Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
You may "feel" that the Clause, in his opinion, was the reason for the fuss, but what evidence do you have that he had that opinion. Was it that because the Clause existed, it in and of itself was crap and that crap was being used to make a fuss about his wanting to host the event on his property, or was it that the Clause was being erroneously used to needlessly stir up the fuss. His legal staff had counseled him re hosting the G7 at Doral, and they didn't think there would be a conflict. Were they right or wrong--that would have been a good question to argue in the courts.
And you're doing it again. You're blatantly just saying his MO is to feel as President he should be allowed to govern as he feels fit. As if you have some authority on how he feels.
|
When your defense of the location is my "legal" staff said it's ok, you are already behind the 8-ball, look at his own personal lawyer.