HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why hasn't Trump been imp...

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 01:35 AM

Why hasn't Trump been impeached for ongoing violations of the Emoluments Clause?

That is well documented and seems to be very clearly “using the Presidency for personal and/or political gain.” Easily falls under impeachable offenses.

What’s going on at Trump International Hotel? What’s going on at Mar-e-Lago? Who’s financing Trump’s properties that are supervised by his kids and the Trump Organization - all of which 45 is continually briefed on. So much for “divesting.”

What about the Inaugural Committee? Or Trump’s re-election campaign? The graft never fucking ends...

Even if there were no overt ties to Russian interference in the 2016 (and now, 2020) presidential election on Trump’s behalf (and there are), even if there were no Mueller investigation or FBI counterintelligence investigation, even if there wasn’t the quid pro quo with Ukraine, even if there wasn’t obstruction if justice and lying and witness tampering and threats to whistleblowers - even if none or most of the above hadn’t happened (and it did and is ongoing, of course), Trump and his family and their associates have still been brazenly profiting off of the Presidency while dealing in corrupt influence-peddling with foreign governments and a lot of unprecedented, unregulated lobbying from very rich and powerful people. How is THAT not impeachable?!

19 replies, 1129 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why hasn't Trump been impeached for ongoing violations of the Emoluments Clause? (Original post)
ArtTownsend Jan 16 OP
DemocracyMouse Jan 16 #1
ArtTownsend Jan 16 #2
arthritisR_US Jan 16 #9
Doodley Jan 16 #3
arthritisR_US Jan 16 #10
NCLefty Jan 16 #4
arthritisR_US Jan 16 #12
NCLefty Jan 16 #13
arthritisR_US Jan 16 #14
mr_lebowski Jan 16 #16
arthritisR_US Jan 16 #19
intrepidity Jan 16 #5
KY_EnviroGuy Jan 16 #6
Wounded Bear Jan 16 #7
LastLiberal in PalmSprings Jan 16 #8
StarfishSaver Jan 16 #15
mr_lebowski Jan 16 #18
raccoon Jan 16 #11
Hermit-The-Prog Jan 16 #17

Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 01:44 AM

1. Thank you! I've wondered about this too.

AND WHY DO ALL THOSE PREPPY NPR PUNDITS TALK SO FRIGGIN' CALMLY AS IF TRUMP AND ASSOCIATES DESERVE TO BE TREATED AS ANYTHING BUT CRIMINALS and TRAITORS TO THE CONSTITUTION.

(i.e. they say, in calm, professional voices: "and the White House responds blah blah (lies) blah blah." without REMINDING the public that these people are crooks)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocracyMouse (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 01:49 AM

2. Yes! Count me in as a member of the Against Normalizing Trump club.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 04:52 AM

9. Oh hell yes, count me in. When do these

sods go down? Yesterday was not soon enough!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 02:01 AM

3. Agreed. Trump should be impeached for his crimes on a monthly basis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doodley (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 04:59 AM

10. On a monthly basis? JFC that's insane.

The first one should have him removed from the office he should never have held and then he should be tried for each and every crime he has committed. Those crimes predate his “presidency” and the fecker needs to answer for all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 02:03 AM

4. I'm guessing Nancy thought this was too nebulous/misunderstood/legally weak.

We would have probably had to subpoena a bunch of financial documents to prove he profited and we know what Trump has done with all of our other subpoenas.

The election is coming. There's not much time left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCLefty (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 05:17 AM

12. I'm afraid there is not much time left to

your democracy, rule of law and judicial governance. Your founding fathers wanted above anything else to protect their founding nation from the British autocracy and they were fecking brilliant in their deliberations and edicts. It saddens me to no end how they have been discarded. If your “government” doesn’t have a true hearing of your commander and thief, your democracy will be pipe dream.😥😪

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 05:27 AM

13. That's a strangely distant way to talk about it.

It's not MY democracy; It's all of the American people's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCLefty (Reply #13)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 05:51 AM

14. I never talked about "my" democracy, please tell

me where that comes in?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #14)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 11:02 AM

16. I'm presuming that Lefty is thinking you're from the USA, when you're actually not?

I think that's the confusion in this case ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mr_lebowski (Reply #16)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 01:20 PM

19. Ok, that's fair. I am Canadian but I care

Deeply about my mates south of me🥰

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 02:04 AM

5. I wonder this daily nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 03:25 AM

6. Do you really feel it's appropriate for members of an internet blog....

to determine what actions are impeachable, particularly considering there's no precedence in past Congressional action or even in case law for members of Congress to draw on for guidance?

There's nothing I find in the Constitution's articles on impeachment that mentions emoluments violations. What it does include is actions of bribery by foreign entities. Do you really think Congress during an impeachment trial could prove without doubt that a president or other government employee was bribed say, by Russia? Republicans choose their co-conspirators carefully.

In addition, no rational person would believe that a Rethug-majority Senate would convict based on emoluments violations. They are the party of laissez-faire everything - you want basic healthcare? Tough shit. You upset 'cause billionaires pay no taxes? Tough shit. Upset because a president makes money off foreign visitors? Tough shit. That's the Republican way of life.

Even though Trump and his family's actions are extremely repugnant to any good citizen, I think our Democratic leadership knows Republicans would make a circus of any attempt to impeach based on emoluments.

Are you aware that there's currently three court cases against the Trumps relating to these issues?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 04:20 AM

7. Because he's stonewalling his financials...nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 04:42 AM

8. It's the KISS principle.

"Keep it simple, stupid."

While we (DUers) are pretty savvy about the ins and outs of Trump's corrupt presidency, the vast majority doesn't have the time or inclination to spend the time to study the ins and outs of the ongoing drama.

So it's better to focus on two simple and obvious matters: extortion and obstruction. Think of a game like baseball. While there are some people who get involved in the minutia of the game -- statistics, RBIs, etc. -- to non-aficionados like me I understand the fundamentals: you throw the ball, you hit the bill, you catch the ball. Three strikes and you're out, four balls and you walk, over the fence is a home run. I can enjoy watching a game knowing those basic principles.

Now let's say that because of a scheduling error both a baseball game and a football game have been scheduled in the same stadium at the same time. The resulting chaos would make me tune out.

The same thing is going on here. Speaker Pelosi has focused the House's energy on just the two Articles listed above. The Republicans are trying to complicate matters by throwing in everything they can, including the kitchen sink. Then they wave their arms and yell that the process is unfair, witnesses and documents weren't included in the House's investigation (who's fault was that?), and the Democrats are just trying to overturn the results of the 2016 election.

So we focus like a laser on the two Articles. And like a laser we cut through all the feldercarb (for all you Battlestar Galactica fans) and stay on message and not get diverted by the Republican crap.

IMHO, that's why there are only two Articles. It gives us the best chance of succeeding, and even if we don't, it builds a historical record which will tarnish Trump's name (which is his most cherished possession) for the rest of his life and beyond.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LastLiberal in PalmSprings (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 06:27 AM

15. Exactly - way too complicated

If the Mueller Report was too complex to support impeachment, imagine what a mess it would be to try to build an impeachment case on Emoluments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 11:09 AM

18. Another angle is that the current impeachment is, in part at least, a foreign emoluments case ...

It's just not money being received directly, it's something else of value ... electoral advantage.

It's not the only transgression involved, but it's one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 05:10 AM

11. I've been wondering that myself. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArtTownsend (Original post)

Thu Jan 16, 2020, 11:06 AM

17. Article 1, abuse of power

His violations of the emoluments clause fits within the first Article of Impeachment -- abuse of power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread