January 23^rd 2017 Blog

This was President Trump’s first full day on the job, as the leader of the free world.  Hopefully today will be an example of how he will continue to lead this nation, for the sake of our posterity.  For far too long the United States has been baby-sitting and enabling many other nations with money that has greatly indebted us. 

The basic Democratic agenda is to take any problem or issue and simply throw money at it.  This is why there were protests in 600 cities around the world by mostly women, for the simple reason that they want the United States, through “Planned Parenthood” to fund their sex lives.  Apparently, these women were under the impression that the “sex enabling money” would continue to flow, but President Trump cut these “cry babies” off from their allowance.  Haven’t they grown up by now?

Okay, if we continue to fund their sex lives, we want to know how the experiment is going; by having them reveal their entire sex life to us.  I think we deserve something for our money… don’t we?  Just to be clear, I am being sarcastic, but I believe the point is well made.

The following is a recent news item; “Liberal Watchdog Group to File Lawsuit Arguing Trump has Already Violated Constitution.”  You are going to love this one, because this where my studies in law have prepared me to answer such dribble.  I must forewarn you that this might be rather long, because it deserves a full explanation.

First I will present the above group’s merit for this lawsuit, to wit: “According to CREW, “Citizens for Responsible and Ethics in Washington”, will argue that Trump has violated the Constitution’s foreign emoluments clause, which prohibits Trump from receiving anything of value from foreign governments, including foreign government-owned businesses, without approval of Congress, according to the group.”

This is quite laughable, for the simple reason this “clause” is not found in our modern “Constitution”.  When I say “modern”, I am referring to our current “Constitution”, which was rewritten in 1868, for which the “organic” 13^th Amendment was omitted and subsequently replaced with the abolishment of slavery.  Well, that is not entirely true, but that is another issue that I have explained in my book titled, “What Difference Does It Make”.

Apparently, CREW is going to refer to the organic “Constitution”; specifically the 13^th Amendment written prior to 1868, to wit:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."

The above can be used in the lawsuit against President Trump, if this organic 13^th Amendment is recognized by the judicial branch of our government.  However, by allowing this to take place, nearly everyone who serves in both the House and the Senate would lose their jobs… why… the organic 13^th Amendment includes those of attorney status who could not serve in either the House or the Senate!  I hardly think that this lawsuit is ever going to take place under these circumstances.

Apparently the idea for the removal of the organic 13^th Amendment was to allow those of attorney status to serve in both the House and the Senate.

Okay, let us say this lawsuit is approved.  It is possible that the 13^th Amendment could be interpreted in accordance to the merit of this lawsuit.  However, unless it could be proven that President Trump is being directly paid from any one of these foreign governments; this lawsuit, in conjunction with the “organic” 13^th Amendment could take President Trump out of office.  But at the same time if one wants to take this to the nth degree, then every attorney who is currently serving in the legislature will also have to be removed from office.

The key to this lawsuit is to discover if indeed President Trump is being directly paid from any foreign government, for which a foreign government is the true owner of any business, for which President Trump is receiving revenue.  I am not aware that CREW has done their homework in this respect to the discovery process.  If upon the “discovery process” that no foreign government has direct ownership of any business President Trump is engaged, then the lawsuit has lost its merit.