I would suggest reading the Constitution. It requires no such thing.

Emoliants, Kythra. it does.

Emolument FROM THE UNITED STATES. Means he can't take money from any other part of the government, or a bribe from a state. Doesn't mean he has to dump his businesses. The founders certainly didn't, and they -wrote- it.

wasn't there a part where he can't take money from other governments, too? (which would raise a question if one stayed in a Trump hotel)

Doesn't actually mention that. One assumes it's covered under impeachment for bribery etc. Having a foreign entity do business with you is not necessarily a bribe. And if it is, Hillary stands convicted of far more serious transgressions...

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/20/new.....ion/index.html

looks like he is in trouble already...

And that's grandfathered. The lease predates running for office, and as long as he doesn't change the terms it would take someone looking for trouble to fuss about it. Oh, right...

So... a businessman is elected to office, and by being elected is immediately in conflict? Whereas Hillary's getting donations to her trust fund isn't?

The party that is not in power, (Democrats at the moment) must and will Obstruct the party that is in power to the best of their ability. it's not an official rule, but that is what both sides do. Supreme court nominees, for example. was there anything wrong with Obama's pick other than he was picked by Obama?

We will fuss everything allowed to be fussed at, Just like the Republicans did to Obama. why shouldn't we? Does not Hoyle's law apply to Politics? I do want to see Trumps birth certificate to prove he was not summoned. Fair's Fair. Let's see those tax returns too.

Hillary did not get elected. the Trumpanzee did.

Trump's family has been in the States for over a century. I'm sure he can pull up his birth certificate if someone wants to push it. And pointing out objections to policy is fine, but that is not the same as dredging up technicalities that are traditional but not constitution-enforced. There's no actual rule requiring release of tax returns, and someone whose returns are going to be as arcane and complicated as his....? I wouldn't release them either. Too many things that could be taken out of context.

As for Obama's court picks? NONE of them have been people I would trust in traffic court, let alone the USSC. Biased, 'the constitution means whatever we feel like pretending it says' rulings, legislating from the bench instead of up or down on the laws that have actually been passed... so, yes, I have objections other than 'waaah, Obama picked it!'

I have not looked into Merrick Garland himself, other than Obama picked him. what were your objections besides "Waaah"?

Voted against the 2nd Amendment in the Heller case, ruled that McCain Feingold wasn't -restrictive- enough, for two specific items right off the bat. He was billed as a centrist, but if his record is centrist, then the center is somewhere slightly left of Pelosi.

and I bet you all still hate Pelosi... but then, hating an operative for the other side is par for the course here. isn't it?

Well, I think the botox has eaten her brain, but I don't hate her per se. Just hate her positions on the issues.

https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/
Check out the Case for Impeachment section.