• 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!

‘Good Conservative’ Grassley Ramps Up His Panel’s Trump-Russia Probe

JANFU said:
As we have seen from the Benghazi investigation, evidence is secondary
Click to expand...
I dont know what happened there but they did in fact have enough evidence to investigate it. Something went terribly wrong there and its not unreasonable to ask for an explination, is it?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Harshaw said:
That is true. Congress is meant to have the most powerful and prevalent of them.
Click to expand...
I agree and believe that it was intenionally crafted that way in fear of another monarchy. POTUS is one, Congress is many. Congress declares war and Congress overrides vetos if they enough members in agreement. They hold the final say

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Objective Voice said:
Might I suggest you keep abreast of the Senate Judiciary Committee's calendar? They've been holding periodic "public" hearings on the matter for months.

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings?PageNum_rs=2&



Uh...no. The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee can hold hearings covering anything the Committee decides to address per SJC rules. As to when such public hearings occur, see my comment on the aforementioned calendar above.
Click to expand...

Can and should are two very different concepts.
 
NIMBY said:
In 2014, bumbling DEM Rep. Braley blew his lead over Sen. Ernst by referring to Sen. Grassley as 'just a farmer not a lawyer' who would take over Senate Judiciary if DEMs lost the Senate, caught on tape like Romney's 47% comment. Cost Braley the election .
Click to expand...

When was the last time we saw any committee in either chamber run an investigation well?

Serious Question
 
Objective Voice said:
Might I suggest you keep abreast of the Senate Judiciary Committee's calendar? They've been holding periodic "public" hearings on the matter for months.

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings?PageNum_rs=2&



Uh...no. The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee can hold hearings covering anything the Committee decides to address per SJC rules. As to when such public hearings occur, see my comment on the aforementioned calendar above.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that link. Its interesting though, reading through it I still have not found anything explaining what the evidence is that leads them to believe Russia intefered or that Trump was involved.

For instance this what Grassleys public release on May 17, 2017
Grassley Statement on the Appointment of Special Counsel in Russian Interference Probe

May 17, 2017
Grassley Statement on the Appointment of Special Counsel in Russian Interference Probe

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley today released the following statement regarding Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s appointment of former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel in the investigation into Russian interference in U.S. elections:

“As I’ve said many times before, the American people deserve to know how Russia attempted to meddle in our democratic process. The FBI’s handling of recent politically charged investigations has eroded the public’s trust in its ability to be independent. I have a great deal of confidence in Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I respect his decision. Mueller has a strong reputation for independence, and comes with the right credentials for this job. At the end of the day, we need a public accounting of what went on to restore faith in government. Congress will have a role to play in bringing transparency to the American people,” Grassley said.
Click to expand...

Heres what Feinstein said
May 17 2017

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today released the following statement on the appointment of former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel:

“The appointment of Bob Mueller as special counsel for the Russia investigation is a good first step to get to the bottom of the many questions we have about Russian interference in our election and possible ties to the president.

“Bob was a fine U.S. attorney, a great FBI director and there’s no better person who could be asked to perform this function. He is respected, he is talented and he has the knowledge and ability to do the right thing.”
Click to expand...

Neither party seems capable of telling the public what raised their concerns. Do you know something I dont because I would really like a specific answer as to why they are putting the country through this. If there is good reason for it I fully support that but I cant support something that I dont understand.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
justabubba said:
yes, the administration does not want the co-equal congress to see information the congress says it needs:

NOT the same as the NSA spying on everybody as was earlier alleged


and since he is unwilling to reveal information that the congress says it needs that refusal to cooperate indicates the white house/president have fear that the information being sought will evidence wrong doing

so, if tRump/white house have nothing to hide, then quit ****ing hiding it
Click to expand...
So, I can only conclude by you statement, that President Trump is not afforded constitutional protections like the 4th, and 5th amendments in your eyes? He'll, let's just gather some angry people, storm the WH, drag him out and string him up....right?

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
I agree and believe that it was intenionally crafted that way in fear of another monarchy. POTUS is one, Congress is many. Congress declares war and Congress overrides vetos if they enough members in agreement. They hold the final say Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Not really.

As Chief executive officer, the Pres can say do not distribute the funds.

As CiC, he can tell his military to stand fast.

The branches are really co-equal.
 
JamesBY said:
Not really.

As Chief executive officer, the Pres can say do not distribute the funds.

As CiC, he can tell his military to stand fast.

The branches are really co-equal.
Click to expand...

It would appear that Rosenstein and Tillerson are not on the same page as trump's tweets .
 
