Avatar_feed
Responses: 12
Cpl Jeff N.
10
10
0
This is going nowhere, fast. The law does not require the president and/or vice president to completely divest themselves from business interests. Also, a hotel room paid to his hotel for a service rendered that is market competitive is not an emolument.
(10)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Contracting Officer
MAJ (Join to see)
>1 y
The intent of the emolument's clause is clearly to prevent foreign nations from donating to say a sitting Secretary of State's Global Initiative fund. It clearly has nothing to do with legitimate business dealings, as there is significant precedent. They are grasping at straws and can't see their own hypocrisy.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
Cpl Jeff N.
>1 y
MAJ (Join to see) - Yes, you just described the left perfectly. They grasp at straws while missing their own hypocrisy. They worry about the speck of sawdust on someone else's eye while ignoring the plank of wood in theirs.
(3)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
MCPO Roger Collins
8
8
0
That's because, in order to bring a suit, a person or organization typically must demonstrate that they have been legally harmed by the defendant, a legal status known as "standing." A court can throw out a case if the person bringing the suit is simply upset by another person's action, but cannot demonstrate they have standing to sue. Constitutional law expert Michael McConnell, a law professor at Stanford University, said he doubts that CREW will be able to prove it has standing to bring this case.
(8)
Comment
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
SPC Kevin Ford
>1 y
MCPO Roger Collins I suspect you may be right in that regard.

Edit to add:
The Constitutional remedy is impeachment and I don't see that happening based on just this.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SFC Combat Engineer
SFC (Join to see)
>1 y
Exactly,
(0)
Reply
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
Capt Jeff S.
>1 y
Every court case challenging Obama's eligibility have (so far) been dismissed on a variety of technical grounds and among them was standing. The courts never proved he was eligible and this charade went on eight years.

The people, as voters, have standing because to run a Constitutionally unqualified fraud in the election DOES in fact cause them detriment when the phony that was installed with the help of election fraud:
* writes EO's that bypass Congress (their voice in government), and legislates from the Executive.
* goes on a multi-Trillion dollar spending spree that effectively redistributed tax dollars from those who produce to those who supported him in the election.
* borrows trillions to pay for his pet programs that he and Congress exempted themselves from. Among the flops that he had to borrow money from future generations to pay for was a healthcare plan he didn't have the authority to implement.... till he broke his campaign promise that he wouldn't raise taxes on the Middle Class and had the Supreme Court declare it a tax. This also violating procedure because he had a team of czars craft it (bypassing Congress) and he originated it in the Senate when all spending bills are required to originate in the House.
* makes lopsided deals with countries that are openly hostile to our collective national interests and releases money to countries that are State Sponsors of Terror, as well as covertly arming radical Islamic rebel terrorists through our State Department.

I could go on and on but suffice it to say that in the case of the people vs. Obama, they had grounds for standing and were shot down by a corrupted Judicial System. In the case with Trump I foresee them having a difficult time proving that they have standing.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
TSgt Kenneth Ellis
3
3
0
Lol. He hasn't been in office a week. An when did the Constitution get in Obama way. He signed treaties which is the job of the Congress
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar_small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close