What will happen if Trumpanzee refuses to divest himself of his business interests?

[PinkTiger]

Can he be forced somehow to do it? Can he be removed from office? I have the feeling this guy intends to run this down to the wire, refusing to reveal his holdings, his taxes, etc.
How can he do this? Where the hell are the watch dogs?

[McCamy Taylor]

1. Can't do anything because Citizen United allows him to bribe all the judges

and others who are supposed to check his power.

If he wants your family land, he will seize it. If he wants your daughter, he will seize her.

[Yavin4]

23. Ramsey Bolton had less power than Trump.n/t

[Grassy Knoll]

35. LOL, G of T Reference..

[pnwmom]

2. Nothing -- unless the GOP House decides to impeach him.

That's why it was so important for all Dems, moderates, liberals, and far left to come together.

Unfortunately, some were willing to take the risk on Trump (by not voting or voting third party or even voting for DT) because of the GOP lies and unflattering press about Hillary.

[Bettie]

10. Marketing works

and that is what Clinton had against her, a 25 plus year marketing campaign against her.

Proves that if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes truth, at least in a lot of people's minds.

It is virtually impossible to move opinions that have been formed over such a long period of time, even if those opinions are not grounded in anything but lies and conjecture.

[Hortensis]

16. I'll take this further. A majority of conservatives are extremely corrupt.

Most (not all!) have become so degraded in their blind partisanship that they have abandoned all the normal principles of decency, personal and family interests and duties, conservative principles, and Christian doctrine, literally the teachings of Jesus that they once imagined they modeled their lives around.

A way of saying, you aren't just a whistlin' Dixie, Bettie. A majority have been corrupted into an anti-Democrat attack dog that will support anything their side does at this point. It's shockingly clear now that, politically, these people have no bottom to hit.

[pnwmom]

18. Don't forget James Comey's two letter bombs. nt

[Bettie]

24. Those played into the marketing campaign

Of course, the last one was to move the needle within the margin of error so that they could pad here and there and ensure that they "won".

[loyalsister]

20. The lesson we should learn is that what they came up with was not entirely ridiculous

People will believe something that confirms suspicions, particularly if it aligns with facts. All it took was an unusual name and an African father for a number of people to be convinced that Obama wasn't born here. Although completely out of his control, that there were actual facts made it easy to convince people. The idea that he was born in Africa and would run for president is a ridiculous stretch, but for a man with a Kenyan father who he is named after to have been born there is believable.

The links to lying, corruption her own penchant for secrecy laid the groundwork for her to be easily painted as everything people hate about politics. First, the fact that she has been in the game for a long time counts against her.

People associate the name Clinton with dishonesty because her husband was proven to have committed perjury. It is not fair, but it is not as irrational as supporters want to believe. The idea that "if someone will accept being lied to, they must see no problem with it." Or, the belief she knew he was lying and turned away, etc. It was too easy for the smearers to put that together. Not her fault, but she should have expected it.

It escalated when she was perceived as secretive because she refused to release the transcripts of wall street speeches. On top of that, Goldman Sachs has been a synonym for corruption since 2008. Cozying up facilitated the forwarding of the perception of-- secretive, corrupt, and therefore dishonest.

With the email, she did not break the law, but she broke rules designed specifically to facilitate transparency. Rules put in place because of the "but they did it" people she tried to point to in her defense.
You can't ignore the reasonable questioning and ultimate spin regarding the Clinton foundation and criticize Trump's conflicts of interest.

It's about perception. The only reason the last FBI act was effective was because she really did do something that the inspector general called out, thus making the investigation not entirely unreasonable.

These things are not invented out of nowhere. And any political consultant worth their salt would have warned them because the associations and history make them easy to believe. The thing that is irritating that it was largely within her control.

[Bettie]

25. And it has all been repeated for decades

literally decades and that makes it hard for even those who aren't inclined to believe it to internalize it.

I realized halfway through Summer that I had negative feelings about her, even without beliving the right wing narrative...they were just there due to the drumbeat day after day. I still think she's too conservative for my taste, but most politicians are these days.

[loyalsister]

34. Exactly

The perception was exacerbated by more recent actions that made it possible to reinforce the narrative.

