• Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I just realized… this is one of the pagers of power!

    One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

    Through the ring of the pagers does the darkness lie.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I know that the people in power don’t care, but this is literally directly constitutionally illegal.

    • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Not only is the gift illegal, Trump can’t even use it because of security issues.

      It’s just rediculous all around.

    • deranger
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      It’s literally not constitutionally illegal.

      The Constitution (Article I, Section 9) prohibits anyone in the US Government from receiving a personal gift from a foreign head of state without the consent of Congress.

      The handling of gifts from a foreign official to any Federal Government employee, including the President, is largely governed by the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act of 1966 and further legislation passed in 1977. Congress has allowed Federal employees to retain any gift from a foreign government, as long as the total US retail value of the gifts presented at one occasion does not exceed an amount established by the General Services Administration (GSA). Foreign official gifts over this “minimal value” are considered gifts to the people of the United States, which the recipient must purchase from GSA, at fair market value, in order to retain.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The Constitution (Article I, Section 9) prohibits anyone in the US Government from receiving a personal gift from a foreign head of state

        I’ve added some bold to a word that’s relevant here.

        It’s actually commonplace for foreign leaders to give gifts to US Presidents. These gifts are not personal gifts and are actually owned by the US government. Some of these gifts wind up in a Presidential library.

        They can’t take this stuff home with them as that would be illegal. Of course Trump does take stuff home with him that belongs to the US government, but that’s the illegal part, not the accepting of the gift.

        Fun Fact: Justin Trudeau (really Canada’s ministry of foreign affairs) gave Trump a nicely framed photo of a hotel Trump’s grandfather owned in the Yukon. That hotel was actually a brothel. The Trump family… keeping it classy for generations.

        • deranger
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          These gifts are personal gifts, and they can be taken home, if they’re below the GSA threshold. If they’re above that threshold, the president has to pay fair market value. If they don’t pay up, it goes to the library. That’s all in the text I pasted. “Personal” is not relevant; that word is not in article I section 9.

          No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

        • deranger
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          The handling of gifts from a foreign official to any Federal Government employee, including the President

          Point out whatever section of the Constitution makes this illegal. I assume you’re referring to the Emoluments clause which explicitly says it’s illegal without congressional consent.

          Congress has consented to the President receiving gifts with the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act of 1966.

  • enkers
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I can’t tell if that’s a thinly veiled threat, or a thank you for the assist.