So, to be clear... Trump has committed all of these constitutional violations, yet congress doesn't find these violations to be violations, and is only focused on impeaching Trump on something that wasn't a violation of the constitution?
Constitutional violations happen every day. Police routinely violate the constitution, but no one cares when it gets brought up. Also, a violation of the constitution is NOT a requirement for impeachment.
It's no secret that Judge Nap is no fan of Trump. I watched the video and he ranted on about the Emoluments Clause, while talking no specifics about where Trump has illegally spent money, or how pulling troops out of Syria was a violation of the constitution, or specifics about separating children from their families or incarcerating children. He ranted on about something that
never happened. Trump listened to his critics and pulled out of the G7 occurring at the Trump resort in Miami. Trump was going to do this at no charge to the government or profit to himself. He was going to personally suck up the entire cost of hosting the G7; yet Nap feels this is a violation of the Emoluments Clause.
The Emoluments Clause is about profiting off the office, not spending money. Nap touches on it when mentioning the G7 Summit that you also saw. There would be no costs to "suck up" because everything would have been "at cost". It appeared Nap was talking the overall optics of a President who still largely controls his companies and properties he's charging domestic and foreign governments to attend.
I agree pulling troops isn't a violation of the Constitution. We were in Syria because, under Obama, the US justified our presence under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter. Trump's decision was morally bankrupt and hastily executed, but I don't agree it's a Constitutional violation.
He didn't rant about separating children, he ranted against doing it despite an order to not do so by a federal judge.
Oh yeah... Trump said it was phony. Watching the
actual video of that comment, I don't get that Trump was saying the actual clause was phony; I believe he was saying that accusations of him violating that clause was phony. And I believe he's right. Hosting the G7 at one of his resorts -
for free - is not a profit to himself. Judge Nap is doing what all of his other detractors do... mischaracterize (or take out of context) what Trump said or did all in the name of expressing his hatred for the man.
"[talking about George Washington's desks] I don't think, you people with this phony Emoluments Clause, and by the way [goes on to talk about money he's lost]"
That was the only thing he said about it and we all know the Clause doesn't narrowly tailor to profit.
In that video, he agreed that he would receive "promotion", but basically said he gets enough as it is.
The one thing Judge Nap didn't do, in light of this impending impeachment, is demand Trump be charged up on these so-called constitutional violations for impeachment. Why not? Why did he leave that part out if he believes to adamantly that Trump violated the constitution on numerous occasions? Because, he knows damn-well none of it is really a violation of the constitution, and he's just using his platform as a means to disparage the president coming up on an election.