I hope future candidates for any office paid attention. I can't help but resent that someone who has been in politics so long didn't seem to consider it when so much was at stake.

[rzemanfl]

27. Which is why religion is still around, alive and kicking. n/t

[Bettie]

30. Republicanism and Religion are so intertwined today

that it is hard to tell where one ends and the other begins.

Yes, there are liberals who are religious, but I'm talking about the crazy "do what I believe or else" kind of religious.

My grandma used to say that it is easy to be a fundamentalist Christian or a Republican because people tell you what you believe.

[rzemanfl]

31. People say "I'm a Republican" the same way they say-

"I'm Catholic."

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

3. IOKIYAR

It's o.k. if you're a Republican.

[malaise]

4. Nothing

They will lock up Hillary

[HipChick]

7. Nothing...he will actually finally become a billionaire at tax payers expense..

[etherealtruth]

13. Unfortunately, you are likely correct

[Crabby Appleton]

5. Nothing. nt

[trof]

32. This

[neeksgeek]

6. Not a thing, unless the GOP gets tired of him.

[no_hypocrisy]

8. I'm thinking that Nixon would have gotten away with everything

if he had only had a republican House and Senate.

[Bettie]

9. Nothing

I doubt he'll divest himself of anything and congress will go on as if nothing has happened.

He could declare himself president for life and our current set of congresscritters would just quietly accept it.

[treestar]

11. It would be a clear violation of the Emolument Clause

but how that is to be enforced is not clear. If Congress does nothing, someone could try filing a lawsuit. He has not had time to stack the courts so much and a justice would look foolish trying to find a way around it. Having standing to file the lawsuit could be tough. Perhaps someone whose business is affected by Orange Loser's ownership of something and there could be said to be a government involvement that is clear conflict of interest.

I hope the ACLU is piling up on energy drinks and donations.

[gratuitous]

19. Would it be a clear violation, though?

From Article II, Section 1:

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

The Constitution doesn't touch on whether the President can receive money from sources other than the federal or state governments. Sure, there's the appearance of corruption, and maybe even corruption in fact and law, but who's going to bring a case against the President? This Republican-controlled Congress, which is interested in governance only so far as it translates to winning for their side? I'm not holding my breath. A private citizen? As you mention there are probably issues of standing that would give the federal courts an easy out for avoiding the controversy.

I don't think anything will happen to Trump. Not for lack of outrage by large swaths of the citizenry, but certainly for lack of fortitude by the responsible elected officials.

[treestar]

21. I thought there was also

prohibition against Emoluments from foreign countries, and they thought he would get a few from foreign holdings.

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/23/13715150/donald-trump-emoluments-clause-constitution

[gratuitous]

22. There are two other emoluments clauses in Article I

But Article I is basically about Congress, while Article II deals with the office of the President. Article I Section 9, which is the passage I've seen quoted several times recently, reads:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Besides being an Article I passage, the fly in the ointment is "without the Consent of the Congress," which Consent I am confident would be speedily forthcoming should President Trump ever need to skirt the Constitution to turn a quick buck. There's also the question of what an "Emolument" is in this context: Does it include any payment for goods or services rendered, or is it limited to cash prizes that attend a present conferred by a King, Prince, or foreign State (e.g., a Nobel Prize)? I don't know.

[COLGATE4]

12. Absolutely, positively nothing. Zero.

[MineralMan]

14. That's up to Congress if he takes office.

Only the Congress can remove a President from office. How, which Party is in majority control of both houses of Congress? Answer that question and you have the answer to your question, I'm afraid.

[Solly Mack]

15. Nothing.

Now, if he was a Democratic president...

[Maru Kitteh]

17. He will refuse. Nothing will happen till at least after the mid-terms - if EVER.

[HassleCat]

26. Not much

Plenty of complaining by those opposed to corruption, but this "honesty" stuff is so last Tuesday.

[Nancyswidower]

28. Squat....no Federal Law says he has to.

Needs to be changed but as of now....squat.

[leftofcool]

29. Not a gawd damn thing.

[sweetroxie]

33. The courts could help.

They don't have to but could be pressed to. The Emoluments Clause is the key.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brianne-j-gorod/can-courts-hold-trump-accountable_b_13306772.html