Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

Thousands protest across Scotland as Trump plays golf

Marchers stream through Edinburgh and group chants ‘no racist USA’ in Ayrshire

Libby Brooks Scotland correspondent
Sat 14 Jul 2018

Thousands of people have protested on the streets of Edinburgh against Donald Trump’s visit to the UK as the US president played golf at his Turnberry resort, on the west coast of Scotland.

Trump was seen playing golf with his son, Eric, on the Ailsa championship course.

Earlier, the US president tweeted his golfing plans for the weekend.

The US president said he had arrived in Scotland for “meetings and some golf”.

Trump and his wife, Melania, arrived in Scotland on Air Force One on Friday evening, before travelling by motorcade to the Trump Turnberry resort in Ayrshire.

By lunchtime, about 50 protesters had congregated by the police cordon on Turnberry beach. Just before 2pm, the US president appeared on the golf course and waved at the gathering on the beach, to be met with booing and chants of “no Trump, no racist USA”. Meanwhile, close to 10,000 marchers were streaming through the streets of Edinburgh, ending up in Meadows park to the south of the city centre, where families sat in the sunshine and enjoyed picnics, music and speeches from local activists.

Paula Baker, 35, attended with her partner, Emily, 38, a nurse, and their seven-month-old baby, Fallon. “It’s a very inclusive atmosphere,” said Baker. “People are willing to make a stand, and we want Americans to see that we are willing to stand by the people who are protesting over there too.”

Gwen Irving, 68, and Rob, 71, had travelled from Glasgow to display their banner reading: “Trump is a disgrace to the office of US president.” “I’ve never been moved to protest before,” said Irving, “but he is a frightening development, and he is trying to foment division across Europe.

“The atmosphere is good-humoured but serious. It’s inspired some hope. We’ve spoken to a lot of Americans about our banner. They’re pleased to see it because this isn’t anti-American.”

Towards the back of the Meadows, the six-metre Trump baby blimp, which depicts him as an angry baby wearing a nappy, was straining against its tethers in the stiff east coast breeze. Organiser Leo Murray said a crew of “babysitters” had travelled from London on the sleeper train to fly the balloon at Saturday’s protest.

Murray had originally hoped to fly the balloon at Turnberry, but Police Scotland refused permission on security grounds.

Murray said: “People in Scotland have been so enthusiastic. I’ve been in activism all my life but this has crystallised something in the public mood. It will be the defining image of this disastrous visit.”

He added that the Trump baby was now planning a world tour, starting in Australia.
You can read more here...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/14/police-search-donald-trump-protester-breached-no-fly-zone-scotland-turnberry-uk-visit

Wrong! The federal employees work for the people of this country and the constitution. The president is not above the law. He can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors. Obstruction of justice falls under that definition. The republican congress is failing their duty to the constitution and country.
If Clinton could be impeached lying about consensual sex, obstruction of justice is a far greater crime.

Who put a nickel in you? Rhetoric is useless, they collide and accomplish 0. General and totally irrational statements like that are a perfect example.

www.newsweek.com/president-donald-trump-impeachment-paper-brookings-institution-681546

It's Trump, and his diehard followers, who don't want to accept that reality.

He is not impeached by now? They must be full of ****, huh?

Trump's demand for personal loyalty rather than to the country and Constitution speaks volumes about his narcissistic nature. How anybody can remain working for him must be painful. http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-turnover-rate-firings-resignations-compared-obama-bush-clinton-2018-3

Yes.

Yes. Those personnel are not part of the executive branch.

That limits firing people due to their party affiliation I believe. I don't know if it has ever been subject to Constitutional challenge.

The Constitution says otherwise.

Bill Clinton committed obstruction of justice. The Democrats said that was OK.

Not that Trump has committed any crime, but if he had committed a crime, since it was OK for Clinton to do it, it would be OK for Trump as well.

It isn't obstruction for the official in charge of an investigation to decide to close down the investigation.

Show me.



He lied about a consensual sexual encounter. It was not worth an impeachment, and congress knew better. Evidently, you don't. It doesn't come close to "high crimes and misdemeanors."

Well, it's not reality. The Democrats have already set a precedent that it is OK for presidents to commit obstruction of justice.

But Trump and his supporters aren't worried too much about imaginary obstruction charges. It isn't obstruction for the official in charge of an investigation to close down the investigation, and everybody knows that.

It's the TDS crowd who keeps obsessing over imaginary obstruction charges.

Article II. Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

Bill Clinton committed purjury, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering to cover up a consensual sexual encounter.

Apparently it is you who doesn't know better.

If obstruction of justice does not rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors, then you shouldn't be complaining about such alleged behavior in regards to Trump.

Not that there is any reason to believe that Trump has committed such a misdeed.

Right, they're worried about real obstruction charges--and they should be worried.

Why do you think Trump's been working so hard to try to discredit Mueller and calling his investigation "a rigged witch-hunt"? He is trying to insulate himself, in the public's mind, against any criminal involvements Mueller might find against him.

It sure is obstruction if the president tries to close down a criminal investigation when he, or members of his family, are likely subjects of that investigation. And it would qualify as a "high crime or misdemeanor".

That's why even Rudy Giuliani has said he doesn't believe Trump would ever fire Mueller. Legal experts pretty much agree that if Trump did that he would set off a profound constitutional crisis. That would be the end of his presidency.

That doesn't mean anything. Limits on Executive Orders

Executive orders are not unchecked strokes of power from the president's pen; they can be challenged and deemed unlawful by federal courts. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court determined during the Korean War that executive orders must fit within a certain sphere of power and cannot simply defy Congressional intent.

Trump went so far as to claim he can pardon himself. That's contrary to the basic tenants of law which states nobody is above the law. https://constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/no-one-is-above-the-law/
Why we have three branches of government.
https://www.reference.com/government-politics/three-branches-government-d2d0b0a231b044e0

If he were really an innocent man, why would he even feel the need to make such a claim?

True except the possible obstruction of justice charge being investigated by Mueller. https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/14/politics/robert-mueller-donald-trump/index.html

That's funny. Bill Clinton is a free man.