Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

shraby

(21,946 posts)
Wed Jan 25, 2017, 03:21 AM Jan 2017

Someone took issue with my argument that the donald took the oath of office and

that action covered his lying, i.e. he is lying under oath.
Here is part of an article about just that:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/bullshit-and-oath-office-lol-nothing-matters-presidency

Notably, the Oath Clause and Take Care Clause are unique among Article II requirements in being fundamentally incompatible by their nature with bullshit. A bullshitter is perfectly capable of serving as Commander in Chief of the armed forces, of making treaties, of receiving foreign representatives, and so on and so forth. He may perform all of these duties poorly, but he is theoretically capable of carrying them out. The requirements of the Oath Clause and the Take Care Clause, on the other hand, are fundamentally irreconcilable with the character type and the behavior. The bullshitter either stops being a bullshitter or he cannot honor these clauses.

To be clear, this is not a legal argument. I am not saying that a President Trump should not be allowed to take the oath of office because of what I see as his characterological inability to honor it; that’s what elections are for. But I am saying that there exists a foundational incompatibility between our President-elect and the duties of the office that he will soon hold and that we should thus expect serial questions to arise about whether he has, in fact, honored his oath and obeyed the Take Care Clause. And when those issues arise, we should understand from whence they spring. As citizens of a country that purports to live under the rule of law, we have a duty to insist that words have meaning—even when the President swears an oath he doesn’t even understand.

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Someone took issue with my argument that the donald took the oath of office and (Original Post) shraby Jan 2017 OP
I'm surprised area51 Jan 2017 #1
Lying under oath, as a legal offense, occurs when you take an oath promising not to lie, Ms. Toad Jan 2017 #2

Ms. Toad

(33,915 posts)
2. Lying under oath, as a legal offense, occurs when you take an oath promising not to lie,
Wed Jan 25, 2017, 04:23 AM
Jan 2017

and then you lie.

An oath is just a promise to do something. Not all oaths are promises not to lie

Specifically, Trump's oath had nothing to do with telling the truth:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."


So lying is not a violation of the oath he took.

(And nothing in the article suggests it is.)
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Someone took issue with m...