AMNA NAWAZ: House Democrats released a new report showing foreign countries spent millions at former President Donald Trump's businesses while he held office.

The release appears to be a political counterpunch to Republicans' impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden and his family's foreign business dealings.

Lisa Desjardins joins us now to unpack it all.

Lisa, good to see you.

LISA DESJARDINS: Hi.

AMNA NAWAZ: So let's start with this report.

Break it down for us.

What does this report allege?

LISA DESJARDINS: OK, let's keep this simple.

At the center of this report is the Emoluments Clause.

Remember that?

Article 1 of the Constitution prohibits any U.S. officeholder from accepting emoluments from a foreign power, emoluments meaning some form of compensation.

The argument from House Democrats here is that, by not divesting himself when he became president, President Trump was accepting emoluments by still getting profit from the Trump Organization, which was run through a trust, but he still earned the profits.

So let's talk about what the report says specifically.

What's new?

The numbers here.

At least $7.8 million, the Democrats say, looking through accounting filings and other filings, did he receive from foreign powers.

That includes 20 foreign governments.

Now, when you break that down a little bit more, it's about Trump Tower and Trump hotels.

Almost entirely, that's where this money went, and it's from 2017 to 2019.

Let's look at the map of the countries that they say are involved here all around the world.

The biggest one, China, that's where the most money is involved.

These are the countries where more than $25,000 was spent at Trump properties while President Trump was president.

Now, the argument here is that -- not just that he profited, but really that he violated the Constitution.

Trump himself has said he gave the profits to the United States Treasury.

AMNA NAWAZ: And since the report has come out, have President Trump or anyone in his organization explained these numbers?

LISA DESJARDINS: Yes, I have been back and forth with the Trump Organization today.

The campaign says this is a Trump Organization issue.

It's not a political campaign issue, though, obviously, politics are involved on both sides here.

And I want to say what the Trump Organization said was interesting specifically about that big amount of money coming from China.

The China portion represents $5 million of that $7 million, so that's really the most of the foreign national payments here.

So let's look at what we're talking about there.

So, China, we're talking about a large bank, the Industrial Bank of China, one of the largest in the world.

That is state-funded; $5.4 million that bank spent at Trump Tower during President Trump's time in office.

But here's the thing, Amna.

The Trump Organization, and verified by the committee later, said that was part of a 20-year lease that that Chinese bank entered into in 2008 before Trump had even entered the race for president.

So, let's be careful here.

The Democrats are not establishing a quid pro quo.

There's no direct evidence of that.

What they're saying is, it violates the Emoluments Clause,that there was money being given to the Trump Organization that he profited from that he shouldn't have.

The Trump Organization says, no, he gave all the profits back, that this was no kind of conflict of interest, and that this is entirely political.

James Comer, the Republican chair of the House Oversight Committee, says this is a parody.

He said what this was about, in his quote, he said: "He has," President Trump "has legitimate businesses, but the Bidens do not."

So, no surprise, it's really about this back-and-forth dual investigations of the Trump and Biden families.

AMNA NAWAZ: As you have repeatedly said here, this is about the Emoluments Clause.

AMNA NAWAZ: What the Democrats are alleging here is a constitutional violation.

AMNA NAWAZ: What's the likelihood that Mr. Trump faces any issues with that moving forward?

LISA DESJARDINS: I don't know who had on their bingo cards this week that we have been talking about the Emoluments Clause.

I wonder if any other broadcasters are doing this explanation, but it is important, because the truth is that there are no cases in court right now pending for Mr. Trump when it comes to the Emoluments Clause.

There were three major federal cases that worked their way through the court system, but, in the end, one of them was dismissed for lack of standing by members of Congress.

The other two were dismissed.

Why?

Because President Trump was about to leave office and the Supreme Court said it no longer had bearing.

So the short answer here is, there is no possibility really of any emoluments problems for former President Trump unless he's reelected.

And if he is reelected, I do think this is an issue we will see again.

AMNA NAWAZ: I think that's fair to say we will see this issue again and again.

Lisa Desjardins, thank you, as always.

LISA DESJARDINS: You're welcome.