To the degree that would promote widespread corruption, it's inconsistent with the president's oath of office and the Constitutionally defined duty that the pre

To the degree that would promote widespread corruption, it's inconsistent with the president's oath of office and the Constitutionally defined duty that the president uphold the law. But it's also a political question (this means the Court probably won't get involved, not that the question is normal politics) because the only way to end such an obvious travesty is to impeach, convict, and remove from office. To whatever degree the Congress can't do that, impugns the Congress who all take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, not a leader. To whatever degree people continue to elect those who support and defend a cult instead of the Constitution? They have given in to passion, and can't be reasoned with. Why argue with irrational people?