• 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!

Judiciary chair wants vote on special counsel bill next week


They really should make the special prosecutor a permanent position. Doing so would insure that the Executive branch never again has co-equal authority to the Legislative and Judicial branches. As long as the people are free to elect someone like Trump there is a danger that, without appropriate oversight, the Executive will be an embarrassment to the political establishment and to our standing as a nation in the international community. We must insure that Congress protects us from ourselves and the only way we can do that is to implement a process by which they can approve our electoral decisions and, when necessary, deny them.
 
the public backlash would be enormous

Sure, but I'm dealing with the process that's available to him, nothing else. Though to be more specific to your point, the backlash would be enormous from those who already disapprove of him. He would not receive backlash from the 42% of the country that supports him now.

I was just told by a Trump supporter that the death of the man in Trump Tower was worth the three million dollars he saved on fire sprinklers. Y'all need to let that sink in.
 
Sure, but I'm dealing with the process that's available to him, nothing else. Though to be more specific to your point, the backlash would be enormous from those who already disapprove of him. He would not receive backlash from the 42% of the country that supports him now.

I was just told by a Trump supporter that the death of the man in Trump Tower was worth the three million dollars he saved on fire sprinklers. Y'all need to let that sink in.

There is nowhere near 42% of the country who supports this clown
 
They really should make the special prosecutor a permanent position. Doing so would insure that the Executive branch never again has co-equal authority to the Legislative and Judicial branches. As long as the people are free to elect someone like Trump there is a danger that, without appropriate oversight, the Executive will be an embarrassment to the political establishment and to our standing as a nation in the international community. We must insure that Congress protects us from ourselves and the only way we can do that is to implement a process by which they can approve our electoral decisions and, when necessary, deny them.

That is exactly what is afoot.
 
Sure, but I'm dealing with the process that's available to him, nothing else. Though to be more specific to your point, the backlash would be enormous from those who already disapprove of him. He would not receive backlash from the 42% of the country that supports him now.

I was just told by a Trump supporter that the death of the man in Trump Tower was worth the three million dollars he saved on fire sprinklers. Y'all need to let that sink in.

the backlash would take the form of public demonstration: political marches on washington, protests everywhere.

and it would probably not be limited to day only events, the protests would last days and possibly weeks.
 
the backlash would take the form of public demonstration: political marches on washington, protests everywhere.

and it would probably not be limited to day only events, the protests would last days and possibly weeks.

Okay, but that's really outside my point, which is the process that's available to him.

If the backlash creates a change in the control of Congress, then that changes the calculus and we're dealing with an entirely different set of variables. The calculus right now is that Trump can fire every man, woman, child and dog within Federal reach (who isn't elected or appointed to a life time position) and Congress wouldn't do anything.
 
They really should make the special prosecutor a permanent position. Doing so would insure that the Executive branch never again has co-equal authority to the Legislative and Judicial branches. As long as the people are free to elect someone like Trump there is a danger that, without appropriate oversight, the Executive will be an embarrassment to the political establishment and to our standing as a nation in the international community. We must insure that Congress protects us from ourselves and the only way we can do that is to implement a process by which they can approve our electoral decisions and, when necessary, deny them.
170804092346-ken-starr-intv-00001908-exlarge-169.jpg
 
Thats an average, thanks in part to Rasmussen. You have polls as low as 38%.

1. I don't look at the polls that give me the rosy numbers that make me happy. The average is the most sober and real-world estimate you're going to have.
2. 538's crew adjusts for biased polling methods.
3. All polls are consistent in their trend, which is that Trump has solidified his base, and all his support is "coming home."
 
Last edited:
1. I don't look at the polls that give me the rosy numbers that make me happy. The average is the most sober and real-world estimate you're going to have.
2. 538's crew adjusts for biased polling methods.

Elections are not won or lost on averages.
 
Uh, no.

He can't do that.

Actually that isn't something that has ever been determined.

Of course, the obvious conclusion to reach if he did (at least try to) pardon himself is that he knows that he committed criminal acts and that just might have some slight negative effect on his chances for re-election in 2020.
 
Okay, but that's really outside my point, which is the process that's available to him.

If the backlash creates a change in the control of Congress, then that changes the calculus and we're dealing with an entirely different set of variables. The calculus right now is that Trump can fire every man, woman, child and dog within Federal reach (who isn't elected or appointed to a life time position) and Congress wouldn't do anything.

and i am arguing that if trump does that there will be protests that will hound every member of congress demanding that they take action now. there will be protests everywhere. and they will not be silent.
 
They sure as **** aren't won or lost on outliers.

Just this morning, on Morning Joe, they discussed a poll that showed that 70% of Americans wanted the Mueller investigation to continue, and only 15% wanted it to end.
 
Just this morning, on Morning Joe, they discussed a poll that showed that 70% of Americans wanted the Mueller investigation to continue, and only 15% wanted it to end.

Fantabulous. Single polls aren't very illustrative. They don't paint a clear picture of trends.
 
There is nowhere near 42% of the country who supports this clown

Not quite right.

Except for the first week of his term of office, Mr. Trump's "Approval Rating" has remained consistently in the 39(+/-3.5)% range and that range does encompass 42%.
 
Not quite right.

Except for the first week of his term of office, Mr. Trump's "Approval Rating" has remained consistently in the 39(+/-3.5)% range and that range does encompass 42%.

Just for the record, I'm quite specifically using the "likely or registered voters" metric.

I'm not a statistician, so at the risk of Nate Silver entering this thread an putting his foot up my butt, it seems the margin of error is less relevant if you're taking an extremely large average of polls. But I don't make that statement with confidence.
 
Point 1, He can not pardon himself.

Point 2. Nuclear option.. State charges. He can not pardon state charges.

Point one...depends on who you ask. Mueller already said Trump isn't under suspicion.
 
Is this law written down and has a precedent addressed this?

It's one of those things the Supreme Court would go with "No, he can't, because that would be unbelievably stupid."

I like that people who previously were shouting all over this board that OBUMMER ISNT A KING, HE SHOULD BE IN JAIL are now actually suggesting a president might actually be able to pardon himself for a crime, literally placing a president above the law.
 
Point one...depends on who you ask. Mueller already said Trump isn't under suspicion.

That isn't what Mueller said.
 
It's one of those things the Supreme Court would go with "No, he can't, because that would be unbelievably stupid."

And I absolutely agree, but the point is that without precedent he could do it, thus dragging the nation through the entire exhausting experience until the matter is settled.
 
Back
Top Bottom