Is Senator Chris Coons Completely Useless?
When it comes to standing up to Trump, Coons really is winning the “most spineless” derby. In a recent Slate Podcast Coons spends 15 minutes rephrasing all of Dahlia Lithwick’s questions about the beating that the Constitution is already taking, without ever answering any questions.
The closest he comes it an answer is to opine, from on high, about that fact that the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution sets up a “fascinating conflict” between originalists and people who think that the Constitution is a living document. Could there be a more entitled approach to Trump’s multiple and egregious conflicts of interest? “fascinating conflict” JESUS!
Coons also goes out on a limb to say the confirmation hearings of Jeff Sessions, and avowed enemy of the voting rights act, must touch on the voting rights act. Golly!
here is a link to the podcast.
Also, I had to look this up the Emoluments Clause:
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the constitution states that no American officeholder 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.”
Pretty much everything Trump has done so far is a direct constitutional violation, but hey.. get some popcorn and enjoy the “fascinating conflict” to come.
Tags: Featured
He’s made a terrible bearded commie if you ask me
The only worst bearded commie is possibly John Bolton.
Members of the Young Republicans usually show their true colors eventually.
This is the Hillary wing of the party that some people still want us to rally behind.
Technically, Trump isn’t yet an office holder and cannot yet violate the clause. He has until January to completely divest from his business to avoid running counter to this clause. He won’t, and therefore he will. Coons at that point, along with every other Democrat, should incessantly call him out on it. There is no way to interpret the Constitution to make what Trump is going to do permissible.
“There is no way to interpret the Constitution to make what Trump is going to do permissible.”
What you said makes sense, but Coons in the DC bubble now, and the bubble says that this is going to be a “fascinating” game. A lark, really. A good old he said, she said.
Yeah, it’s going to be a lark, alright.
Can’t find it now, but I read a piece a couple weeks ago about the emoluments clause. The key problem here, according to that article, is that there is no penalty for violations of the clause. Unless, of course, you want to try the impeachment route, which, given the composition of the House, is less likely than hell freezing over. So, fugeddaboutit.
As for Coons, well, he’s Carper with a bigger vocabulary.
I feel sorry for people I see around here and there talking about impeachment. Clueless.