• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

More U.S. Republicans back independent probe of Trump-Russia ties

Erod said:
I just want one piece of actual evidence. I haven't seen it yet. The media would have never gone after Obama with such little proof of anything.

Liberals supported Hillary, so they obviously don't care about actual guilt or innocence.
Click to expand...

ludin said:
Your TDS is getting out of hand.
What proof do you have of treason?

So far not even the intelligence committee has such evidence.
Click to expand...

There seems to be a lot of confusion on your side of how an investigation works.

You're demanding evidence from an investigation that does not yet exist. That is an incoherent and ignorant demand.
 
Absentglare said:
Note: this is not like your witch hunt of Hillary Clinton, there's actual smoke here that needs to be cleared up.
Click to expand...

If Lois Lerner and the IRS scandal did not merit a special prosecutor, then this certainly does not. At this point, no one has produced a smidgen of evidence that Trump was involved with the Russians during the election.

Now if the Comey memorandum is produced and turns out to be authentic and contemporaneous, then things change significantly.
 
Gill said:
If Lois Lerner and the IRS scandal did not merit a special prosecutor, then this certainly does not. At this point, no one has produced a smidgen of evidence that Trump was involved with the Russians during the election.

Now if the Comey memorandum is produced and turns out to be authentic and contemporaneous, then things change significantly.
Click to expand...

You can't defend this case on its own merits, can you? You just have to dig up some unrelated story to try to counter-smear. It's so desperate and pathetic, it simply underscores to me that you actually acknowledge the seriousness of the evidence already before us.
 
Absentglare said:
You can't defend this case on its own merits, can you? You just have to dig up some unrelated story to try to counter-smear. It's so desperate and pathetic, it simply underscores to me that you actually acknowledge the seriousness of the evidence already before us.
Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint you, but I have no intention of defending Trump. In case you didn't know it, legal action in this country is based on precedence, not "some unrelated story". Holder set the bar high for the need of a special prosecutor.

A simple look at the evidence presented so far (none) easily proves that point, there is nothing to it, at least to someone that's not a hyper-partisan.

If any actually evidence appears, then I'll be the first one in line demanding action against Trump. As a matter of fact, my wife and I were trying to decide last night who President Pence would choose as his V.P.
 
Cardinal said:
A special prosecutor (there's actually a proper term for this but I forgot it at the moment) is a double edged sword, but we'll see where this goes.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/a-special-prosecutor-is-not-the-answer/526662/

There's also the matter that a special prosecutor is assigned by the Justice Department, which is answerable to...you guessed it...Donald Trump.
Click to expand...

The firing of Comey is not enough to activate the SP law. An act of Congress would be enough, and even then they would have to request it. An SP has to be appointed by the AG or the President and was only enacted by Congress one time during the Teapot Dome scandal, over 100 years ago. The law is quite specific, maybe Rueters should get their head out of their ass and learn what they are reporting about instead of tossing junk politics out.
 
Gill said:
Sorry to disappoint you, but I have no intention of defending Trump. In case you didn't know it, legal action in this country is based on precedence, not "some unrelated story". Holder set the bar high for the need of a special prosecutor.

A simple look at the evidence presented so far (none) easily proves that point, there is nothing to it, at least to someone that's not a hyper-partisan.

If any actually evidence appears, then I'll be the first one in line demanding action against Trump. As a matter of fact, my wife and I were trying to decide last night who President Pence would choose as his V.P.
Click to expand...

It's funny so many people feel compelled to say that they aren't defending President Trump before they defend President Trump.

There's plenty of evidence to warrant an investigation. The investigation is what determines whether action, like indictment or impeachment, is appropriate.

Your eagerness to be blind is irrelevant.
 
Absentglare said:
It's funny so many people feel compelled to say that they aren't defending President Trump before they defend President Trump.

There's plenty of evidence to warrant an investigation. The investigation is what determines whether action, like indictment or impeachment, is appropriate.

Your eagerness to be blind is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending Trump, I'm defending the legal fabric of this country. I was taught in school that people can't get railroaded by the legal system without proof of wrongdoing. I know today's public schools don't teach civics, but maybe you could look up the concept and educate yourself.

