A President's General Moral Responsibility to the people

What is the President’s Greatest Responsibility?

https://adleinternational.com/products/the-academic-president-as-moral-leader-james-t-laney-at-emory-university-1977-1993?variant=23924506329169

The presidential oath of office that is prescribed by the U.S. Constitution (Art. II, sect. 1) makes it clear that the President’s supreme responsibility is to “…preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”  

Moral Leadership has a different point of view in leading their followers. They take action by choosing the moral and the most ethical decisions to solve an issue. Moral Leaders take beliefs and moral as a personal matter. Moral Leaders follow their moral rather than the organization's value.

Do leaders as a President  have moral obligations? ... Morals do not have to be religious or stemming from a certain set of beliefs, they are just what makes a good or bad decision and if the decision is right or wrong. Leaders should know that they have to make decisions that benefit the greater community.

"The president is the very first symbol of American government that children comprehend," she says. "The president, especially in the modern era, comes into our homes — first by radio, then television, now through all sorts of electronic gadgetry — and so we think of him as part of our life. And that's why it's so important for him to model the proper behavior for us."

I find that again and again, no matter what the subject is, we return to the question of leadership. Moral leadership is in fact the central task of our presidents when it’s done correctly,” said Jon Meacham, a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian who has written books about Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. He spoke at a luncheon in October kicking off a year-long series on Moral and Ethical Leadership in the American Presidency. 

The best presidents – including figures such as Abraham Lincoln and George Washington – are celebrated not only as good leaders, but as good men. They embody not simply political skill, but personal virtue.

Why, though, should anyone expect a president to demonstrate that sort of virtue? If someone is good at the difficult job of political leadership, must they demonstrate exceptional moral character as well?

In Nov. 7 2018 during a press briefing at the White House, President Trump defended his rhetoric and his status as a “moral leader” after a reporter asked him about the rise in anti-Semitic attacks during his presidency.

“I think I am a great moral leader and I love our country,” Trump said Wednesday at a White House news conference.

Today's modern era on American Presidency depicts a lot on the presence and influence a President makes to the country through our televisions, radio, online, social media and all channels we see the daily current events. The basics on this moral perspective starts right from the words uttered by a leader and the message he/she communicates to the people.

Unfortunately, each word and statement uttered to the executive actions no mater how significant and valuable they are is tied to a moral responsibility as leader of the free world and as protector of the US Constitution.

Moral responsibility without even looking at the political implications they have dictates the outcome it sends to the people. The daily actions affecting moral responsibility of a president eventually is a writing material for Presidential historians,

The Promise, The Goal, The Enactment to Close The Borders, Stop Immigration and Rule Forever

The power the President has over “immigration” is limited to what is established by the Constitution.  The President cannot establish new rules of Naturalization.  He cannot issue waivers to overturn rules of Naturalization that are established in compliance with the Constitution.

From the issue of the ending DACA when this administration started by the Attorney General, building walls on the border of Mexico, the impending show of military might on a caravan fleeing persecution from a hostile country and now the ending of the constitutional birthright in the United States. It's kinda hard really to simply stay silent when all this adds to the divisions and the new way how people see America as a country.

The power over foreign immigration is delegated through Article 1 section 8 clause 4; “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”   Because it is delegated under Article 1, we know this power is specifically vested in Congress.  Separation of powers dictates that since the power to establish this Rule is rests in Congress, it cannot be exercised by any other branch.  We can see that the executive branch cannot ESTABLISH the Rule of Naturalization, but what authority does the President have over the naturalization process?,   quoted from KrisAnne Hall, Presidential Power Over Immigration article.

Hence, President Obama during his 8 years also wanted Immigration reform tried several times through Congress but was not successful. Finally, he came up with an Executive Order which created the DACA which the Trump administration tried to stop. Thanks to the courts, DACA recipients  are still protected. It is an expected bombshell that right after hours when this so called new Executive Order to end the birthright of people born in the United States will immediately start the legal battle of lawsuits to challenge and stop this said order. Whether the US Congress will react on this Executive Order depends the outcome of the mid term US elections in two weeks.

Presidential proclamations, by their nature, are solely within the prerogative of the president and do not have any pre-publication notice requirement, as (for example) regulations do. Therefore, the only way to challenge a presidential proclamation suspending entry of all or some foreign nationals based on their nationality, in the case of incoming Caravan would be a post-promulgation legal challenge. Such a legal challenge would pit two well-established legal doctrines against each other. On the one hand, Congress has been deemed in many cases to have “plenary power” to make immigration rules and to delegate unrestricted discretionary enforcement power to the executive. Courts have held that statutes or exercises of discretion that would otherwise violate the equal protection guarantee under the Constitution are allowed in the ­immigration sphere.  This is why right after this so called new Executive Order in ending the birthright of people born in the US will have such a phenomenal legal battle. 

Likewise, this will add to the spectrum of how this presidency has turn out in delivering it's promises while creating a lot of division and how it had affected the citizens of this country. This will lay the framework for 2020.  With the approaches this administration has taken, the likes of autocrat leaders depicts in it. The bigger question is will the Constitution even allow it or perhaps the next step is changing the Constitution using Executive Powers.

Alex Esguerra

How Complicated is it "To End a Presidency" the Analytical Perspective

To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment

is 6 days away as of the writing of this blog. Written by two distinguish authors, Laurence Tribe and Joshua Matz.  Laurence Tribe is the Carl M. Loeb University Professor and a professor of constitutional law at Harvard. One of America's foremost constitutional scholars, he is the coauthor of Uncertain Justice (with Joshua Matz) and numerous other books and articles. He lives in Brookline, Massachusetts.

Joshua Matz, a graduate of Harvard Law School and a constitutional lawyer, is the publisher of Take Care, which provides legal analysis of the Trump presidency. He lives in Washington, DC.

I had a personal interest in this book as the topic of impeachment itself is very complicated. 'Impeachment is not like a magic Harry Potter spell or wand nor a doomsday as they say in fairy tales. It such in depth that notoriety in wiring books on this topic requires such expertise and familiarization not only of the process but also constitutional law. Added to that are the democratic ideologies and how it impacts the current administration and president hence is what this topic has been discussed since day 1 when this presidency took effect.

Hopefully, an overview of the process and facts on lay men's understanding can shed some light on the real significance of this topic today. The reality is that is such a hard process to impeach a president. Hence, two past presidents impeachment tries didn't really resonate. America's founding fathers did include this provision from the very start as weakest last resort as if in case of fire break the safety glass cabinet to get the fire extinguisher. While there are really no glass case to break nowadays in this age, that barrier in reference to impeachment is still the same meaning their still is a glass case with a lock.

I remember Psychology plays a big de facto on impeachment. In the past year we have seen the psychology books written about the President's mental health. The truth of the matter, a being disturbed, acting strange even like an idiot, saying different things and versions does not surpassed the test of getting impeached. The said person truly and definitely has to be mentally ill to pass the test. 

This is why of all the books written, I believe the closest case if ever if there would be one case for impeachment would be on Bribery and Collusion with a foreign in meddling the outcome of the presidential elections. And even then if the facts of the case gains a positive outcome, the hardest part would be the constitutional process. Both the United States Senate and House of Representatives has to be both having a majority vote to enact the impeachment. Regardless, of the lengthy process in developing the case, without both majority vote will either enact or if ever this case finally dies. One example is in the case of President Clinton in 1998, the vote pass the House of Representatives but failed in the US Senate.

The bigger question even to be ask is "Is it possible that a Congress in which the Republicans control both or even one chamber would consider impeaching Trump?".  This is why I'm hoping that this new book written by two notables on the subject will lay out the underling and tedious criteria s on what is really involved even to get a case for impeachment.

When you get to read this new bestseller, please share your comments and we together review not just this book bu the case of impeachment.

Alex Esguerra

ADLE Intl

 

Trending, "What Happened", New Release Book by Hillary Clinton

     

What Happened

                           

What Happened by Hillary Clinton will soon be hitting the bookstores on Sept. 12, 2017, a day after the US remembers the Sept. 11 attack on the World Trade Center during the Bush era.

I started with this as right after the World Trade Center attacks and President George W. Bush launch the Iraq invasion, then Senator Hillary Clinton was  one of those that approve the Iraq invasion and war  - Years after her work as Secretary of State under the Obama administration was very prominent and colorful defining her political fate as stateswoman in foreign diplomacy. With this came part of the major hurdles in her presidential bid leading to her defeat to incumbent President Donald Trump for the thousands of leak emails using her personal email server for state email communications. Her approval of the Iraq war was one of the repeated propaganda's against her even as democratic party nominee until being the official democratic party presidential candidate in 2016.

History will write Hillary as the first woman in the US to be a standard bearer of a major party as presidential candidate. In her new forthcoming book, she  describes what it was like to run against Donald Trump, the mistakes she made, how she has coped with a shocking and devastating loss, and how she found the strength to pick herself back up afterward. With humor and candor, she tells readers what it took to get back on her feet—the rituals, relationships, and reading that got her through, and what the experience has taught her about life. She speaks about the challenges of being a strong woman in the public eye, the criticism over her voice, age, and appearance, and the double standard confronting women in politics.

 Hillary takes you inside the intense personal experience of becoming the first woman nominated for president by a major party in an election marked by rage, sexism, exhilarating highs and infuriating lows, stranger-than-fiction twists, Russian interference, and an opponent who broke all the rules. This is her most personal memoir yet. In the last few months, speculations and speculations, threads and threads of feeds on social media talked about how she lost and why as well as if she is going to make a comeback.

In the few years then I was sort of involved with political affairs during my time as as an APEC Youth leader what I've seen so far is that Mrs. Clinton has outlived any presidential candidate in history of presidential candidates as she was able to come back and make another run for the presidency in 2016 after losing in 2008 to then Senator Obama. She was able to make the comeback as she had the popularity, she and her husband has the army of followers and supporters and she did not really had a lot of questionable past scandals and moreover she was an effective Junior Senator form New York which initially people had reservations when she made the run for Senator after being First Lady. The last part is that she has the professional merit as Lawyer and her enduring work then for the healthcare initiatives as First Lady leading to the Affordable Care Act.

She lays out how the 2016 election was marked by an unprecedented assault on our democracy by a foreign adversary. By analyzing the evidence and connecting the dots, Hillary shows just how dangerous the forces are that shaped the outcome, and why Americans need to understand them to protect our values and our democracy in the future.

With that in mind, the reality is presidential candidates normally retire from the lime light and embrace being a private citizen after a defeat. Hence, which is why I mentioned Hillary was unprecedented making a second run for the presidency. Yet, it is done, she will be in another end of being an observer and private citizen but she will indeed have a big section when the history books are written as the first woman as a major party presidential candidate which of course will defined her political life from being First Lady, Senator and then Secretary of State.

 She lays out how the 2016 election was marked by an unprecedented assault on our democracy by a foreign adversary. By analyzing the evidence and connecting the dots, Hillary shows just how dangerous the forces are that shaped the outcome, and why Americans need to understand them to protect our values and our democracy in the future.

So we should look forward on her more on being a pro-active political observer and being involved in preserving democracy in America.

Alex Esguerra

Usedbooksworld

Affordablebookdeals

   

If The President does it, that means it's not illegal, is it still true even today

The Conviction of RICHARD NIXON by James Reston, Jr. writes the foreword, "If the President does it, that means it's not illegal," as quoted was the brazen words uttered by Richard Nixon in his famous interview with David Frost in 1977.

Nixon continued and argued that the President is immune. As the book describes about eavesdropping, cover up, and bend government agencies like the CIA and the FBI for his own political purpose. National Security and "Executive Privilege" hence when exposed were "mistakes". With such words and predicament came about "Obstruction of Justice", the case for impeachment which led the way for Nixon to resign as it was inevitable.

Reading through this book trying to get a well deserved sleep gave a lot of comparison to the new book, 

The Case For Impeachment by Allan J. Lichtman . Professor Allan J. Lichtman, who has correctly forecasted thirty years of presidential outcomes, makes the case for impeaching the 45th president of the United States, Donald J. Trump.

Excerpt of the book annotation, "The Case for Impeachment also offers a fascinating look at presidential impeachments throughout American history, including the often-overlooked story of Andrew Johnson’s impeachment, details about Richard Nixon’s resignation, and Bill Clinton’s hearings. Lichtman shows how Trump exhibits many of the flaws (and more) that have doomed past presidents. As the Nixon Administration dismissed the reporting of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein as “character assassination” and “a vicious abuse of the journalistic process,” Trump has attacked the “dishonest media,” claiming, “the press should be ashamed of themselves.”

Historians, legal scholars, and politicians alike agree: we are in politically uncharted waters—the durability of our institutions is being undermined and the public’s confidence in them is eroding, threatening American democracy itself."

With the recent testimony of the Former FBI Director James Comey about being asked repeatedly on the Russian interference investigations in  the 2016 elections, and the case of holding on to his position simply gives a more stronger case of Obstruction than the last impeachment case of Bill Clinton on an affair which never got passed. 

The months and circumstances to follow next will be part of the American history books as it unfolds. From the time this new book by Lichtman was release in April 2017, it hasn't yet gotten that much sales from a bookseller standpoint yet however this book is soon to be such an enormous bestseller that the publisher Dey Street Books will probably continually be making reprints.

For now, this is a new discussion between supporters of then failed candidate Hillary Clinton and the current 45th President Donald Trump.

Alex Esguerra

https://www.usedbooksworld.com