Is our Constitution strong enough?

We now have a duly elected president who is in violation of the emoluments clause as he uses his office to enhance his business interests, who is under investigation by intelligence agencies for ties to Russia, who has fired an FBI director while that Director is engaged in an investigation of the presidency, and who seems to have failed to vet his cabinet picks.

Is this a problem of weakness of our Constitution, or is it a problem of a weak, compliant Congress that isn't concerned about the Constitution and what it demands?

 

None of the Founding Freemasons thought about or wrote about political parties.

They apparently were not familiar with political parties since British politics were clandestine rather than openly public.

They apparently did not anticipate partisan politics arising in the new American States. Surprise, surprise!

The Federalists and the Demo-Republicans (later to become Whigs) soon evolved and developed a strong partisanship.

This is the problem we are left with today.

The U.S. Constitution does not anticipate nor address the problem.

The problem is that partisanship by such persons in power such as Majority Leaders in the Senate and House may ignore the Constitution at their leisure for the benefit of party power at the expense of constitutional government.

There is no solution to this problem short of We The People rising up in revolt and removing them from power. And that would be a form of anarchy that would be painful to endure.

There are good and bad elements of one party having complete control of the Federal Government. The speedy appointment of SCOTUS justices who support the Constitution (Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, etc.) rather than who ignore it (Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, etc.) is a good thing.

What we are seeing at the moment from Trump over Comey, Yates, Bharara, etc. are not so good.

The de facto checks and balances of a two party system is what is missing at the moment. Trump knows that Pence, Ryan, and McConnell will let him get away with virtually anything.

Political parties are not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution however.

We are just missing Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer at the moment while they both have been neutered for now.

 

You have no clue what the emoluments clause is LOL

 

Oh, well then why don't you educate us! Good luck.

"The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them."

 

The burden is on you to prove it. Good luck since you clearly don't know what it is.

 

Just think of the fun we would have had if Hillary had been elected. No need to make up feces about her.

 

It must be weak since Hillary accepted gifts from the Saudis and Russians in exchange for value and the Hillary / Bubba duo peddled access to China, Korea, Canada, etc. in 1996 and were fined by the FEC in 2002. Bubba completed his second term despite committing high crimes and misdemeanors in shaking down foreign countries for gifts.

Obama violated the Emoluments Clause by Accepting the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing of value and doubled down by donating part of it to a fraudulent charity. No impeachment.

Despite the fact that he hasn't accepted any gifts, Trump has volunteered to donate profits from sales of goods and services to foreign governments to the Treasury annually.

 

I didn't expect you had anything. LOL!!!

 

I'd say that it is a VERY confused and therefore indecisive REPUBLICAN Congress who feels that its fate is tied with Trump's and is desperately searching for a safe exit.

 

Be specific.

Then justice was served.

Please be specific. This and your first comment I suspect refers to their Foundation. Is that right?

EMOLUMENTS??!!! Who granted this award? Which foreign state?

He also promised his businesses would all be put in a blind trust. LOL!!!

 

So that would mean that the Republicans, who are known for accusing others of violating and not respecting the Constitution, are actually the ones who violate and disrespect the Constitution?

 

So now the left wants a strong Constitution? The very thing they argue is a "living, breathing document" that is outdated and written by a bunch of white racist slaveowners?

 

Keep making it up. It's entertaining.

 

Assuming that to be a rhetorical question. . . . It is not a good time to be a Republican, is it???

 

Our Constitution is strong but it's not bullet proof. And if we lose sight of the protections it offers...we're done. Once it's gone...it's gone.

 

The Saudis delivered $10M, Hillary delivered the sale of fighter jets that upset the balance of power in the ME.

The Russians delivered $145M, Hillary delivered 20% of our Uranium production

He served out his second term.

Funds were laundered through their foundation.

Norway.

You think globalists, progressive fascists, and establishment partisans would love him if he denied his kids their inheritance or gave away a business he built over decades? No. So he learned along the way. If a CEO stuck to every commitment through growing knowledge and changing environment, I would avoid the company's stock like the plague.

Cheney donated his options and insured his pension to completely separate himself from Halliburton. When did you start loving him?

 

The problem is Congress. The Constitution is just fine. The problem is that the Constitution is being intentionally disregarded by both sides when it's inconvenient.

 

Weak? No, treasonous. If patriots knew what they were trying to do, there would be some serious action.

Are you aware that in 1911, 2/3 of the states applied for a convention and congress violated the law, their oath and the constitution by failing to convene delegates and that this continues today?



This document has links to the letter sent to the clerk of congress and other aspects related.

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file47.pdf

Such a fact justifies that all delegates be elected in the states by the people of those states.

Because of that letter, the house finally adopts rule to count states applications for Article V.

http://www.examiner.com/article/u-s-...n-applications

However, congress refused to start counting applications occuring before the letter. The speakers were sued.

http://www.foavc.org/reference/doc4.pdf

That suit, of course was denied. Government is deeply unlawful. These .pdf's by Bill Walker explain the developing status.

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file67.pdf

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file70.pdf

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file71.pdf

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file73.pdf

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file74.pdf

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file75.pdf

National Archives and Records Administration Attempts Termination of Article V Convention

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file77.pdf

http://www.foavc.org/reference/file78.pdf

 

It survived Obama, it's more than able to stand against Trump

 

Unsupportable partisan nonsense.

 

Actually, RiseAgainst was right, you must prove it. You made the blanket statement and offered no proof, that's on you.

You then proceeded to tell someone else to be specific regarding something said about Clinton....didn't take long for your hypocrisy to show.

So....get to it. We're waiting.

 

It is a failure of the voters, and the electoral college which should have rejected Trump as unfit. The EC was the safety valve and it failed.

 

"Unsupportable"??? Get your head out of Breitbart and learn something. These think they can support it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-of-emoluments-clause/?utm_term=.53c5b15cefcc

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trumps-ethics-train-wreck/513446/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...01/11/what-is-the-emoluments-clause/96446252/

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/22/news/donald-trump-constitution-lawsuit/index.html

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/24/51135...o-trump-s-businesses-violate-the-constitution

 

Then check post #4. Your mud seems to be slowing down your thinking process.