Has President Trump committed High Crimes & Misdemeanors Yet?

1. 87

   My Esotericposted 6 years ago

   Maybe.  The 17th Century term High Crimes and Misdemeanors may not mean what you think it might  be after seeing President Clinton impeached, but not convicted. 
   
   A common interpretation is as follows:
   
   The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming, and refusal to obey a lawful order.
   
   In the end, however, it is Congress who determines what constitutes the phrase.
   
   President Andrew Johnson was impeached by his political opponents in the House because he allegedly violated the Tenure of Office Act when he removed the Secretary of War from office.  The Republican Congress did not like the way Johnson, a Democrat from Tennessee, because his Reconstruction plan was to put the transition from slavery into the hands of Southern Whites.
   
   President Richard Nixon was facing impeachment, but resigned before it was complete. Some of the charges against him were 1) Obstruction of Justice, 2) Abuse of Power, and 3) Contempt of Congress
   
   President Bill Clinton was impeached by his political opponents based on charges of him with lying under oath to a federal grand jury and obstructing justice.  The real reason, as with Johnson, is the opposition Republicans didn't like his politics.
   
   So, has President Trump met or is coming close to meeting any of those thresholds?

   replyreport
   1. 94

      wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Sure!  The only one that matters at all is contempt of congress, and he's made no secret of that!

      replyreport
   2. 70

      Ewentposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Once you consider the circumstances under which President Nixon was forced to resign over WaterGate, you see that Trump has exceeded all the boundaries of all 44 presidents. He wants NO disclosure of his taxes, his continuing business deals or any of the decisions he makes behind closed doors with members of the Trump Organization. Nixon may not have physically burglarized the WaterGate Hotel and DNC office. But he was forced to resign for LYING.
      
      Trump lies and gets away with it. We are supposed to tell our kids, the president lies. It's okay for you to do the same?
      
      Is this man an elected representative of all of the people of this country or is he operating a corporation out of the White House? When we elect a president, he is OUR employee. Trump refuses to allow any voter to know what his plans are. That is high crimes and misdemeanors based on the fact that the people who elect ANY representative have Constitutional rights to know what their elected official is doing and why.
      
      The fact that Trump refuses to disclose his taxes, refuses to divest himself from his Trump Organization, hires only family members and billionaire cronies for jobs they are totally unqualified for, proves the depths of his need run an insider government.

      replyreport
2. 59

   Prayerhubposted 6 years ago

   TRUMP IS NOT INSANE
   
   No folks,Trump is not insane, he is only rising up to the challenges of our time. The present world needs someone like Trump to challenge and frighten the bullies, the heartless and the reign of terror in the world.
   
   If not for the sudden emergence of Trump, who else will speak out ? The UN and other world leaders only condemn terror attacks, each time it ocured, they never rose up to fight it with the zeal it requires. Trump is not for that..Trump is not insane.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      colorfuloneposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I agree!  Very good points you made.

      replyreport
   2. 87

      My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Folks said that about Hitler in 1933 as well, PrayerHub.  #NoMandateTrump is following his play book and has almost an identical personality as Hitler.  Hell, he kicked the head of intelligence and the Chief of Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Principles List of the National Security Council.and replaced by his chief political adviser.  What does that tell you about your unstable hero.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Prayerhubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Now that the vocal cum popular American press could not stop him, now that he has been sworn in and now that he wines and dines at the white house, he has every right after consultations with his team, to appoint anybody he deems fit for a post.

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Castlepalomaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Schwartz who is ashamed now, that Trump is President, he knew him more than anybody outside his family. Schwartz wrote the book Art of the deal, describes Trump to a T for 10 reasons why Trump is a psychopath. I married a megalomaniacs/psychopath, if I was not a strong individual I would have been destroyed. I recognize Trump firmly as a psychopath then you America people gave him a red button to push.
            
