Hyper-liberal Columbia professor Rohit Aggarwala has casually discarded the will of nearly 73 million Americans, and - under the guise of 'returning to norms' - thinks that America needs a constitutional amendment to prevent another president like Donald Trump.
In a Bloomberg Op-Ed painting in the broadest of brush-strokes, Aggarwala (who's involved in Bloomberg's philanthropic efforts) suggests that Trump's behavior is so outside presidential norms that it can't be allowed to happen again.
President Donald Trump’s years in office reminded us how important those norms are, and also proved that many of them have little or no legal force.
One of the Biden administration’s first steps should be to propose a constitutional amendment to establish the most important presidential standards in law — an amendment that would be in keeping with American constitutional history. -Rohit Aggarwala
Aggarwala also takes issue with Trump's unwillingness to release his tax returns - which were subsequently leaked, illegally, revealing exactly zero ties to Russia or any other foreign nation that might exert leverage over the sitting US president. Yet, we have to wonder - what kind of leverage would foreign actors have over the Biden family, should Biden be sworn in, if photos and videos of a crack-addled Hunter Biden banging (potentially underage) prostitutes hadn't surfaced before the 2020 election?
Speaking of Hunter, can we get a constitutional amendment against influence peddling and then lying about knowledge (and now, evidence of direct involvement) regarding said influence peddling?
Aggarwala also says that the proposed amendment "should institutionalize the independence of the Justice Department by making the attorney general an officer who serves at the pleasure of both the president and Congress, thereby ensuring that attorneys general would not be able to do active harm for very long."
Should we call this the 'no wingman' clause of Aggarwala's new amendment? Perhaps that could go next to the 'don't weaponize the intelligence community to spy on presidential candidates' and 'don't use the IRS to target political enemies' clauses.
Lastly, Aggarwala proposes that "the amendment should prevent presidents from pardoning themselves, their families, their staffs and campaign officials, and perhaps even major donors to their campaigns. It should eliminate the ability to grant pardons between Election Day and the beginning of the next presidential term."
Was Aggarwala calling for this in 1999, after Bill Clinton pardoned over 130 people during his last month in office - including his own brother and several business associates? (In fact, Hillary Clinton's brother was pimping out pardons for money).
In short, virtually all of Aggarwala's grievances with Donald Trump, sans his benign, yet perhaps embarrassing tax returns, concern allegations which former presidents have not only engaged in - but to a much more shocking degree in many cases.
Now - how about an amendment against new foreign entanglements of any type without Congressional approval?