• 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!

Should Presidents Be Able To Have Private Conversations With World Leaders?

Should Presidents Be Able To Have Private Conversations With World Leaders?

  • Total voters
    66
I don't see why we would give greater deference to a president's right to shield himself from Congressional inquiry in matters that deal with our national sovereignty, security, military power and war, than in matters of taxation or regulation of commerce. If anything foreign policy questions require greater moral vigor, scrupulous integrity, more sober reflection, and by extension, more congressional scrutiny rather than less.

Congress should give his communications the deference and trust that his past conduct, credibility and behavior permit and not one whit more. This President has done nothing to earn the confidence of either the legislative or judicial branch. Trusting his judgement and decency has proven a perilous mistake time and again.
 
Last edited:
Moderate Right said:
He didn't ask for any dirt on Biden. Why are Democrats so convinced that dirt would be found?
Click to expand...

So why investigate? Because he's that concerned with corruption in Ukraine?

The things you are willing to believe are staggering.
 
Cardinal said:
You mean do I think that Hillary abused the office of the Presidency to force a foreign power to open an investigation into her political rival, making that American foreign policy in the process? No.

Do I think that candidate Hillary legally hired an American firm to get dirt on her opponent? Yes.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's funny how these conservative dilemma scenarios, designed to flip the ethical and legal question on libs, are slapped down so easily. These are not complicated questions for people who operate with any integrity.
 
Dans La Lune said:
Yes, it's funny how these conservative dilemma scenarios, designed to flip the ethical and legal question on libs, are slapped down so easily. These are not complicated questions for people who operate with any integrity.
Click to expand...

These false equivalencies are always lazy as hell. Take one or two points of similarity (in this case "foreign" and "dirt on political opponent"), ignore literally every other factor, and claim an equivalence.
 
To the ones who said YES...think beyond this administration
To the ones who said NO...is it possible for any potus to have a "private" conversations?
 
Moderate Right said:
Well, try to answer the poll question without thinking of Trump. We have a generic president, could be from either party. Should they be able to have private conversations with world leaders without the fear of them being made public at some point? If you are a Trump hater please try to answer the question as if Obama was president.
Click to expand...

Only Democrats should be allowed to talk period. Republicans are all haters and corrupt thus must be shut down every time they open their mouths. Plus, Republicans expel 10x the amount of CO2 that Democrats do si merely allowing them to breathe is destroying the environment.
 
Helix said:
wrong question. should presidents have the ability to extort other countries into participating in their campaigns mob style without consequences? nope.
Click to expand...

Right question, wrong answer.
 
Should Presidents Be Able To Have Private Conversations With World Leaders?

Certainly.

But if a president hides certain phone conversations, and confiscates the interpreter notes of his secret meetings with a dictator, that should give everyone pause.

But as we see, this presidents top aides and WH lawyers are complicit in his schemes to deceive Congress and the American people.

And as we saw with his $1 billion 35 day government shutdown for his wall and sitting on $400 million here to obtain political dirt, he has no problem holding our taxpayer money hostage for his personal political agenda.
 
Lovebug said:
To the ones who said YES...think beyond this administration
To the ones who said NO...is it possible for any potus to have a "private" conversations?
Click to expand...

Presidential conversations with a foreign leader are not in any traditional sense "private," and the concept is a red herring in any case.

Consider how this might have gone if the WB's concerns had been warranted, and if the White House had not attempted to stifle the complaint.

1)WB creates report of perceived abuses of power.
2)ICIG investigates the claims and finds them insufficient and uncompelling. Process ends. OR...
3)DNI receives the ICIG's report, finds the the claims insufficient and uncompelling, and explains why to a bipartisan Congressional Intelligence Committee in a closed hearing explaining his position for why the claims are insufficient and uncompelling. At that point the bipartisan committee will arrive at its own conclusions.

What the thread question ignores that the whistleblowing process is extremely organized and is specifically set up to vet the claims at three separate levels before it ever reached the light of day.

Instead, what happened here is that the WB's report was suppressed, which eventually led to a giant, loud and messy public explosion. And on top of it, the WB's complaint did in fact lead to the revelation of at least two abuses of power. So the matter of "private conversations" is a red herring and misses the point.
 
Moderate Right said:
Well, try to answer the poll question without thinking of Trump. We have a generic president, could be from either party. Should they be able to have private conversations with world leaders without the fear of them being made public at some point? If you are a Trump hater please try to answer the question as if Obama was president.
Click to expand...

In a democracy, the people should have some say. Presidents should be accountable.
 
Lutherf said:
Only Democrats should be allowed to talk period. Republicans are all haters and corrupt thus must be shut down every time they open their mouths. Plus, Republicans expel 10x the amount of CO2 that Democrats do si merely allowing them to breathe is destroying the environment.
Click to expand...

So when will you stop breathing?

