Again, I dunno?
"Violation of the emoluments clause" - This MAY be true. I know he is taking the sum of $1/year for his office but that his businesses are running. I understand his children are running them and I imagine that there is some trust or transfer of ownership in place but to be honest, I simply do not know. Nor does it appear does anyone else. People speculate and maybe they are right.
Yes, you do know. Impeachment is a political process. It was left vague for a reason.Pretty much anything (including his Twit-feed) could probably serve as an impeachable offense."If obstruction of justice matters, he's admitted it already." Except he hasn't. He got rid of Comey and it was COMPLETELY in his power to do so as Comey served under him. His comments and the optics were far from good BUT the investigations continued regardless. Not just with the special counsel and unabated.
Using powers of an office can certainly end up as a crime. But again, the question is
Impeachable. Andrew Johnson was impeached
for what amounted to executive discretion, after all.
"Well, he has someone in place who seems to do his bidding. We're not taking down his puppets, nor opposing Russian expansionist
policies. Trump's actions are helping to degrade Nato and the other geo-political structures that Russia would like to see gone."
Except, that Trump, whether right or wrong in his efforts to put America first and get other countries to pay their fair share and lessen the burden of cost on the US, is NOT a play for Putin even IF it benefits Putin.
Opinion. There would be a cover. What we know is that there was unprecedented contact between the Trump campaign
and Russian government associates, unprecedented financial entanglements with Russian connections, and that Trump is now performing
actions which greatly benefit Putin's aims. Circumstantial, but enough that no sane person would vote for Trump
if he hadn't been running against someone who had as many damning trails leading back to them.
"1. He's in Russia's pocket. And maybe other extra-national interests who control his sources of income."
How? 12 months and I have yet to see the collusion. It is a great talking point and for all I know may be true BUT I see no proof of this and it is a big claim without the proof needing to back it.
You ask what I see as the cons. Every scrap of circumstantial evidence I see appears to point to Trump long being on
Putin's payroll (since well before the election). Proof for this is as unnecessary as proof of his intentions toward the wall.
He is absolutely taking a sledgehammer to them. Why this is a good thing or a bad thing is up for question. My belief is that Arts, Media, Academia, Politics and virtually every facet of life has been moving further and further left politically
Really? Look at the (supposedly conservative) Nixon agenda. There was a huge swing to the right in the Reagan era, and it has
snowballed heavily. Obama managed to stand as something of a stopgap to it, temporarily. Now, I'll grant you, there was a
very large swing to the left, from FDR (or even Teddy) on - but that's what's being eaten into these days, not the spike of (supposed) liberalism
of the late 60's.
and the Establishment is corrupt and becoming more and more so.
That is the nature of government. But, the changes that we're seeing are further centralizing power in a manner which
is leading to a situation ripe for autocracy. There is no good way out of this - the best we can hope for is to soften the
fall.
I think if it does swing back it will not stop there and the Religious Right or some other for of Far Wing politics may come to the fore and that will be no better, but I do not think Progressivism is a viable option either.
The 20th Century was defined by such swings. So too, the 19th. At least in American politics. The early postwar period had the
advantage of an incredible economic position globally (which couldn't last without more big wars) and what amounted to a one-party
state, running under two names, Democrat and Republican. A time of growth and apparent stability.
