A lot of things come to mind when the Christmas Season is upon us. Family and friends and depression is always around the corner. I remember when I saw how sad my mother was when dad left her when I was in my early teens. A young boy can only do so much since he does not have all the skills an adult has. However, he does have that love a child has for his mother. Same goes for any of you who have the empathy for those close to you. Remember too, if you are lucky to have a nice warm house with a Christmas tree or Hanukkah candles with presents and a nice dinner setting, remember there are others who for reasons known and unknown have nothing. They live in a cardboard house under an over pass or hidden by the trees near a lake or stream and to them survival is not just some unknown arena, it is as real as it gets. It means you are lucky, you have been given a break that others have not. Remember this and the question that most are afraid to ask if you are a Christian, "What would Christ do?"
Sunday, December 25, 2016
Thursday, December 1, 2016
Now What.
I am going to be as objective as I can be in this blog, "Now What". If you don't know by now who the president elect is you have either been, a) living under rock b) living underground with troglodytes (yeah I know, look it up) or c) had been kidnapped by aliens from Barsoom and returned. (Google Barsoom).
The Constitution is a rather unusual document. Nothing like it exists, although some of the precepts can analyzed by reading the Ten Commandments, Hammurabi Code (which predate the Ten Commandments and the Magna Carta.
One particular law in the Constitution involves "Gifts", Another country granting a title to a sitting president or sitting vice president, "The Nobility Clause", The emoulments clause as addressed by the Heritage Foundation
More about this can be found from the Congressional Research Service as outlined by Jack Maskell, Legislative Attorney on August 16, 2012
If you are a Yale student or grad (sorry Harvard) you can read it here. The Avalon Project which I truncated to be specific. ".....No titular nobility. Officers not to receive presents, etc" along with sub section 8. "8. No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no person holding any office or 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."
So what does this mean? It means a sitting president is not allowed to receive presents or gifts or titles of office. The On Line Merriam Dictionary has an extensive definition and examples of this.
The other side of the coin is that the president elect and the vice president elect is not subject to ethics in divestiture. All other elected officials are. There is a difference in emolument and divestiture As outlined by outlined by Jack Maskell of the Congressional Resarch Service.
If a president receives a call from a Saudi Prince asking for more jet fighters and the president elect asks if the Prince can help in his hotel being built (a quid pro quo)
The president and the vice president elect are exempt from the ethics laows outlined by the CRS.
So there you have it. Read the links and google some more. I would also search using the .gov, .org or .edu endings since these will be more objective than subjective.
Now time for me to be subjective. Do I think it's right for a sitting president or sitting vice president not to be held accountable for ethics violations when every other lawfully elected officials are? No I don't think it's right. Do I think that the president elect and the vice president elect will actually divest their holdings (sell their holdings and place those funds into a blind trust fund (Blind trust means blind. The person who holds the trust has not connection to the person who is the person who put the assets into the blind trust. That does not mean any relatives, close relatives (children) who are close and advising him are proper custodians for such a blind trust.
If a sitting president has properties in different countries and has his name or is granting license to use his name on properties, then those properties should be sold and as I stated before, held in a blind trust.
Did the American people speak? Yes they did. He won the electoral vote and lost the popular vote. In my next blog I will explain both sides as to why it is very dangerous to even consider eliminating the electoral college.
The Constitution is a rather unusual document. Nothing like it exists, although some of the precepts can analyzed by reading the Ten Commandments, Hammurabi Code (which predate the Ten Commandments and the Magna Carta.
One particular law in the Constitution involves "Gifts", Another country granting a title to a sitting president or sitting vice president, "The Nobility Clause", The emoulments clause as addressed by the Heritage Foundation
More about this can be found from the Congressional Research Service as outlined by Jack Maskell, Legislative Attorney on August 16, 2012
If you are a Yale student or grad (sorry Harvard) you can read it here. The Avalon Project which I truncated to be specific. ".....No titular nobility. Officers not to receive presents, etc" along with sub section 8. "8. No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no person holding any office or 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."
So what does this mean? It means a sitting president is not allowed to receive presents or gifts or titles of office. The On Line Merriam Dictionary has an extensive definition and examples of this.
The other side of the coin is that the president elect and the vice president elect is not subject to ethics in divestiture. All other elected officials are. There is a difference in emolument and divestiture As outlined by outlined by Jack Maskell of the Congressional Resarch Service.
If a president receives a call from a Saudi Prince asking for more jet fighters and the president elect asks if the Prince can help in his hotel being built (a quid pro quo)
The president and the vice president elect are exempt from the ethics laows outlined by the CRS.
So there you have it. Read the links and google some more. I would also search using the .gov, .org or .edu endings since these will be more objective than subjective.
Now time for me to be subjective. Do I think it's right for a sitting president or sitting vice president not to be held accountable for ethics violations when every other lawfully elected officials are? No I don't think it's right. Do I think that the president elect and the vice president elect will actually divest their holdings (sell their holdings and place those funds into a blind trust fund (Blind trust means blind. The person who holds the trust has not connection to the person who is the person who put the assets into the blind trust. That does not mean any relatives, close relatives (children) who are close and advising him are proper custodians for such a blind trust.
If a sitting president has properties in different countries and has his name or is granting license to use his name on properties, then those properties should be sold and as I stated before, held in a blind trust.
Did the American people speak? Yes they did. He won the electoral vote and lost the popular vote. In my next blog I will explain both sides as to why it is very dangerous to even consider eliminating the electoral college.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)