Or was this another of your "Trump is always right" sarcasm posts.
 
Kreton said:
Asking for dirt doesn't mean it would be found.

An example:

Hey moderate can you get me a unicorn that can fly and shoot rainbows out of its ass?

you can't. And just because i asked you to doesn't mean you'll find one.

Fact is, Trump did ask. That doesn't mean something will be found.

You are once again turning a blind eye to government corruption for no reason then your extreme partisan protection of Dear Leader.

He didn't say "dirt" but neither did Dems, but that doesn't stop you from pretending they are fishing for dirt.

Dems launch a legal investigation = looking for dirt and is wrong.
Trump tries to launch an illegal investigation = not looking for dirt and is ok.

Sometimes your posts are reasonable and other times you rival zimmer as one of the most loyal and supreme trump lovers on this site.
Click to expand...

But Trump never asked for dirt.
 
Well it looks like time to go back and pull Obama's conversations with Putin. Under his watch, collusion occurred and he says he had conversations with Putin regarding this collusion. It is time to see what was said. It is evident he did nothing to stop it. I find that highly suspicious. It is time to get to the bottom of this. While we are at it we need to dig out his conversations with Assad and Putin on Syria. Why did he weenie out? Was he just incompetent or was there more?
 
Moderate Right said:
Well, try to answer the poll question without thinking of Trump. We have a generic president, could be from either party. Should they be able to have private conversations with world leaders without the fear of them being made public at some point? If you are a Trump hater please try to answer the question as if Obama was president.
Click to expand...

Any President should have that right. Though as regarding US Presidents, it might be self healing. A wise leader would not want his/her every sudden reaction be published. Any foreign leader knowing their every word is public might no longer accept a call from a sieve. There is nothing inherently wrong with private/secret conversation.

Regards,
CP
 
Cardinal said:
You mean do I think that Hillary abused the office of the Presidency to force a foreign power to open an investigation into her political rival, making that American foreign policy in the process? No.
Click to expand...

No that is not what I mean and you know it. But yes Hillary used numerous foreign powers to gain monetary gain thru the Clinton Foundation. Also Hillary and her State Dept allow Russia to gain a percentage of US uranium supply in exchange for a $145 million to her Foundation and Bill Clinton got a large speaking fee to speak in Moscow shortly after.
Do I think that candidate Hillary legally hired an American firm to get dirt on her opponent? Yes.
Click to expand...

False..she used a British foreign agent who used the Russians to get dirt on Trump...In case you forgot it was called the Steel Dossier.
 
antiquity said:
No that is not what I mean and you know it. But yes Hillary used numerous foreign powers to gain monetary gain thru the Clinton Foundation. Also Hillary and her State Dept allow Russia to gain a percentage of US uranium supply in exchange for a $145 million to her Foundation and Bill Clinton got a large speaking fee to speak in Moscow shortly after.


False..she used a British foreign agent who used the Russians to get dirt on Trump...In case you forgot it was called the Steel Dossier.
Click to expand...

False.
 
Moderate Right said:
Should Presidents Be Able To Have Private Conversations With World Leaders?
Click to expand...

Define "private." Do you mean not broadcast in real time on cable news? Or do you mean one-on-one, without advisors or intel/military experts participating?

I can't imagine a scenario where a one-on-on conversation with another world leader would be necessary? And what responsible, business-like president would want that? Unless something unscrupulous is going on?

:confused:
 
Marine Electric said:
Define "private." Do you mean not broadcast in real time on cable news? Or do you mean one-on-one, without advisors or intel/military experts participating?

I can't imagine a scenario where a one-on-on conversation with another world leader would be necessary? And what responsible, business-like president would want that? Unless something unscrupulous is going on?

:confused:
Click to expand...

Sometimes I wonder what current Democrats would think of JFK and the Cuban Missile Crisis and all of the private conversations that must have gone on during that time period, not to mention the wheelings and dealings at the time of the two world wars, including us dropping nuclear bombs on Japan. If that were Trump as president during WWII and the Cuban Missile Crisis and he had had a private conversation with Japanese and Russian leaders threatening to bomb them with nuclear weapons, current Democrats would want his madness exposed and want him impeached for being crazy.
 
Moderate Right said:
Sometimes I wonder what current Democrats would think of JFK and the Cuban Missile Crisis and all of the private conversations that must have gone on during that time period, not to mention the wheelings and dealings at the time of the two world wars, including us dropping nuclear bombs on Japan. If that were Trump as president during WWII and the Cuban Missile Crisis and he had had a private conversation with Japanese and Russian leaders threatening to bomb them with nuclear weapons, current Democrats would want his madness exposed and want him impeached for being crazy.
Click to expand...

You put an awful lot of faith in a man who has plainly displayed an obvious absence of knowledge, skills and abilities when it comes to global politics and all-things-presidential in general.

It's amazing to me, that despite his public track-record, there are still people who don't realize what every businessman in NY has known for decades -- that Donald J. Trump is a know-nothing, idiot whose sole motivation is ATTENTION and nothing more.

:fyi:
 
Marine Electric said:
You put an awful lot of faith in a man who has plainly displayed an obvious absence of knowledge, skills and abilities when it comes to global politics and all-things-presidential in general.

It's amazing to me, that despite his public track-record, there are still people who don't realize what every businessman in NY has known for decades -- that Donald J. Trump is a know-nothing, idiot whose sole motivation is ATTENTION and nothing more.

:fyi:
Click to expand...

No one person can know everything. That's why you have cabinet members and others to guide you. I don't see where Trump has done anything wrong. The world is a safer place since Trump took office. The economy is going great, even if you try to claim Obama already had it going in that direction. Trump was elected because voters were tired of dynasties and the establishment. They wanted someone from outside the swamp. I know the left has a hard time dealing with the fact that political correctness, sjw, and liberal policies took a hit and the fact that the deep state has been unable to remove Trump from office.
 
Moderate Right said:
No one person can know everything. That's why you have cabinet members and others to guide you. I don't see where Trump has done anything wrong. The world is a safer place since Trump took office. The economy is going great, even if you try to claim Obama already had it going in that direction. Trump was elected because voters were tired of dynasties and the establishment. They wanted someone from outside the swamp. I know the left has a hard time dealing with the fact that political correctness, sjw, and liberal policies took a hit and the fact that the deep state has been unable to remove Trump from office.
Click to expand...

:lamo:rofl:bs:2rofll:

Lest we wonder how a criminal, reality-TV idiot wound up in the WH.





.
 
No. They can conduct the phone calls alone but there should be witnesses and transcripts of ALL calls by the head of state to other foreign state officials. No back doors should be allowed either.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Moderate Right said:
Sometimes I wonder what current Democrats would think of JFK and the Cuban Missile Crisis and all of the private conversations that must have gone on during that time period, not to mention the wheelings and dealings at the time of the two world wars, including us dropping nuclear bombs on Japan. If that were Trump as president during WWII and the Cuban Missile Crisis and he had had a private conversation with Japanese and Russian leaders threatening to bomb them with nuclear weapons, current Democrats would want his madness exposed and want him impeached for being crazy.
Click to expand...

1. If Trump had been president then we'd all be speaking German. I wonder if that's not what some of his supporters would like.

2. Don't pretend Trump's shady shenanigans come anywhere close to the high-stakes negotiations of his predecessors.


3. Also, the question itself is a red herring. It seeks to frame it as simply a matter of presidential privilege: yes or no, period. It is not that simple.

Yes they should be allowed 'private' conversations (if recorded then these would be 'classified') but yes any illegal, unethical or self-dealing portions of those conversations must be exposed, private, classified or not.

If Trump had been hit with Clinton's email schedule, he and his supporters would be claiming that was covered under exec privilege too.
 
Last edited:
Moderate Right said:
Well, try to answer the poll question without thinking of Trump. We have a generic president, could be from either party. Should they be able to have private conversations with world leaders without the fear of them being made public at some point? If you are a Trump hater please try to answer the question as if Obama was president.
Click to expand...

No, not without witnesses or a transcript/tape because only that would make a president safe from blackmail/smearing by the other side.
 
Captain Adverse said:
I voted yes.

While I have a desire for, and support transparency in government, I recognize that sometimes we have to be willing to trust those we have selected to lead us.

The President is elected to handle certain aspects of our government. When he is acting on internal policy, IMO we have a right to know it all.

However, when acting in his capacity as our national leader discussing issues of foreign policy with other national leaders, I am willing to allow him privacy.

How else to ensure frank and open discussions without fear some partisan group will create a tempest in a teapot here, or use the information to undermine the foreign government there?

IMO there are things that need to be secret if there is going to be any trust from those world leaders.

Remember, whatever is discussed will eventually have to be acted on. At that point the President is going to have to justify anything that seems out of hand, or it can be stymied by Congress and/or the SCOTUS. Ultimately he remains answerable to the electorate.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with this assessment. Regardless of what has transpired recently, I believe the POTUS is due some measure of privacy when discussing matters of such importance as national security or in making foreign policy with other world leaders. Now, that said there are procedures in place whereby said communications eventually will become a matter of public record and if, in the interim words gets out that the POTUS has committed wrong-doing, well...we have laws on the books that are suppose to protect "whistleblowers", too. But in the normal course of events, such conversations should be privately held and the system of retaining a record of said conversations should be followed. As with Nixon, we're seeing a POTUS who doesn't like following the rules and feels emboldened to do whatever he wants to do.

So, IMO the system is working as it's suppose to do. The POTUS had his private conversation and the system caught him abusing said system of privacy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom