Cont: Mueller Investigation pt3

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Democrats say they will investigate Whitaker when they take the House, in order to stop obstruction by Trump. I think opening investigations on McConnell would serve them better, Mitch is the one that's stopping the Senate from protecting Mueller. Trump and Putin have something on Mitch, I'm sure of it.
 
thaiboxerken said:
The Democrats say they will investigate Whitaker when they take the House, in order to stop obstruction by Trump. I think opening investigations on McConnell would serve them better, Mitch is the one that's stopping the Senate from protecting Mueller. Trump and Putin have something on Mitch, I'm sure of it.
Click to expand...

Or he could just be a generally traitorous partisan who's far more interested in "winning" than the good of the country. Investigating political opponents, just because they're political opponents, is a very dangerous path to take and should be strongly discouraged (at least when it comes to any party interested in good governance). Now, if he were coincidentally caught in Mueller's investigation, that would be fine. If you can point at some, say, dark money that's actually being funneled to him from Russia and unusual Russian contacts, that could be worth investigating.
 
Aridas said:
Or he could just be a generally traitorous partisan who's far more interested in "winning" than the good of the country. Investigating political opponents, just because they're political opponents, is a very dangerous path to take and should be strongly discouraged (at least when it comes to any party interested in good governance). Now, if he were coincidentally caught in Mueller's investigation, that would be fine. If you can point at some, say, dark money that's actually being funneled to him from Russia and unusual Russian contacts, that could be worth investigating.
Click to expand...

I was watching an episode of "Lost Tapes" last night about the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal and Whitewater. I had forgotten how much the American public backed Clinton, even knowing he had been unfaithful to Hilary, because they wanted rid of the distraction and wanted he and Congress to get on with the jobs they were elected to do. GOP, however, especially Newt Gingrich, were obsessed with getting him, and they effectively committed political suicide when they decided to go against the will of the people, and continue with their attacks on him. It cost them the 1996 Presidential election and the 1998 mid-terms.

If GOP is counting on the American people getting sick of the attacks on Der Trumpenführer in the same way they tired of the attacks on Clinton, they are definitely barking up the wrong tree - Clinton had the support of the people, Trump does not.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
Or he could just be a generally traitorous partisan who's far more interested in "winning" than the good of the country. Investigating political opponents, just because they're political opponents, is a very dangerous path to take and should be strongly discouraged (at least when it comes to any party interested in good governance). Now, if he were coincidentally caught in Mueller's investigation, that would be fine. If you can point at some, say, dark money that's actually being funneled to him from Russia and unusual Russian contacts, that could be worth investigating.
Click to expand...

Mitch is in bed with Trump and Russia, or he certainly acts enough like it to warrant an investigation. Investigating Mitch at this point would not be political.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Mitch is in bed with Trump and Russia, or he certainly acts enough like it to warrant an investigation. Investigating Mitch at this point would not be political.
Click to expand...

Maybe. His outright threatening of the President is certainly grounds to raise ethical questions. They just might not be the right kinds of ethical questions to warrant an investigation.
 
smartcooky said:
What?
Click to expand...

In response to Obama trying to make a bipartisan statement strongly condemning Russia for their electoral interference before the election, McConnell outright threatened him with the claim that he would loudly proclaim it to all be a partisan ploy and generally undermine anything he could in relation to that. There was a dramatically watered down bipartisan statement released later, though, apparently.

3point14 said:
It's concerning that it's difficult to tell the difference.
Click to expand...

It is, though what's more concerning is that it's on the table in the first place and hasn't resulted in pretty much any penalties given to McConnell... including from the loudly patriotic "Support the President because he's the President" crowd on the right.
 
Aridas said:
It is, though what's more concerning is that it's on the table in the first place and hasn't resulted in pretty much any penalties given to McConnell... including from the loudly patriotic "Support the President because he's the President" crowd on the right.
Click to expand...

No wonder they're loud, they recently had an 8-year sabbatical.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Haven't spotted this elsewhere, but it seems that Trump was only stopped from demanding that Hillary Clinton and James Comey be prosecuted because his lawyers told him that it was an impeachable offence to do it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/20/us/politics/president-trump-justice-department.html

MSNBC coverage...
Click to expand...

Then his lawyers lied to him. Anything can be an impeachable offense. He can be impeached for not ordering their prosecution.

Or did you mean likelihood of impeachment?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom