• 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!

House Foreign Affairs chairman says committee will hold hearings on Trump-Putin relationship

digsbe said:
Lol more like "Where there are Democrats there is partisan corruption." Mueller has been on his witch hunt for 18+ months, the Dems are trying to nab at anything in desperation to try and slander the president. I hope the next time we have a DNC president that the GOP gives them living hell.
Click to expand...

...............and Republicans were after Bill Clinton for 6 years. Your point??
 
iguanaman said:
The Senate is the body who's votes will rid us of Trump for good. The good old days are over in the House and the endless fruitless witch hunts on Benghazzi and fast and furious will be replaced by legitimate hearings leading to an impeachment of Trump. Get used to it
Click to expand...

You have provided no reason to get rid of Trump, just speculation based upon hatred of his personality. Results matter except to you as do valid charges none of which have been issued. in this country people are innocent until proven guilty and you can't be guilty without a charge. Benghazi was a witch hunt? tell that to the murdered family of our Ambassador. You are truly nothing more than a partisan liberal full of hatred
 
iguanaman said:
Oversight of a lawless President is the Constitutional duty of the House and it will be done. Trump has violated his oath of office and must answer for it.
Click to expand...

What violation of his oath has he been charged with? Keep making things up?
 
Conservative said:
What violation of his oath has he been charged with?
Click to expand...

It is DOJ policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted. Why am I not surprised you forgot that fact? His assault on our Constitution is well documented regardless of that policy.
 
iguanaman said:
Yes. The House will be performing its Constitutional duties again. You remember that document don't you? I's the one that Trump wipes his ass with every morning.
Click to expand...

You misspelled "Obama".
 
JacksinPA said:
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...an-says-committee-will-hold-hearings-on-trump

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) announced that the panel will hold hearings on President Trump’s relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In a statement Saturday night and repeated on Twitter Sunday morning, Engel made reference to what he called Trump’s “dark dealings” with “Putin and his cronies.”
==========================================
'Dark dealings.' Where there is smoke there is usually fire.
Click to expand...

What a ****ing waste of time. What do they think Mueller's been doing the last 2 years?
 
iguanaman said:
It is DOJ policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted. Why am I not surprised you forgot that fact? His assault on our Constitution is well documented regardless of that policy.
Click to expand...

Nothing prevents charges for being filed and I am waiting for you to post those charges?
 
Conservative said:
Nothing prevents charges for being filed and I am waiting for you to post those charges?
Click to expand...

Huh? Filing charges is also called an indictment and that will have to wait for Trumps impeachment hearings. I'm just as impatient as you are for them to get underway but time is on our side.
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
Huh? Filing charges is also called an indictment and that will have to wait for Trumps impeachment hearings. I'm just as impatient as you are for them to get underway but time is on our side.
Click to expand...

OMG you are totally clueless and cannot admit when wrong. The longer this goes on the more foolish you look and more hatred you have, sad that the President of the United States has such an influence on people like you

https://www.wisemantriallaw.com/blog/2012/august/what-is-the-difference-between-being-charged-and/
 
Conservative said:
OMG you are totally clueless and cannot admit when wrong. The longer this goes on the more foolish you look and more hatred you have, sad that the President of the United States has such an influence on people like you

https://www.wisemantriallaw.com/blog/2012/august/what-is-the-difference-between-being-charged-and/
Click to expand...

LOL Did you even read that link you posted?
A criminal charge is a formal allegation that you have committed one or more criminal offenses. These can be misdemeanor or felony violations.

Once you are formally charged, you are subject to being arrested on a warrant if you have not been arrested already. If you were arrested before a warrant was issued, the State’s Attorney’s Office decides whether to charge you based on the evidence presented to him or her in a charging affidavit from the police officer.
Click to expand...

If Trump was "charged" he would be subject to immediate arrest. DOJ policy will not allow arrest of a sitting President so he may not be indicted OR charged. All in due time though. It is most important that we also snare all the other participants in this criminal conspiracy and that is where Mueller comes in.

45C9B77700000578-0-Orange_is_the_new_orange_This_fake_Time_cover_was_mocked_up_prom-a-100_1509234925608.jpg
 
iguanaman said:
LOL Did you even read that link you posted?