In the meantime, please feel free to enlighten me on this mountain of evidence linking Trump personally to Russia and their attempt to influence the election. By the way, there are a large number of investigations into the matter already. At last count, I believe there are at least four going on right now.
 
OpportunityCost said:
The firing of Comey is not enough to activate the SP law. An act of Congress would be enough, and even then they would have to request it. An SP has to be appointed by the AG or the President and was only enacted by Congress one time during the Teapot Dome scandal, over 100 years ago. The law is quite specific, maybe Rueters should get their head out of their ass and learn what they are reporting about instead of tossing junk politics out.
Click to expand...

There's no legal "activation" in assigning a special prosecutor or drafting articles of impeachment. They are political processes and can be done for offenses as little as chewing with one's mouth open, if Congress and the AG so chose.
 
Cardinal said:
There's no legal "activation" in assigning a special prosecutor or drafting articles of impeachment. They are political processes and can be done for offenses as little as chewing with one's mouth open, if Congress and the AG so chose.
Click to expand...

Actually, Congress can request a special prosecutor, but the AG and President are the final decision makers on whether one is appointed.
 
Gill said:
Actually, Congress can request a special prosecutor, but the AG and President are the final decision makers on whether one is appointed.
Click to expand...

I think I just said that.
 
Gill said:
Sorry to disappoint you, but I have no intention of defending Trump. In case you didn't know it, legal action in this country is based on precedence, not "some unrelated story". Holder set the bar high for the need of a special prosecutor.

A simple look at the evidence presented so far (none) easily proves that point, there is nothing to it, at least to someone that's not a hyper-partisan.

If any actually evidence appears, then I'll be the first one in line demanding action against Trump. As a matter of fact, my wife and I were trying to decide last night who President Pence would choose as his V.P.
Click to expand...

I know Republicans are still frothing that they never got to see Holder deposed, but, you're honestly bringing up an aspect that only matters to partisan Republicans. People by and large, do not give a **** about Eric Holder, his involvment in the fast and furious scandal, or him perjuring himself. Try a little social experiment. Get on the subway and start asking people if they think Eric Holder should've been impeached. Then ask them if they think the Russian investigation deserves an independent special counsel. See the results.

You have yourself an argument that only matters to partisans. Most of the country aren't hyper-partisan Republicans.
 
Winston said:
I know Republicans are still frothing that they never got to see Holder deposed, but, you're honestly bringing up an aspect that only matters to partisan Republicans. People by and large, do not give a **** about Eric Holder, his involvment in the fast and furious scandal, or him perjuring himself. Try a little social experiment. Get on the subway and start asking people if they think Eric Holder should've been impeached. Then ask them if they think the Russian investigation deserves an independent special counsel. See the results.

You have yourself an argument that only matters to partisans. Most of the country aren't hyper-partisan Republicans.
Click to expand...

I suggest you read my post again, as your reply has nothing to do with what I posted. Not once did I say Holder should have been impeached.

Reading with blinders on could also be considered partisan, or even hyper-partisan.
 
Gill said:
I suggest you read my post again, as your reply has nothing to do with what I posted. Not once did I say Holder should have been impeached.

Reading with blinders on could also be considered partisan, or even hyper-partisan.
Click to expand...

I didn't put those words in your mouth. I only suggested a question in a social experiment to measure how much people know or even care about Holder. Only partisans would ever bring him up.. If you ask someone, "Do you think this investigation warrants a special prosecutor" And they say, "Well, given that Eric Holder dragged his feet on the IRS and Fast and Furious scandal and perjured himself, no, I don't believe we need a special consel" Pretty good indication you've found yourself a partisan. Who would ever, ever say that?
 
Winston said:
I didn't put those words in your mouth. I only suggested a question in a social experiment to measure how much people know or even care about Holder. Only partisans would ever bring him up.. If you ask someone, "Do you think this investigation warrants a special prosecutor" And they say, "Well, given that Eric Holder dragged his feet on the IRS and Fast and Furious scandal and perjured himself, no, I don't believe we need a special consel" Pretty good indication you've found yourself a partisan. Who would ever, ever say that?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but the people on this forum are typically a little bit more politically aware than the average person on the street. My post was meant for those on this forum, not some ignorant fool at a bus stop.

Feel free to attempt a more logical and cognizant reply next time.
 
Gill said:
Like I said, Congress has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

Good god, man, all you had to do was go to the top of the page you responded to me in.
 
Gill said:
I'm sorry, but the people on this forum are typically a little bit more politically aware than the average person on the street. My post was meant for those on this forum, not some ignorant fool at a bus stop.

Feel free to attempt a more logical and cognizant reply next time.
Click to expand...

I agree you are addressing a different group here. Sorry for being rude. Allow me to rephrase; I don't believe Holder's past actions should dictate the need for a special prosecutor in the Russian investigation. The Russian investigation is arguably the biggest case in the country right now, and Holder's IRS scandal is finished and forgotten by most Americans.
 
Winston said:
I agree you are addressing a different group here. Sorry for being rude. Allow me to rephrase; I don't believe Holder's past actions should dictate the need for a special prosecutor in the Russian investigation. The Russian investigation is arguably the biggest case in the country right now, and Holder's IRS scandal is finished and forgotten by most Americans.
Click to expand...

Using your logic, Sessions could refuse to appoint a SP and it will all be finished and forgotten in a few years, right?

To set the record straight, I would prefer that Trump resign before a SP is appointed or impeachment proceedings are started. I fully expect one or both to occur if Comey's memo is legit. Knowing Trump though, I seriously doubt that would happen. His ego is too big. In that case, the country is in for a lot of pain for the next few years and cable news will have record numbers of viewers.
 
Last edited:
Absentglare said:
There seems to be a lot of confusion on your side of how an investigation works.

You're demanding evidence from an investigation that does not yet exist. That is an incoherent and ignorant demand.
Click to expand...

Correction someone made the charge of treason. I am asking for what evidence they have to come to that charge.
as I stated in my post not even the intelligence committee has such evidence.

so obviously they have some information or evidence that others in the government do not have.
 
Gill said:
Using your logic, Sessions could refuse to appoint a SP and it will all be finished and forgotten in a few years, right?

To set the record straight, I would prefer that Trump resign before a SP is appointed or impeachment proceedings are started. I fully expect one or both to occur is Comey's memo is legit. Knowing Trump though, I seriously doubt that would happen. His ego is too big. In that case, the country is in for a lot of pain for the next few years and cable news will have record numbers of viewers.
Click to expand...

Well Sessions recused himself. Even though, I think he isn't all the way out.. just like Trump put his business in a "blind trust" managed by his family... not all the way out.

And my point about the average Americans from the beginning is that, the Russian investigation has their attention. All of Holder's trouble, like you said, right or wrong, merit or demerit, only really had the attention of politically aware people. But, everybody knows and has an opinion about this Russian investigation. If they quash it, barring acts of war or acts of God, No, I do not believe America will just move on and forget about it.
 
So...are the Republicans tired of winning yet?
 
Winston said:
Well Sessions recused himself. Even though, I think he isn't all the way out.. just like Trump put his business in a "blind trust" managed by his family... not all the way out.

And my point about the average Americans from the beginning is that, the Russian investigation has their attention. All of Holder's trouble, like you said, right or wrong, merit or demerit, only really had the attention of politically aware people. But, everybody knows and has an opinion about this Russian investigation. If they quash it, barring acts of war or acts of God, No, I do not believe America will just move on and forget about it.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree with this.
 
Gill said:
I can't disagree with this.
Click to expand...

Which is why we need to put this behind us. It needs to come to a resolution, whether or not it's bad for Trump or bad for the Republicans. Right now, DC owes it to the country to cut the crap and give us the facts. If a special prosecutor will get us there, I'm for appointing one.

But, until the memo surfaces or we get a Comey testimony before Congress, we'll be stuck arguing with strangers online, lol :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom