[Merged]US election stuff

[DodgyAgent]

Not sure I agree with the Black vs Police lives matter dig but the rest of it is spot on...

Why not? Just because it doesn't fit the left wing narrative?

[Old Greg]

<place holder>

Looks like it's already a thing.

Can Donald Trump Be Impeached? | Law News

Law Prof Says There is Already Enough Evidence To Impeach Donald Trump
by Rachel Stockman | 10:58 am, November 9th, 2016 47

Donald Trump has pulled through with an unexpected win, and will soon become the next President of the United States. As this reality sinks in across the country, Google searches for how to impeach a President Trump are surging. On top of that, the hashtag #NotMyPresident is already trending on Twitter.

However, even before he was elected, one law professor was convinced that there was already enough evidence to impeach him if he did win. Of course, even if there is, that’s going to be a tough task considering that the Republicans now have control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Despite that, his analysis is certainly an interesting theory to re-examine as questions continue to arise.

University of Utah Law Professor Christopher Lewis Peterson penned a 23-page article analyzing why it would be proper for Congress to impeach Trump if he’s elected. He believes that Trump has engaged in fraud and racketeering which meets the standards under Article II of the United States Constitution which reserves impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

“Unlike his promised crimes yet to come, the illegal acts in Trump’s high pressure wealth seminars have already occurred. Indeed, a federal judge appointed under Article III of the U.S. Constitution has already determined that Trump’s alleged actions, if true, constitute fraud and racketeering,” Peterson wrote. While Peterson acknowledges there would be some legal hurdles, he contends that the Constitution does not prohibit Congress from impeaching a President for alleged acts that happened prior to taking office (which is the common belief).

“Congress would be well within its legal rights under the Constitution to insist upon a President who is not a fraudster or a racketeer as defined in its own law,” Peterson wrote. Another issue that Peterson acknowledges is that if Trump wins, this would be seen as referendum against any kind of impeachment. After all, the people voted him in knowing he was facing lawsuits as it relates to Trump University. Peterson has an answer for that too.

“Trump appears to have lied about his role in Trump University to students, he has throughout the election continued to misrepresent the cases that focus on his misrepresentations,” Lewis wrote. Therefore, Peterson contends that the American public might not have been aware of the full extent of his transgressions.

Right now, Donald Trump is facing several different lawsuits surrounding his role at Trump University. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed a $40 million civil suit against the University for alleged illegal business practices and fraud. None of the cases have been resolved, and all are ongoing. The class action fraud trial is scheduled to begin the Monday after Thanksgiving. Trump has repeatedly denied his school ripped off students.

[Old Greg]

WTF it has to do with you I do not really know. I am all for making a judgement but you are not an American voter and for you to judge Trump as "totally unsuitable" smacks of an arrogance that ignores millions of people in an other country. My view is that the people of America see a person that is beyond the wit and intelligence of many British liberals

Peter Thiel perfectly summed up Donald Trump in one paragraph

So why is Mexico going to pay for the wall?

[shaunbhoy]

Not a wailing liberal here ... just amazed how utterly unsuitable a person has just been elected president. Hillary just as bad ...

No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems, of which getting Elected and getting Re-Elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.

[Old Greg]

No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems, of which getting Elected and getting Re-Elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.

That's why I didn't really see the problem with Clinton. She was yet another economically right-wing socially liberal politician who was going to shaft everyone the same way as always.

[d000hg]

What do you expect it to be for?

Isn't he facing charges including abuse, rape AND child rape? I don't recall which things he's actually been formally charged/investigated for and which are (for now) merely claims that are unverifyable.

[d000hg]

No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems, of which getting Elected and getting Re-Elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.

In the USA in particular it seems like candidates are forced down this line. You get maybe 3 years of your first term to do things then have to spend the 4th year focusing on little other than the election. Except it presumably takes a year just to get up to speed with the job.

[d000hg]

He is guilty of this

'I was right. Donald Trump’s triumph has crushed the lefty luvvies'. says KATIE HOPKINS | Daily Mail Online

An endorsement from KH is fairly damning in itself. And he has Farage blowing his Trump-et too.

[bobspud]

Why not? Just because it doesn't fit the left wing narrative?

No because regardless of left or right wing stance, the US police have a race issue that would make 1970's South Africa proud.

[OwlHoot]

Let's start with pussy grabbing

Does that count as a "high crime or misdemeanor"? Sounds a bit low to me.