NIMBY said:
It would appear that Rosenstein and Tillerson are not on the same page as trump's tweets .
Click to expand...
Non sequitur.

Trump has not told Rosenstein to fire Muller (and if he is smart, he won't). Trump has not told Tillerson to do or stop doing whatever.

If Trump say, "do not disburse monies" or "do not move your military forces", he will be obeyed.
 
JamesBY said:
Non sequitur.

Trump has not told Rosenstein to fire Muller (and if he is smart, he won't). Trump has not told Tillerson to do or stop doing whatever.

If Trump say, "do not disburse monies" or "do not move your military forces", he will be obeyed.
Click to expand...

With the russian meddling and all of the investigations, tillerson and Rosenstein are polar opposites from trump .
 
NIMBY said:
With the russian meddling and all of the investigations, tillerson and Rosenstein are polar opposites from trump .
Click to expand...
They will follow directions or resign. They are both the right kind of guys that way.
 
trouble13 said:
I would like Grassley to present what evidence he has that gives him suspicion that there may be collusion involved. That is the one thing that seems to be missing.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Its a bit more complicated than simple collusion....
 
JamesBY said:
Not really.

As Chief executive officer, the Pres can say do not distribute the funds.

As CiC, he can tell his military to stand fast.

The branches are really co-equal.
Click to expand...
2/3rd majority can override the potus and they can remove potus from office if they choose to. Potus has the power of the veto and is the commander and chief but ultimately congress when voting in a supermajority has more power. The only argument I can think of where the executive branch holds final say is at the supreme court but that is not a presidental privilage.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
You act as if Trump has nothing to fear from people who are openly hostile toward him leading an investigation into his private affairs. Trump has some very good reasons to be as uncooperative and hostile as possible.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I cant wait for Mueller to subpoena Trumps tax returns, go Mueller !!
 
trouble13 said:
2/3rd majority can override the potus and they can remove potus from office if they choose to. Potus has the power of the veto and is the commander and chief but ultimately congress when voting in a supermajority has more power. The only argument I can think of where the executive branch holds final say is at the supreme court but that is not a presidental privilage.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And the veto is very difficult to do. Impeachment much harder. Whereas, on most legislation, POTUS can sit on it and smile at Congress.

He is even stronger than many states even combined in their power. The last time the States tried it, Lincoln with the power of POTUS murdered the Old South.
 
JamesBY said:
And the veto is very difficult to do. Impeachment much harder. Whereas, on most legislation, POTUS can sit on it and smile at Congress.

He is even stronger than many states even combined in their power. The last time the States tried it, Lincoln with the power of POTUS murdered the Old South.
Click to expand...
Im not saying the POTUS is not a very powerful position. How bout we say it this way. The POTUS is more powerful than a diveded congress, but a united congress is more powerful than the POTUS.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
yankintx said:
I cant wait for Mueller to subpoena Trumps tax returns, go Mueller !!
Click to expand...
I would think if he does it will be a sealed document that will remain unavailable for public consumption unless Trump gives his permission to release them. They are likely to be treated like Obamas college transcripts.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Im not saying the POTUS is not a very powerful position. How bout we say it this way. The POTUS is more powerful than a diveded congress, but a united congress is more powerful than the POTUS. Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Which would require an impeachment, a trial with advice of SCOTUS, and a conviction. Has that ever happened? I understand the theoretical; I also understand the practicable.

But if our Congress took down Trump by Amendment XXV or impeachment, then I will agree with you.
 
trouble13 said:
I would think if he does it will be a sealed document that will remain unavailable for public consumption unless Trump gives his permission to release them. They are likely to be treated like Obamas college transcripts.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The above includes a non sequitur and a fallacy of false equivalency.

The initial subpoena and investigation of tax returns would probably be secret, but it the investigation moved into the open, the tax returns would be released to the public.
 
upsideguy said:
Its a bit more complicated than simple collusion....
Click to expand...

Well this is a guy who seems to have the answers.......

Please, tell us what makes it more complicated than simple collusion......
 
yankintx said:
I cant wait for Mueller to subpoena Trumps tax returns, go Mueller !!
Click to expand...

What do Trump's tax returns have to do with Russian interference into our elections.....

And why do Trump's tax returns hold so much interest for you?
 
JamesBY said:
The above includes a non sequitur and a fallacy of false equivalency.

The initial subpoena and investigation of tax returns would probably be secret, but it the investigation moved into the open, the tax returns would be released to the public.
Click to expand...
I think tax returns are treated s confidental like health records

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom