should be held accountable,” Trump replied: “You’ll see.” (Bloomberg / Washington Post / New York Times / NBC News / CNN)

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

“U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia found the members of Congress lacked legal standing to bring suit against Trump for violating the [emoluments] clause”

Anybody know who does have standing? I suspect it would have to be the DOJ, but we know that Trump’s flunky there will never let that happen.
This has been a hell of a week, hasn’t it?


There’s a vital difference between Trump’s Friday Night Massacre and Nixon’s Saturday night one:

Nixon’s was done to protect himself and failed thanks to a Congress that was prepared to do its duty.

Trump’s is happening for sheer malice and revenge due to a Congress that enabled him.

Trump’s Friday night massacre

Even the notoriously right-wing Washington Examiner, which is best known for providing defenses of Trump’s actions, acknowledges that this looks bad.


Quoted for Truth.


This topic was automatically closed 15 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

Their argument is that they don’t have the standing because they don’t have the numbers to legislate. Which is full of it, frankly. But if a Dem House majority re-filed, they could beat that ruling potentially.

1 Like

From @matt’s CNN story from above,

This emoluments case was one of three ongoing constitutional challenges to Trump and his business, alleging that the President is violating the anti-corruption emoluments clause. Two other emoluments cases attack Trump for his alleged competitive advantage at the Trump-branded real estate empire. Those cases are still moving through the court system.

There are still two more cases on the emoluments clause challenges moving through the system. This isn’t the end. And like @Windthin said Dems can re-file.

1 Like