Subject: Re: DJT, trump and the IPO, what comes next?
That becomes a very valuable and useful product if Trump gets elected President.

At this point, there is perhaps no other course of action more important for Congress to pursue than obtaining clarification on EXACTLY how the emoluments clause WOULD be interpreted in court and how it SHOULD be interpreted in court to then enact legislation to tighten its actual enforcement like a noose around the neck of ANY future President.

Given recent arguments about the power of a President and the "rights" of a President versus the rights of the larger population, it seems clear anyone who attempted to pursue criminal charges for violations of the Imoluments Clause would be challenged in court that

a) Congress never enacted enabling legistlation for its enforcement so it is null and void
b) enforcing the Emoluments clause would violate a President's right to privacy by forcing more disclosure of their "personal" finances
c) enforcing the Emoluments clause would unfairly burden a rich President by forcing them to forego earnings from their hard-earned portfolio accumulated over years of "hard work"

Trump Administration I and his current actions as he tries to regain the Presidency are textbook examples of how current interpretations and enforcement of that language are fundamentally flawed and toothless. It isn't enough to require a President to put their financial assets in a "blind trust." A President who is rich enough would have assets so large it would be impossible to manage them in a "blind" way that wouldn't provide traceability to their current performance. That's all that's required to establish the incentive chain between those wanting influence and a corrupt President. Even if a President isn't currently "controlling" his stake in company XYZ, if individuals know he holds a $50,000,000 position in that stock or a $5 billion dollar position, that's enough for someone to manipulate the stock and aid the President... In exchange for something only the President and the external party to see.

To provide proper separation between a sitting President and the worldwide roster of uber-billionaires willing to buy a democracy, the only way to isolate a President in this modern era of corruption is to literally require them to DIVEST all assets into cash and hold nothing but cash until they leave office. Is that too much of a price to pay for a wealthy would-be President? Then tough, you aren't focused enough on serving the public. The public can look elsewhere for leadership.


WTH