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.
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution is not some nefarious plot hatched by narrow-minded, bleeding heart Liberals intent on tripping-up our glorious new leader.
It was made an integral part of our Nation’s founding document specifically because the Framer’s of that document saw from personal experience how easily the loyalties and priorities of even the most honorable people could be swayed by the promise of personal gain resulting from official actions.
It has been part and parcel of the “job description” for every President aspiring to or holding our Nation’s highest office since George Washington. Every one of those individuals, and most of their political appointees, have willingly complied with its strictures, often at great personal sacrifice.
As of January 20, 2017, we have, for the first time in our Nation’s history, a President who stands in blatant violation of this most basic of Laws as of his first day in office. Although directly contradicted by some of the Country’s most accomplished legal and constitutional scholars, the man who would lead our “Nation of Laws” has unilaterally decided that THIS law, which he finds personally inconvenient, does not have to be obeyed by him.
There are many concrete examples illustrating why this particular Law is of crucial importance, especially given the situation in which we currently find ourselves:
As Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, Trump has the authority to order the men and women who VOLUNTEERED to defend us all into harm’s way. Those individuals should not have to wonder whether his orders are based on the need to defend our Country or based on the need to defend their Commander-in-Chief’s business interests.
For those of us whose main contribution to our Country is the taxes we pay, we should not have to wonder whether the relative pittance most of us have to cough-up every April 15 will have to compete in our government’s eyes with the influence conferred by the (recently doubled) initiation fee of $200,000.00 at the golf resort in Florida which just happens to have the same name as our newly elected head of state.
Perhaps even more central to the argument, though, is this: Throughout our Nation’s 200+ year history, we have prided ourselves on the premise that All Are Equal Before The Law. Richard Nixon tried (and dismally failed) to make the argument that “If the President does it, it’s not illegal”. So the flimsy moral and legal grounds upon which Trump bases his claim of immunity have already been soundly rejected.
Are we now to make a “special exception” to one of the key pillars upon which the success of the American experiment in open and honest governance has rested for over 200 years?
No matter what your personal opinions may be concerning the course and outcome of last year’s election, I think any rational citizen would have to concede that Trump is now the President. For the good of the country he should at least be given the opportunity to govern. I am personally willing to give him that opportunity AS LONG AS he is willing to do so in accordance with the laws of our Nation.
To faithfully discharge the duties of the office and to uphold the very values he swore to protect and defend when he took the oath of office on January 20, it is a requirement of the Constitution (which is, after all, the highest law in the land), that he divest himself, immediately and completely, of ALL his business interests.
Failure to do so amounts to nothing less than the betrayal of the Office and of the trust placed in the new President by the millions of Americans who voted for him.
Bridges-Not-Walls 