If Trump was "charged" he would be subject to immediate arrest. DOJ policy will not allow arrest of a sitting President so he may not be indicted OR charged. All in due time though. It is most important that we also snare all the other participants in this criminal conspiracy and that is where Mueller comes in.

45C9B77700000578-0-Orange_is_the_new_orange_This_fake_Time_cover_was_mocked_up_prom-a-100_1509234925608.jpg
Click to expand...

Police charge, court indict!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
digsbe said:
Lol more like "Where there are Democrats there is partisan corruption." Mueller has been on his witch hunt for 18+ months, the Dems are trying to nab at anything in desperation to try and slander the president. I hope the next time we have a DNC president that the GOP gives them living hell.
Click to expand...

There are days when I sincerely hope that Mr. Mueller's investigation turns up exactly nothing simply because of the mental distress that turning up something solid will cause for all of Mr. Trump's supporters.

Then I think of all the mental distress that turning up nothing solid will cause for all of Mr. Trump's detractors and I get ambivalent.

Of course, it doesn't really matter if Mr. Mueller's investigation turns up something solid (because Mr.Trump's supporters will deny that it did) any more than if Mr. Mueller's investigation doesn't turn up anything solid (because Mr. Trump's detractors will deny that it didn't).

And THAT'S the state of American political discourse today.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
There are days when I sincerely hope that Mr. Mueller's investigation turns up exactly nothing simply because of the mental distress that turning up something solid will cause for all of Mr. Trump's supporters.

Then I think of all the mental distress that turning up nothing solid will cause for all of Mr. Trump's detractors and I get ambivalent.

Of course, it doesn't really matter if Mr. Mueller's investigation turns up something solid (because Mr.Trump's supporters will deny that it did) any more than if Mr. Mueller's investigation doesn't turn up anything solid (because Mr. Trump's detractors will deny that it didn't).

And THAT'S the state of American political discourse today.
Click to expand...

That is exactly why we must depend on the rule of law and support it above all else. It has always been the basis for all our freedoms and security.
 
apdst said:
It's Congress' duty to punish the president for performing his constitutional duty? :lamo
Click to expand...

No, but it is Congress' duty to make sure that the President IS performing his constitutional duty.
 
iguanaman said:
It is DOJ policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted. Why am I not surprised you forgot that fact? His assault on our Constitution is well documented regardless of that policy.
Click to expand...

Not quite.

It is DOJ policy that a sitting President SHOULD not be indicted.

There is a difference between "should not" and "can not".
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Not quite.

It is DOJ policy that a sitting President SHOULD not be indicted.

There is a difference between "should not" and "can not".
Click to expand...

That is just semantics. The result is the same. I believe we are left with no alternative but to impeach. I am more worried about what the remedy is for Senators that violate their oath of office now.
 
iguanaman said:
LOL Did you even read that link you posted?


If Trump was "charged" he would be subject to immediate arrest.
Click to expand...

Minor point here but "subject to arrest" does NOT mean "will be arrested".

In civilized countries, people who present themselves before the court, or have indicated that they are going to present themselves before the court, in order to answer the charges against them are NOT routinely arrested.

That situation can get rather ludicrous at times.

I once represented a person whom the police had had in custody. When the police arrived at the courthouse they let him accompany me into the courtroom. Once in the courtroom the prosecution asked that my client "remain in custody until trial" (which wasn't an unusual request for semi-transients). I then asked how my client could "remain in custody" when he was NOT in custody and had, in fact, presented himself to the court voluntarily.

I must have been having a good day because the Judge agreed that he had no power to order that a person who was NOT in custody should REMAIN in custody.

My argument that my client was more likely than not to return for trial could be inferred from two things, one - he said he would, and two - he had voluntarily presented himself before the court in order to answer to the charges against him.

The Judge agreed. As I said, I was having a very good day that day.

PS - My client DID show up for his trial, as he had done repeatedly throughout his long career of petty crime (winter was coming on, the jails are heated and the food isn't that bad).
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
No, but it is Congress' duty to make sure that the President IS performing his constitutional duty.
Click to expand...

Talking to foreign heads of state is one of those duties. :lamo
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
Oversight of a lawless President is the Constitutional duty of the House and it will be done. Trump has violated his oath of office and must answer for it.
Click to expand...

He hasn't broken any laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom