We don't know nothing — we
haven’t done anything illegal
(Not yet - wink/wink)
Pertinent and related to all
that follows on this timely subject is this
question and this article from NPR:
Who
Can Settle Questions About Donald Trump's Conflicts Of Interest?
So, if we can’t trust or
believe Constitutional legal experts, then who do we trust?
Case in point are the “conflicts
of interest” hanging over the head of Donald J. Trump, incoming 45th President
of the United States and despite what Mr. Trump has said on this subject, which
is the following:
Thus far, he has not
shown a willingness to do anything. He told the New York Times that he is under
no obligation to set up a trust and that he “could run my business perfectly, and run the country
perfectly.”
He says he plans to have his adult children run the company while he retains ownership - but we have not seen any plan about that. He told a room full of reporters that “the law is totally on my side, meaning, the
president can’t have a conflict of interest.”
Most legal experts and ethics
lawyers would totally disagree with that his personal view and conclusion vis-à-vis
what the Constitution says.
Most legal experts conclude
that Mr. Trump must give up his monetary holding totally before he takes office.
Those legal opinions are shared by Harvard Law Professor Larry Tribe, one of the nation’s preeminent
constitutional scholars.
Tribe
told Think Progress that, after
extensive research, he concluded that “Trump’s ongoing business dealings around
the world would make him the recipient of constitutionally prohibited “Emoluments” from
“any King, Prince, or foreign State” – the original sense of payments and
not necessarily presents or gifts – from the very moment he
takes the oath.”
Tribe went on to say that the
only solution would be to divest completely from his businesses and failing
that, Tribe elaborated possible consequences:
1. Mr. Trump would be knowingly breaking his
oath of exclusive fealty (under Art. II, Sec.1) to a Constitution whose very
first Article (Art. I, Sec. 9) – an Article deliberately designed to prevent
any U.S. official, especially the Chief Executive, from being indebted to,
or otherwise the recipient of financial remuneration from, any foreign power or
entity answerable to such a power – he would be violating as he repeated the
words recited by the Chief Justice.
2. That violation would qualify as one of the
“high Crimes and Misdemeanors” that would require Trump to be “removed from
Office.”
It’s as simple as that – so,
Mr. Trump the ball as they say is in your court – your serve. What will you
show the public?
1. That you will totally divest
your business holding and that does not mean some fancy gimmick or trick, either, like “my
kids will run things while I serve as president, but I’ll still be the owner.”
2. That you totally do or do not trust or have full
confidence in your kids to divest entirely to them and thus need another legal way.
3. That you cannot enter
office with this legal cloud handing over you even as you take the oath office
for to do so, would make you illegal from that moment you raise your and take
the oath of office.
So, what is all this going to end up being? A legal showdown and a mess for months or longer, or total and complete compliance with the laws
of the land which Mr. Trump says he will obey (or maybe just on his terms). Words he would pledge to the public via these 35 words before the
American people at Noon on January 20, 2017:
“I, Donald John Trump, do
solemnly swear (or affirm) that I
will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will
to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the
United States.”
{Optional to conclude with (as most do) but not required part of the oath by the Constitution: So help me God}.
Tick tock Mr. Trump, tick tock.
This is a critical issue facing us all. Time is running out.
No comments:
Post a Comment