Could the Electoral College Really Vote to End the Trump Fiasco?

by Nomad

It's quickly becoming an election year cliche.

We are now in uncharted waters.

Who could say that's not true?
The circumstances of Trump's victory have been extraordinary.  Not merely because, against all odds, the tangerine tycoon won, but also because it was an unanticipated technical win.

Although he won the Electoral College vote, his opponent won the popular vote. It's not the first time this has happened, but Trump comes to office as the most disliked president-elect in modern US history. 

According to a Pew Research poll, even before Trump is inaugurated, 55% of those polled say they disapprove of the job Trump has done.

That 41% approval rating is lower than President Barack Obama's 72% in December 2008 and President George W. Bush's 50% in January 2001 -- in the wake of a disputed election. It's also lower than President Bill Clinton's 62% in January 1993 and President George H.W. Bush's 65% in March 1989.

FactCheck.org took a look at the vexing question: Could the Electoral College Elect the winner of the popular vote, Clinton, over the winner of the electoral college vote, Trump?

Who Really Murdered Manufacturing Jobs in America and Why That's Important in November

by Nomad

American workers have every reason to be angry. For a crafty politician, it's the kind of emotion that wins elections. However, the question is whether they have fully understood who was responsible for their plight.

The Angry Unemployed American Male

The last half century of American history has been marked by one undeniable economic trend: the death of the American worker. Between 1965 and 2015, experts say that employment rates for the American male spiraled relentlessly downward. 

In September, a TIME Magazine article pointed out:

America is now home to a vast army of jobless men no longer even looking for work—more than 7million between the ages of 25 and 54, the traditional prime of working life...The collapse of male work is due almost entirely to a flight out of the labor force—and that flight has on the whole been voluntary. The fact that only 1 in 7 prime-age men are not in the labor force points to a lack of jobs as the reason they are not working.

The Atlantic Monthly provides a little more information:

Poor men without a college degree are disappearing from the labor force. The share of prime-age men (ages 25-54) who are neither working nor looking for work has doubled since the 1970s.

This is, not too coincidentally, the core support of Republican nominee Donald Trump's campaign.

Distrust and Discord: How Putin and Trump Have Teamed Up to Undermine the Political System

Attempts to Tamper?

Recently, U.S. officials announced they have “high confidence” that Russia is behind what they describe as a major influence operation in this year's election. They could not go into specifics and admitted that their evidence probably would not yet stand up in any court. 

The breaches include hacking into the email servers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Presumably, this was in search of damaging information which might be used to cripple the Clinton campaign.

But there were other concerns too.

In mid-August, the FBI alerted all 50 states to dangers that their election systems might be vulnerable to attack. Authorities have also delivered evidence of a “significant” number of new intrusions into their systems. Experts at the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security “are still trying to understand" who is behind it and what's actually going on.

Admittedly, neither the United States or Russia are innocent when it comes to meddling in the elections of other nations. In the past, the CIA made a more or less regular practice of it in countries. The very first CIA covert action was a manipulation the 1948 Italian elections. 

More recently Russia has reportedly interfered in the elections of major U.S. allies that have imposed sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.
Attempting to manipulate the elections in the US is- as far as we know- a first.

Obama’s Impeachment: Mr. Jones and the War Powers Act 2/2

by Nomad

In the previous post in this series, we examined in detail the resolution put forward by Republican Congressman Walter B. Jones of North Carolina charging President Obama with impeachable acts for his handling of the incidents in Libya last year. For the most part, we have seen them to be specious and without any real foundation. As I mention at the close of that post, there still seemed to be something I was overlooking. We'll begin with a closer look at the law.

The War Powers Act as Written

source:

To understand more about the War Powers Act, we need to take a small step back in time. 

In an attempt to put in practice the lessons learned from the Vietnam War, in 1973 Congress established the War Powers Resolution (later called the War Powers Act) which attempted to limit the president’s ability to wage undeclared wars; more precisely to limit the president’s ability to conduct a protracted military engagement without the authorization of Congress.

The act also attempted to clarify the ambiguity on the Constitution which considers the president the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces while at the same time, gives Congress the power to declare war and to provide the funding.