            May Mothernature recover from your great ignorance.

            replyreport
            1. 87

               My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               #NoMandateTrump just found out with the failed Trump/GOPCare debacle that his book Does Not apply to politics ... nor should it.

               replyreport
         2. 87

            My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Of course he does, but that doesn't make his decisions smart or good for the country.  The reality is, that 90% of what he has done, including the idiocy with the National Sercurity Council, to date has been Very harmful to our Nation

            replyreport
      2. 94

         wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Wouldn't know, but "#NoMandateTrump", "identical personality as Hitler" and "unstable hero" says quite a bit about the veracity of the speaker.  In my experience it is typically only those with nothing else to offer that descend into such tactics.

         replyreport
         1. 87

            My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            The "tactic" is quite legitimate if the analogy fits, and in this case it does.  One difference between Hitler and Trump is that Trump is not a sociopath and Hitler was..  But what is in common is 1) both are serial lairs, 2) both live in alternate realities and have no use for facts, 3) both are Narcissistic to the point that they are both probably have a Personality Disorder, 4) the intimate circle around each who are "yes" men who think exactly like their principals or are even more extreme in their beliefs, 5) both are master manipulator, 6) both are xenophobes, 7) both are misogynists (although I never read that Hitler sexually abused women), 8) both are extreme nationalist, 9) both are authoritarians who want to be dictators (like CEOs are vis-a-vis their companies ... I'll stop their.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               That's what I said, isn't it?  That it has something to say about the veracity of the speaker; that you go ahead and provide more reasons to question that veracity would seem to indicate that the point is valid.

               replyreport
         2. 87

            My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            It says Nothing about veracity unless I am lying, and I am not.

            replyreport
   3. 87

      My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      While I wouldn't classify Trump's disease as Insanity, I do think he is mentally ill ... and here is why http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/26/politics/ … index.html

      replyreport
      1. 70

         Ewentposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         MyEsoteric, May I inquire as to what "challenges of our times" he rose up to when he appointed Flynn, a known foreign agent to be a member of his cabinet? Are the challenges of our times to destroy and so weaken the US government that it no longer exists?

         replyreport
         1. 87

            My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Ewent, I think you meant to direct your question to Prayerhub who made the comment.

            replyreport
3. 77

   Kathleen Cochranposted 6 years ago

   His conflicts of interests made him guilty the moment he took office.  Will a Republican congress do anything about his constitutional violations?  Don't hold your breath.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      You might want to check the legal meaning of "conflict of interest", for the perception or possibility of a conflict of interest is not illegal.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Not "illegal" for the President and Vice President only.
         
         They are Not exempt, however, from Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution.  If Trump makes one dime in profits or other remunerations or remunerations in-kind from a foreign government or their agents, he will be guilty of High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            True.  Now...if he owns a share of stock in any company doing business overseas?  Or any company that receives remuneration from foreign agents (the Hilton, perhaps)?  This will include stockholders in such companies as taxi services, flower shops, restaurants or bakeries as well as mutual funds such as those emulating the S&P.  Airlines are definitely included, as are grocery stores. 
            
            The answer, of course, is yes, and that means that virtually every president in recent history has also been guilty.  Is jailing Trump because a business he has partial ownership of rented a hotel room to an ambassador worth the hassle it brings about?  Or should we be a little more concerned if that agent puts money in Trumps hot little hand for doing a personal service of some kind?
            
            What do you think the writers of that document would say, given the convoluted state of ownership and earnings in today's world?

            replyreport
            1. 87

               My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               Not true, B. Clinton and G.W. Bush both put their assets in blind trusts.  Obama did not, but he didn't have to because he didn't have the types of assets susceptible to conflict of interest or foreign influence.
               
               Our founders were very worried, based on their writings, about foreign influence on any federal employee or elected official.  So yes, the fact that Trump can get very enriched from foreign gov'ts with his massive foreign real estate investments would worry them.

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  They earned from foreign agents.  Blind trust or no, they earned from them, and THAT is what is addressed.  Not whether they knew it or not - the blind trust is another red herring in this matter.
                  
                  Besides - can he put Trump Towers in a blind trust?  His golf courses?

                  replyreport
                  1. 87

                     My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                     Nonsense and no you can't, that is the point.  He should have thought about that before deciding to run.

                     replyreport
                     1. 94

                        wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                        Guess we're all stuck with it then.  Unless you would deny the presidency because he owns a business?  How about we wait until he actually commits a crime - something beyond renting a room to an ambassador for reasonable fee?  You know - a real conflict of interest, not just something cobbled together by trumpophobes so they can complain?
                        
                        But can you describe why earning from a blind trust is not earning?

                        replyreport
                        1. 87

                           My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                           Last first, because the owner has no control over a blind trust, hence the word "blind".  Independent parties make the decisions.  Unlike Sec Price's so-called blind trust, the owners cannot influence the outcome; Price could so it was no longer "blind" and, in my opinion, is guilty of insider trading.  Hopefully when Ds get back control, they will take him to task on that.
                           
