The founders never saw him coming.

You're flailing, dude. Really bad look.

 

Yet you keep showing how little you know about the case. Tsk Tsk.

 

Trump had government employees sign personal Trump NDA's, this President knows no bounds

he may even make people sign them in trade for a Pardon

 

I'd argue that the severe limits imposed by the constitution was in anticipation for leaders like him.

 

What kind of logic is that? A man is found guilty even though he is innocent. Then he gets a pardon and therefore you conclude he was guilty because he was given the pardon.

 

The Democrats insistence on how they interpret the Enoluments clause is the scariest part about it. If Lee Alwalter had it his way here, you would never see a private entrepreneur enter public life, possibly ever again. At best, you might serve as a Congressperson but the Presidency becomes an undesirable position that's essentially a black pocket loss to your business.

The Framers wanted the Presidency to be accessible to all walks of life, not to those who gravy-trained the system and therefore their only assets is actually in capital gains(read: HRC and their books, that's capital gains.)

 

I'd argue the founders never envisioned a prez who would exploit every opportunity to assume and or abuse presidential powers that were not expressly given or prohibited by law. That Trump has exposed a weakness in our system because we never imagined someone so corrupt could dupe enough voters in the giving him power.

 

More 2+2=35. Or it's obvious he was framed brow beaten and abused by a bunch if corrupt career bureaucrats scared to death that Flynn would given the chance expose there scam.

 

Got evidence that actually happened?

 

In reality what the founders never saw coming was petty, career, self serving, bureaucrats bound and determined to rule rather than serve.

 

Not true. I would, however, expect the candidate to divest themselves from any financial arrangement that could cause a conflict of interest while serving as prez. Like the ownership of hotels government agents paid to stay at while protecting the prez.

 

@Lee Atwater
GET OVER IT!
The Republicans won for 4 years. You guys won again. There is nothing wrong with the system. You guys want to change the system WHENEVER it doesn't go your way. The founding fathers' genius is beyond your comprehension. All of these systems were put in place for a reason. enough of your anti constitution, anti- electoral votes and anti founding-fathers nonsense. You guys won and you guys might actually win it ALL if you get the senate. Why not be happy instead of continuing to whine about Trump? Its not a good look to let some man that doesn't even know who you are control your life.

 

The emoluments clause? Trump lost money in 4 years, didn't take a dime in salary and donated profits attributable to White House business to the Treasury.

Obama, on the other hand, became filthy rich on our dime. He wouldn't have sold one copy of the domestic terrorist's book if not for the Presidency. He bought a house in Martha''s vineyard after driving the price down by using his office to devalue the property, predicting it will be under water. Hillary traded on the SOS office, making millions. Biden sold his vice Presidency to China and Ukraine.

 

The last four years have rendered your argument manifestly absurd. Part of the founder's genius was the recognition the Constitution was not an all encompassing document. To that end they allowed for the Bill of Rights and designed a mechanism for amendments to be added. However, they never comprehended a prez like Trump would ever be possible. Partly because they believed the electors would prevent a cretin like him from ascending to the presidency.
They were wrong.
Putting stricter guidelines in place to govern the prez's behavior is not a partisan issue as they will apply to prez's of both parties. Your objection to suggestions like preventing a prez from firing IG's for investigating corruption inside their admin is, in my view, impossible to defend. It's a reflexive defense of all things Don borne out of a habit of doing so since he has polluted the Oval Office.

 

To his credit, Washington warned in his farewell address of the destructive effect caused by the kind of division Trump has sought to create.

"The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts."
https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=15&page=transcript

 

15 AGs Demand WH Retain Docs Despite Trump’s ‘Utter Disregard’ For Record Keeping

Fifteen Democratic state attorneys general on Wednesday said in a letter to White House counsel Pat Cipollone that President Trump has an obligation to comply with federal laws on record-keeping even in the waning weeks of his presidency.

In a three-page letter issued by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), the group of Democratic attorneys general demanded that Cipollone ensure that “all White House personnel understand and comply with their record preservation obligations” under the Presidential Records Act (PRA). The attorneys general requested confirmation of such compliance prior to January 20, 2021, when President-elect Joe Biden will officially take office.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...al-white-house-cipollone-trump-retain-records

 

Fake nooze.....

 

"The attorneys general took aim at Trump for having shown an “utter disregard for his recordkeeping obligations” under the PRA throughout his presidency. They cited the sitting President’s history of ripping up notes at the close of meetings, going on a Twitter spree only to delete his tweets and his “obstruction of notetaking.”

The attorneys general also took issue with White House senior adviser Jared Kushner communicating with other administration officials as well as foreign officials through WhatsApp, a popular mobile messaging service owned by Facebook. They also cited the President’s daughter Ivanka Trump having used a “personal email account to send emails concerning White House business.”

 

Yet Trump has been the most constitutional president in a very long time. Unlike Obama.

 

Pretty funny after the years of democrat identity politics pitting groups against each other. Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others. You see this distinctly in democrats dividing the country base on arrogant coastal liberal elitists dismissing the rest of the country as rubes.

 

And? Obama pardoned and commutated the sentences of ten times as many people on his final day in office than Trump has during his entire Presidency. Obama pardoned more people than the previous eleven Presidents before him combined...

 

And.........................?

Here's a quiz. How many people did Obama pardon that were rewards for being uncooperative in federal investigations of potential illegal behavior on Obama's part?

BTW, I believe the right way of saying it is Obama commuted, not communtated.

 

Innocent people don't need pre emptive pardons, which is what Trump will be handing out to his family and inner circle.

 

At the federal level, yes, except in cases of impeachment. Per SCOTUS, the acceptance of a pardon is an admission of guilt.

 

You can't pre-pardon someone, and acceptance of a pardon is not an admission of guilt. For example, several posthumous pardons have been granted, and the deceased is no longer around to defend their innocence.