All of those are unconstitutional, but go for them anyway, I guess.
-
-
-
Dang. Under which clause(s)? (This isn’t my area). Norms clearly don’t work on their own, but I doubt any amendment could happen. So is it just something we have to live with? Basically an emoluments loophole?
-
Requiring tax returns falls afoul of the Eligibility Clause. Divesting might fly under emoluments, but it would have to be litigated.
-
Thanks. There shouldn’t be a way for foreign governments to funnel money to the private interests of a president or other top exec branch officials, whether business, charity, etc. Not sure how to make it happen, but it doesn’t strike me as a controversial position. Maybe it is.
-
I don't think it's controversial or non-controversial. No one has thought about it before now. The Emoluments Clause was like the Third Amendment until Trump came along.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The arms deal was mostly set before Trump took office, and they touted a promise rather than actual value of contracts. I haven’t seen evidence of kickbacks for Kushner or other public officials for Saudi arm sales. I’m thinking of loans, investments, and spending at properties.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Personal corruption has been a big part of trump forever. Now it’s a national disgrace.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.