Thank you for providing specific allegations.

As to emoluments, there are cases in court but no decision has been rendered.

It is a borderline case. A classic violation of the Foreign Emoluments clause would have the President accepting money or a gift from a foreign source without approval of Congress.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

But does that really prohibit foreign customers from doing business with commercial enterprises owned by the President? If George Washington sold cotton to French customers, was he in violation?

The Domestic Emoluments clause prevents the President from receiving extra money from Congress or the states.

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased 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 intent was to prevent the President from being legally bribed. It is quite a stretch to say it was meant to apply to prevent any commercial transactions between the President and any arm of any government in the US. The Secret Service agents needed to stay in a secure hotel. The transaction should be investigated to see if the Secret Service was overcharged, but if the rate was reasonable I don’t think you have a legitimate case.

As to nepotism, there is no law or Constitutional provision preventing a President from appointing a family member to a White House position. JFK had his brother as Attorney General. Hillary Clinton advised her husband and headed task forces on Healthcare when Bill Clinton was President. So there is more than ample precedent for Ivanka and Jared working in the White House. Both are taking huge pay cuts to do so.

With regard to impeachment, a key argument against it was that no actual crimes by Trump were alleged in the actual articles of impeachment. The US Constitution requires “Bribery, Treason, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors”. It is designed to prevent partisan impeachment convictions. The Democrats tried to do that and failed. They flagrantly abused the impeachment process. The remedy if you don’t like the result of an election is to win the next one. By the way I also opposed the impeachment of Bill Clinton. His crime was not a “High Crime”: it was perjury about a personal matter.

Finally, the Democrats have defunded the police in New York City, Seattle, Minneapolis, and other cities. Many Democrats explicitly champion police defunding as part of their support for BLM. If you do not agree, maybe it’s time you stopped voting for Democrats who favor police defunding.

Mathematician, Statistician, Businessman, and Academic. Student of history, poli sci , and the Bible.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store