• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Major GOPer Issa calls for Special Prosecutor!!!!!

Hercules56

Banned
H
Joined
Aug 4, 2013
Messages
17,176
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/25/politics/issa-russia-sessions-investigation/index.html

Major Republican Congressman Darrel Issa calls for a Special Prosecutor to investigate ties between Russian Intelligence and the Trump campaign.

Darrel Issa is notorious for vigorously pushing for more and more investigations into Hillary Clinton's Benghazi issues and her private server.

Issa also supported Trump for President.

Issa also says AG Jeff Sessions should recuse himself from any such investigation.

Darrel Issa, John McCain, Mitch McConnel, Roy Blunt, John Cornyn, Peter King, Lindsey Graham, Bob Corker are all calling for a major investigation into connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.
 
It's ridiculously premature to appoint a special prosecutor. As far as I tell, nobody has actually articulated a plausible claim of illegal activity by anybody connected to the Trump campaign.

Issa was on Bill Maher at the time, and he was being pressured by Maher. I think Issa made a mistake. Congressional investigations will proceed, and that's all that's reasonable at this time.

I'm pretty sure that nothing will come of it. I can't imagine that the Russians needed any help or encouragement from the Trump team to hack the DNC or John Podesta. They're big boys, and they can look after their own interests. Does anybody seriously think there was some kind of quid pro quo? Most anti-Trumpers are just seizing on this for emotional reasons. They can't even formulate a coherent conspiracy theory, let alone a plausible one.
 
BobTheCoward said:
There is no evidence of a crime. Normally we wait until after that for prosecutors.
Click to expand...

How do you know? Not being a dick, it's a real question. Do you think we're privy to all of the intelligence reports or data that the intelligence community has gathered? Spicer is losing his *********** mind over these leaks, but I don't think we've seen everything. There might be significant ties or it could be nothing at all. I'll wait and see before I make a judgement, and we all know that Issa has been known to cry wolf. At this point, I wouldn't be shocked though.
 
Hercules56 said:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/25/politics/issa-russia-sessions-investigation/index.html

Major Republican Congressman Darrel Issa calls for a Special Prosecutor to investigate ties between Russian Intelligence and the Trump campaign.

<snip>
Click to expand...

BobTheCoward said:
There is no evidence of a crime. Normally we wait until after that for prosecutors.
Click to expand...


Yeah. We don't want anyone investigating.

What if they found something?

The Trumpettes would lose sleep trying to 'splain it away.
 
quadraginta said:
Yeah. We don't want anyone investigating.

What if they found something?

The Trumpettes would lose sleep trying to 'splain it away.
Click to expand...

The problem with an investigation into possible links between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence, is that we might find links between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence.

That would be a bad thing. So we shouldn't do any investigation.

;)
 
plague311 said:
How do you know? Not being a dick, it's a real question. Do you think we're privy to all of the intelligence reports or data that the intelligence community has gathered? Spicer is losing his *********** mind over these leaks, but I don't think we've seen everything. There might be significant ties or it could be nothing at all. I'll wait and see before I make a judgement, and we all know that Issa has been known to cry wolf. At this point, I wouldn't be shocked though.
Click to expand...

If no one is presenting evidence of a crime has occurred, then there isn't any evidence out there. I'm not going to pretend there is.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Should we also prosecutors investigate the existence of unicorns? There exists as much evidence.
Click to expand...

The possibility of the existence of unicorns is so miniscule that its not even worth discussing.

The possibility of tactical discussions between persons within the Trump campaign and the Russian government? High enough to justify a formal inquiry.

Or do you consider Darrel Issa, John McCain, Mitch McConnel, Roy Blunt, John Cornyn, Peter King, Lindsey Graham, Bob Corker to all be Left-wing Liberals.
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
If no one is presenting evidence of a crime has occurred, then there isn't any evidence out there. I'm not going to pretend there is.
Click to expand...

I'm not either, nor did I imply you should. I was saying that we don't know, and as was the case in the Hillary thread, we can discuss it in a "well if they find this, then this could happen". Which is what I assumed this thread was for, but if you say there isn't then /thread. Let's shut it down.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Should we also prosecutors investigate the existence of unicorns? There exists as much evidence.
Click to expand...

That's just a complete lie. One of Trump's administration already "resigned" because of a connection that came out. To say there isn't any evidence at all that connects the two is disingenuous at best, outright lying at worst. That doesn't even mention the fact that Trump asked Russia to hack emails, and he can't possibly do anything else to show his love for Putin. He's praised him repeatedly. While not evidence of anything, there's way more to warrant this investigation than there was the 7th Benghazi **** fest.
 
Hercules56 said:
The possibility of the existence of unicorns is so miniscule that its not even worth discussing.

The possibility of tactical discussions between persons within the Trump campaign and the Russian government? High enough to justify a formal inquiry.
Click to expand...

Prosecutors do not engage in formal inquiry. They assemble a case against someone suspected of breaking the law.

What I think you want is an independent commission.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Prosecutors do not engage in formal inquiry. They assemble a case against someone suspected of breaking the law.

What I think you want is an independent commission.
Click to expand...

You're splitting hairs.

Congress should look into the matter, and have subpoena power. If they find enough evidence of criminal activity, then there should be a special prosecutor.
 
plague311 said:
That's just a complete lie. One of Trump's administration already "resigned" because of a connection that came out. To say there isn't any evidence at all that connects the two is disingenuous at best, outright lying at worst. That doesn't even mention the fact that Trump asked Russia to hack emails, and he can't possibly do anything else to show his love for Putin. He's praised him repeatedly. While not evidence of anything, there's way more to warrant this investigation than there was the 7th Benghazi **** fest.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges. Benghazi was investigated by Congress. They have a different role than a prosecutor. Which is probably no prosecutors were involved in Benghazi.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Prosecutors do not engage in formal inquiry. They assemble a case against someone suspected of breaking the law.

What I think you want is an independent commission.
Click to expand...

*cough* link *cough*

A special prosecutor generally is a lawyer from outside the government appointed by an attorney general or, in the United States, by Congress to investigate a government official for misconduct while in office.
Click to expand...

You were saying?
 
Hercules56 said:
You're splitting hairs.

Congress should look into the matter, and have subpoena power. If they find enough evidence of criminal activity, then there should be a special prosecutor.
Click to expand...

That is not splitting hairs. They represent two fundamentally different functions that cannot even be mixed in casual conversation.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Apples and oranges. Benghazi was investigated by Congress. They have a different role than a prosecutor. Which is probably no prosecutors were involved in Benghazi.
Click to expand...

At least you're bailing on the whole "there's no evidence" train. That's progress to me.

Either way, there is more than enough to warrant more digging. You can call it whatever the hell you want to. Congress investigating, special prosecutor, etc. As was stated before, you're splitting hairs to try and win internet points.
 
BobTheCoward said:
That is not splitting hairs. They represent two fundamentally different functions that cannot even be mixed in casual conversation.
Click to expand...

And you're focusing on a trivial statement to try and sidetrack from the fact that Trump should be investigated. It can be by either Congress, or a Special Prosecutor. As I showed, already, it is in the definition of their job to investigate government officials. Get back on topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom