Important - Dems emoluments clause violations challenge -Ari was discussing with Senator Blumenthal

[malaise]

https://ctmirror.org/2018/06/07/federal-court-considers-blumenthal-v-trump-case/
<snip>
– A federal court on Thursday heard arguments in a case brought by Sen. Richard Blumenthal and dozens of other Democratic lawmakers who claim President Donald Trump has violated the U.S. Constitution by failing to seek and obtain the consent of Congress before accepting benefits from foreign states.

Blumenthal leads a group of nearly 200 Democrats who’ve sued Trump because they say he is not complying with a Constitutional provision, known as the Foreign Emoluments Clause, that requires the president to seek permission from Congress before taking payments or gifts from foreign governments.

The Founding Fathers, led by Alexander Hamilton, wrote the emoluments clause because they were concerned about foreign corruption in the United States.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

1. THANK YOU!

:That's how to fight back.

[elleng]

2. Good to hear.

Very complex legally, but at least the issue is on the table.

Here's what it says: '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.'

[BigmanPigman]

3. This was a BIG concern before he was even inaugurated.

I wrote a letter to Walter Schaub, former head of Ethics Dept who eventually left...poor man, before the fucking moron took office over this issue. The GOP is allowing this to happen(GOP=CORRUPTION). Everyone must sue the govt now...the states' AGs, the reps in both chambers, individual groups and organizations since the GOP has stopped ALL CHECKS AND BALANCES! The GOP is obstructing justice by blocking the Emoluments Clause from being enforced.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2077866

[malaise]

4. Blumenthal was very hopeful

Said the judged asked all the right questions

[BigmanPigman]

8. Blumenthal is wonderful!

He is so calm, smart, and principled. He is truly the genuine representative of what this country is supposed to stand for.

[saidsimplesimon]

5. Way to go, Schiff, Blumenthal, everyone

who is taking the job of working for all the people in their states or districts seriously. Those people who claimed to be Constitutional Purists regarding the 2nd want to pick and choose from a list reflecting nothing but their greed that fuels domination.

Those types disgust me, and should be cause enough for removing them from office by whatever legal means necessary.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

6. IQ45 can't even spell "emoluments." Nor "Constitution" or even "ethics," for that matter.

Last edited Thu Jun 7, 2018, 09:36 PM - Edit history (1)

The only words he knows are "me" and "I" -- no other words matter to him.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

21. Oosp!

Thanks for the catch. That's embarrassing for a writer to miss. Now I know why the spell check button is there.

[magicarpet]

23. Did you possibly mean...... Oops ?

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

24. No, "oosp" is my personal dyslexic version of "oops." It's a little personal joke I make for myself

It seemed particularly appropriate in this case since I had misspelled "constitution" in a post describing how Trump couldn't spell that word.

Thanks for asking about it, though. Everyone has to have their quirks, and this one is mine.

[magicarpet]

27. .

[spanone]

7. K&R...

the party of law and order my ass.....Bwahahahahahahaahahaaa

[malaise]

11. zYou find the best

smilies

[spanone]

14. 😁

[StrictlyRockers]

9. I tweeted at my boy Sam Seder right after the interview to see if he would go deeper on this subject

@SamSeder can you do a deep dive on your show tomorrow on what you discussed with Senator Blumenthal, regarding the Emoluments Clause & how it is currently unenforceable the way it is written, but Congress hopes to get the Courts to help with making it enforceable?

Sam Seder was on Ari's show with him and Sen. Blumenthal and asked a good question. Sam does a daily podcast M-F called The Majority Report

https://majorityreportradio.com/

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-3jIAlnQmbbVMV6gR7K8aQ

Link to tweet

[malaise]

12. Excellent

Hope Rachel covers later - this could be huge

[byronius]

16. Sam's definitely the guy for Deep Diving.

Never shies away from the complex and difficult issues.

He should have his own show on MSNBC.

[PoliticAverse]

17. "how it is currently unenforceable the way it is written" - it's most certainly enforceable...

through impeachment.

It seems ultimately the Supreme Court likely would do one of three things:

(1) Remind Congress they can pass a law to enforce the Constitutional provision.

(2) Remind Congress that Impeachment is an option.

(3) Order Trump to return any "emoluments" received (seems least likely).

[bitterross]

22. I'm right there with you.

It is only currently unenforceable because we have a congress that is just a compromised as the person they are supposed be holding accountable. Has nothing to do with how it's written. It has everything to do with having the same GOP cult in charge of all three branches of government.

[magicarpet]

10. Dems need events like this, one after the other...

.... to highlight the illegalities of the trDump Crime Syndicate.

The Greenpeace mattress delivery to the EPA Headquarters was the type of street theater that will bring media cameras and get a spot on the evening news.

We can fight back against these Fascists but we can inject humor to get the point across. Again and again and again we should do this until November 2018. Make these Fascists look like the fools they truly are. Nail them good when they step out of line and high-jack our Democracy.

[malaise]

15. +1,000

That mattress act was brilliant

[oberliner]

18. More proof that Sharpton was wrong to say Democrats are "too tame" to take on Trump

[gademocrat7]

19. Senator Blumenthal is an articulate intelligent man.

Glad he is arguing this important case.

[bitterross]

20. I don't see how this can go anywhere.

Not to be a kill joy, but I'll be really surprised if the court doesn't come back and say that because of separation of powers the courts are the wrong place to pursue this. I expect them to say that if the President's personal actions are violating the Constitution then congress has the jurisdiction and authority to deal with that. That's what impeachment is for.

Someone with a better grasp on all these things may differ from my opinion. But I seem to recall us being pretty happy when the courts threw out some cases against Obama due to separation of powers issues.

[gratuitous]

25. I have a friend who's a law historian

He's written books and everything, and he too doesn't think the lawsuit stands much of a chance, either. I disagree with his assessment, simply because the Constitution is pretty clear, and every President so far has had a grasp of what it means. That is, nobody's been as nakedly corrupt as Donald Trump, which makes this lawsuit (surprisingly) a case of first impression, in my opinion. While "everybody knows" isn't really a legal principle recognized by courts and legislatures, I feel it's applicable to this case.

Obviously, this case will go all the way up to the Supreme Court. Whether the Court has the moxie to apply the Constitution to Donald Trump or not will determine the outcome.

[dameatball]

26. It's worth a try. Everything that can be done should be done. Pressure!!