Trump-ing the Constitution

Audrey Garrett / The USD Vista

Calamitous press conference demonstrates the president’s self-serving nature

Eric Boose / Opinion Editor / The USD Vista

By the time Mick Mulvaney ended his Thursday press briefing on Oct. 17, the acting White House Chief of Staff had not only told Democrats in the House of Representatives exactly the words they had wanted to hear in their impeachment inquiry, but also revealed a new blatant violation of the Constitution.

For some background, the House, in which Democrats hold a majority, is in the midst of a formal impeachment inquiry into the president’s decision to withhold nearly $400 million in military aid from Ukraine. In a July phone call, Trump asked the Ukrainian president to conduct opposition research on former Vice President Joe Biden, and his son Hunter, who was on the board of a Ukrainian energy company. In their inquiry, House Democrats aim to determine whether the decision to withhold aid, which came only a few days after the phone call, constitutes either bribery or “high crimes and misdemeanors,” both offenses for which the president can be impeached. 

If the House finds sufficient evidence that there was a “quid pro quo” agreement — an exchange of something (in this case, $400 million in military aid to Ukraine) for something else (Ukraine investigating one of Trump’s political opponents) — they will likely be comfortable introducing articles of impeachment, which would then compel the Senate to hold an impeachment trial. If found guilty by the Senate, Trump would become the first president to be removed from office following impeachment.

In the press briefing last Thursday, Mulvaney all but confirmed that the decision to withhold military aid from Ukraine had been an attempt to encourage Ukraine to conduct an investigation which would benefit Trump politically, according to The New York Times. “There’s going to be political influence in foreign policy,” Mulvaney said. “Get over it.” 

By the end of the day on Thursday, Mulvaney had outright denied making such a statement, despite the fact that he had made that statement in a room full of reporters at a televised briefing. While it is worth noting that The New York Times reported the investigation Mulvaney mentioned was not an investigation into the Bidens, but an investigation of a debunked theory that Ukraine had interfered in the 2016 election, not Russia, that is beside the point. Mulvaney’s defiant statement seemed to condone the president using his office for personal gain, something which has never been, nor should ever be allowed in this country. 

Not only did Mulvaney essentially confirm that Trump withheld aid from Ukraine in hopes of benefitting personally, he also revealed another way Trump is using his office to benefit himself. In fact, that announcement was the original purpose of the press conference. 

The United States is the host country for next year’s Group of Seven (G-7) Summit, meaning heads of state from Canada, Germany, Italy, France, Japan, and the United Kingdom will travel to an American venue of the president’s choice for a multi-day discussion of economic policy. They will bring with them staffs of advisors, translators, and security — all of whom will stay at the venue. Journalists will join the diplomats and staffers in staying at the venue while they cover the summit. Clearly, hosting a G-7 summit is a lucrative deal. On Thursday, Mulvaney revealed Trump’s choice of venue: the Trump National Doral Golf Club in Miami. 

Essentially, in announcing the G-7 host site, Mulvaney announced that the president was going to blatantly violate the Constitution. By awarding the G-7 Summit to a Trump-owned venue, Trump is violating not one, but two clauses of the Constitution. In Article II, the Constitution states that the president “shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States,” making any federal funds spent on Trump’s stay — for housing the president, his staff, and security — at the Doral for the summit a violation of the domestic emoluments clause. 

Also, in Article I, the Constitution prohibits any member of the federal government from receiving “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State,” without Congress’ consent. At the G-7, the Doral will be hosting six foreign states. As to whether Congress consents, Democrats are already planning a formal rebuke of the president for his decision, according to Newsweek. Therefore, any money Trump makes from hosting the G-7 at the Doral, either from the federal government or any of the visiting governments, would be a violation of both Article II’s domestic emoluments clause, and Article I’s title of nobility clause — the clause most commonly referred to as the “emoluments clause.”

Of course, Mulvaney was quick to defend Trump at the press conference, saying, “he’s not making any money off of this, just like he’s not making any money from working here. And if you think it’s going to help his brand, that’s great, but I would suggest that he probably doesn’t need much help promoting his brand.” Had Trump, like other presidents before him, divested from his businesses, Mulvaney would be right. However, according to Business Insider, Trump has not divested from his businesses, and his assets are currently being held by his sons, both of whom are Trump Organization executives. 

Days after announcing the Doral as the host of the G-7, Trump did something he has rarely done before — he took it back. Saturday night, Trump tweeted that the G-7 Summit would no longer be held at the National Doral golf course. However, he was less than gracious in announcing the change. In his tweet, Trump blamed “the Do Nothing Radical Left Democrats & their Partner, the Fake News Media” for forcing the change, saying nothing about the Constitution. It is entirely possible that Trump chose to blame Democrats and the news media, two of his favorite political scapegoats, simply because he could. It is also entirely possible that this was because Trump has no idea what the emoluments clause or the title of nobility clause says or, as it turns out, does not care. On Monday, Trump referred to the emoluments clause as the “phony emoluments clause,” indicating his blatant disregard for the law. 

Combine Trump’s decision to hold a major international summit at one of his own properties and the subsequent tantrum he threw when people pointed out how clearly it violated the Constitution with the outright admission that he withheld military aid from Ukraine to try and earn a personal favor, and it is impossible to miss how self-serving he is. Trump is putting his personal interests first, when as president he should be serving the interests of the people first. Worse still, he is demonstrating a serious disrespect for the Constitution — our founding document and most basic set of laws.

In the United States, no one, not even the president, is above the law. The impeachment process exists to hold the president accountable, and it is a large part of how we protect ourselves from tyranny. 

On Thursday, Mick Mulvaney gave House Democrats an admission that they have been searching for in their impeachment inquiry. That should be enough for them to take action toward holding Trump accountable to the law and filing articles of impeachment.

If it is not enough, Mulvaney also essentially admitted that the president was planning on violating Article I and Article II of the Constitution. Arguably, the decision to host the G-7 Summit at a Trump property would be an impeachable offense on its own. Congress not only has the power, but the responsibility to hold a president accountable if they violate the Constitution, no matter how blatant the violation. Had Trump not reversed course on the location for the G-7 summit, it surely would have led to its own impeachment proceedings.

Whether considered separately or together, Mulvaney’s admissions  on Thursday make it clear: Donald Trump is abusing his office for personal gain, and must be held accountable. It is time for lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to stand up for their country. These are not offenses where a slap on the wrist will suffice. These offenses require a more serious recourse. The Constitution cannot defend itself, it requires Americans to use the framework it sets out in its defense. As such, there is no clear path forward other than impeachment.