We aren't talking nearly enough about the fact that Donald Trump STILL hasn't paid back more than $1 million to multiple cities for rally costs. City officials have been trying to get money back for weeks/months & still have nothing. If this doesn't break the law, it should.

— Victor Shi (@Victorshi2020) March 27, 2023

The billionaire former president owes the city $569,204 for transportation, security and a 21-percent late fee. https://t.co/uxvKnkS9tK

— Houston Chronicle (@HoustonChron) October 22, 2022

When will people learn? If trump isn’t made to pay in advance, he doesn’t pay.

Trump refuses to explain why he won't pay El Paso $500,000 he owes the city after nearly 4 years https://t.co/b5hJgZZsgL

— Kurt Eichenwald (@kurteichenwald) October 22, 2022

That's nothing for him. He stills owes El Paso half a million dollars. El Paso is a pretty poor border city in Texas. https://t.co/UrEjHWW48Y

— LibertyAndJusticeForAll!!! Suzanne (@SMurray1000) December 9, 2022

Doesn’t this imply that Trump is guilty? If he was innocent, why would he want a settlement?

— Harris Levy (@HarrisL585) September 15, 2022

Breaking News: A federal grand jury has issued subpoenas related to Save America PAC, which was created by Donald Trump to raise money as he promoted baseless voter fraud claims after his loss in the 2020 election. https://t.co/aOf10IuKBU

— The New York Times (@nytimes) September 8, 2022

A federal grand jury investigating the activities leading up to the insurrection has expanded its probe to include seeking information about Trump's leadership PAC Save America https://t.co/KlWZLgMPXM

— Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) September 8, 2022

Trump’s longtime accountant says a decade’s worth of his financial statements “should no longer be relied upon” and suggested that any recipient of the documents be alerted, according to a copy of the letter filed in New York court filings. https://t.co/npkO3Xx5S6

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) February 14, 2022

Mazars, the accounting firm that signed off on the Trump Org’s filings *for years*, cut ties to the company and says it can no longer stand behind the financial statements. https://t.co/4FXEwFj9GA

— Tim O'Brien (@TimOBrien) February 14, 2022

News – Mazars has effectively fired the Trump Organization, citing a non-waivable conflict, and determined that Trump's financial statements from 2011-20 should not be relied on, per a letter to Alan Garten filed in court today. pic.twitter.com/UmC1nVe4ZP

— southpaw (@nycsouthpaw) February 14, 2022

This is brutal. Trump's counsel hired an appraiser for his Silver Springs property. The appraiser told them it was worth $29M-$50M. Trump then turned around and told his tax accountants at Mazars that it was worth $161M. pic.twitter.com/CsFnOQNIsw

— Scott Stedman (@ScottMStedman) January 19, 2022

The Trump Organization's longtime accounting firm Mazars said it no longer wants Trump's business, as it doesn't trust the financial documents the Trump Org has given them. https://t.co/2DJrMmR7bY

— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) February 14, 2022

Mazars says as a result of their decision regarding the financial statements they will no longer be doing work for the Trump Organization.

— Tom Winter (@Tom_Winter) February 14, 2022

Bigger problem for Trump:

The loan agreements relying on the fraudulent financial reports likely have "representations and warranties" — including one in which Trump was vouching for the accuracy of all info he provided.

So Trump may now be in breach of the lending agreements.

— Tristan Snell (@TristanSnell) February 14, 2022

AG James cites Mazars's declaration that it can no longer stand behind its financial statements to the Trump Organization in pushing judge to order depositions of Trump and others.

— Harry Litman (@harrylitman) February 15, 2022

Former President Donald Trump's long-time accounting firm informed the Trump Organization last week that it should no longer rely on nearly 10 years' worth of financial statements and that they would no longer be their accountants, citing a conflict of interest pic.twitter.com/VivhdzV34K

— CNN (@CNN) February 15, 2022

NEW: NY prosecutors are now focused on whether Trump broke the law by providing widely different valuations for the same properties.

In one case, Trump told lenders a bldg was worth $527M— but told tax authorities it was worth just 1/30th of that.https://t.co/fJTBIuJDSI

— David Fahrenthold (@Fahrenthold) November 22, 2021

Trump has his own political operation, with a whopping $100 million in the bank. He's got a private business worth hundreds of millions.

But…the RNC agreed to pay his legal bills?

"He's a leader of our party," a spokesperson said. https://t.co/KLxSbEQICl

— David Fahrenthold (@Fahrenthold) November 22, 2021

Trump’s practice of giving different valuations for the same properties was detailed in this great @propublica story… https://t.co/XAoGd4DUab

— David Fahrenthold (@Fahrenthold) November 22, 2021

That’s insane. They’re not moot. He still has the money. When any other federal employee violates the emoluments clause they have to forfeit the money. https://t.co/09kAERxBB7

— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 25, 2021

A justice system that let's a defendant run out the clock to avoid judgment is not just.
Supreme Court Ends Emoluments Suits Against Trump https://t.co/nMwe9zb6H9

— Jill Wine-Banks (@JillWineBanks) January 25, 2021

BREAKING: Supreme Court dismisses as moot lawsuits over whether Donald Trump illegally profited off his presidency by accepting payments from foreign and domestic officials who stayed at the Trump International Hotel. https://t.co/1PSsXKP1g0

— The Associated Press (@AP) January 25, 2021

Our statement on the Supreme Court's Emoluments decision:https://t.co/zZ2L3ng6T5

— Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) January 25, 2021

Trump spent four years unsuccessfully trying to shake lawsuits that accused him of unconstitutionally benefitting from his businesses as president. By losing the White House, he finally won.

On today's SCOTUS action and the end of the emoluments cases: https://t.co/sftHks0CuB

— Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) January 25, 2021

I am aware that this is how common law works, but it seems weird to have the rule be that any time a new president is elected he can violate the emoluments clause and then stall litigation until he's out of office and we never get a precedent. https://t.co/hwKMDqboAw

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) January 25, 2021

A couple of things here:
* Roberts likes dismissing things in this way.
* CONGRESS NEEDS TO ACT, and pass legislation about what "emoluments" means, and what is prohibited. That's the only want to prevent Trump-style graft in the future. https://t.co/8bDi3unJWb

— Elie Mystal (@ElieNYC) January 25, 2021

Statement by Attorneys General Frosh and Racine on Conclusion of Emoluments Lawsuit: pic.twitter.com/fKv8bNpsyu

— Brian Frosh (@BrianFrosh) January 25, 2021