                           As to gov'ts giving Trump properties the lion's share of business to curry favor, that is already happening.  It will probably be the thing that bites in the butt.

                           replyreport
                           1. 94

                              wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                              Can you point to a constitutional phrase that says it's OK to take money from a foreign agent if the president doesn't know it is being done?  No?  Then it's not there, and a blind trust, earning money from foreign interests and giving it to the President as profit, is still in violation.
                              
                              When you can prove that Trump properties are getting that lion's share (if true, something which is doubtful unless it is a carry over from past years) because the president is actively working to get that business when there is something better, there is no conflict.  As with the rest of the Trump haters, you seem to have decided that anything he does is illegal, but it's not.

                              replyreport
                              1. 87

                                 My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                                 Trump will know; he gets plenty of reports as to who his clientele is and how often they stay.  If not, then he is not a very good CEO.
                                 
                                 The rest of your comment is a stretch of logic and common sense and a denial of human nature.
                                 
                                 I am not a Trump-hater, I hate very few people.  But I do dislike him intensely because he is a serial liar, sexual predator, an extreme narcissist, a crook, a scammer and without a moral compass.
                                 
                                 The latest, of course, is his alleged business ties to the Russian mob.
                                 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/worl … /98321252/
                                 
                                 USA Today's sources were court cases, government and legal documents and an interview with a former federal prosecutor.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 94

                                    wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                                    You're right - Trump will know.
                                    
                                    Next suggestion, then?  That we confiscate all his wealth and make him a pauper?  Or shall we just make up alleged tall tales and promote them all over the world?  It works wonders for anyone already hating the man.  Why, we could even call names!

                                    replyreport
   2. 70

      Ewentposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      At the moment, it is beginning to look as if the Republican Party is as complicit as Trump in the election rigging. Once you look at how many Republican states were called into court for redistricting maps to increase the number of the electoral college votes, you see why they chopped up voting districts so they appeared to be Republican even in heavily minority voting districts.
      
      The Republican Party knew about the Russian hacking by Sept. McConnell was asked about it in November and he confirmed it by saying publicly, "We will let things take their course." That is an open admission of aiding and abettng Russians datamining voting information.
      
      We have no idea what the Russians did or CAN DO with that information. And since the Republicans tried to abolish the Ethics Court that monitors them and King Rat Ryan decided to use Nunes, a co chair of a supposedly bi-partisan investigation committee to run details of the committees evidence to hand to Trump, the Republicans are in serious legal hot water.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         My Esotericposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         What we do know about the Russians and their intentional influence in the 2016 Presidential election. 
         
         * It is clear they Did Not tamper with voting machines or tallies in any way
         * It is equally clear they did hack, or try to hack, into many election related systems including at least 2 or 3 state voter registration systems. 
         * It is also known that Vladimir Putin chose to help Donald Trump and actively hinder Hillary Clinton.
         * It is true that the Russian released unflattering information about Clinton and her aides in a steady drip-drip-drip over Spring, Summer, and Fall of 2016.  It had to suppress votes for Hillary because that is the way propaganda works, no other outcome is possible.
         * What is unknown is if it suppressed enough votes in WI, MI, and PA give Trump a little over 78,000 vote margin (23,000. 11,000, and 44,000, respectively)
         
         Do I think that is possible?  Yes, eminently possible because we are talking about a whopping 0.6%.  Keep in mind the kinds of voters who put Trump over the top were particularly susceptible to this kind of pressure from the Russians.
         
         Finally, did Trump or his team collude with the Russians?  Right now the answer is ... maybe.

         replyreport
4. 77

   Kathleen Cochranposted 6 years ago

   Wilderness:  Do you also need a definition of "is"?  Legaleze won't work here.

   replyreport
5. 0

   ahorsebackposted 6 years ago

   "Conflict of interest "  never used to mean anything   until it actually was one ,that is ,  Today  because Trump has business holdings automatically places him . in liberal "trust fund " minds   , into the category of conflict of interest .
   
   Unless he was a democrat .
   
   Obama - Clinton -  Why the hell would they have ever entered  into a "conflict of interest " category   seeing's how they were ever only public employees ?

   replyreport