Should Mueller testify to Congress.... in open session..... to answer questions about his investigation?

Should Mueller testify to Congress. to answer questions about his investigation?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.
Mar 2012
56,305
37,878
New Hampshire
#41
That's one of the things congress must address.
No COTUS wording or law immunizes a sitting present from prosecution, nor should here be such a law.
40 year old DOJ opinions mean nothing.
Maybe but thats how the DOJ has been operating. It would be hard now to change that. Plus I dont think most voters want a sitting president to be allowed to be indicted because lets face it, it would be abused. Obama would have been long indicted by the GOP. We have to think about this without Trump in the equation.
 
Mar 2012
56,305
37,878
New Hampshire
#43
We know now that he continued working on getting Trump Tower built in Moscow during the campaign even though he lied about that. What was he willing to do or say for that deal? Why has he met with Putin without any record of what was said? Why was Kislyak at the Republican convention and why did Page and Sessions meet with him there? Why did Sessions have a second meeting with Kislyak at his Senate office? And why was the Republican platform altered so that it considerably softened its stance on Russia even though our intelligence community is so concerned about election interference among other things in relation to Russia? Why did Trump say to Russian ambassadors in the Oval Office that firing Comey got the pressure off of him concerning the Russia investigation?

Beyond all that, he has mucked up our foreign relations and his handling of N Korea has been hair raising as far as I'm concerned. He hasn't a clue about history or foreign policy. That's very dangerous. Plus, he's generally a crook. Yeah, yeah all politicians are crooks. But not like this. This is way beyond the pale.
But wasnt that already decided due to him still being CEO of Trump Inc? He had not stepped down during the campaign. So technically he was still CEO and able to act as such. That may need to be changed but lets remember this was the first time (at least in modern times) a non politician ran for president. Not sure we should expect a businessman to sell everything just to run, he could have lost and wanted to go back to that. I agree its troublesome and awkward but not sure how it can be handled.
 
Jul 2011
59,705
11,880
NYC/Москва
#44
We know now that he continued working on getting Trump Tower built in Moscow during the campaign even though he lied about that. What was he willing to do or say for that deal? Why has he met with Putin without any record of what was said? Why was Kislyak at the Republican convention and why did Page and Sessions meet with him there? Why did Sessions have a second meeting with Kislyak at his Senate office? And why was the Republican platform altered so that it considerably softened its stance on Russia even though our intelligence community is so concerned about election interference among other things in relation to Russia? Why did Trump say to Russian ambassadors in the Oval Office that firing Comey got the pressure off of him concerning the Russia investigation?
So you know more than meuller? 500 witnesses, 3000 subpeonas. Do you think they didn't look at this?

Beyond all that, he has mucked up our foreign relations and his handling of N Korea has been hair raising as far as I'm concerned. He hasn't a clue about history or foreign policy. That's very dangerous. Plus, he's generally a crook. Yeah, yeah all politicians are crooks. But not like this. This is way beyond the pale.

N. Korea is just the same shit different president, trump tried a little harder but it's not bearing fruit, kudos for trying I say. The rest of it, I agree witgh your first part, but not the second, they are all crooks. equally.
 

Devil505

Former Staff
Jan 2008
70,422
28,813
Florida
#46
Maybe but thats how the DOJ has been operating. It would be hard now to change that. Plus I dont think most voters want a sitting president to be allowed to be indicted because lets face it, it would be abused. Obama would have been long indicted by the GOP. We have to think about this without Trump in the equation.
Fair point about abuse of indictments but this country can't survive if we decide that we elect "Kings" every 4 years who are above our laws.
That's not America!
 

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
75,363
65,786
So. Md.
#47
But wasnt that already decided due to him still being CEO of Trump Inc? He had not stepped down during the campaign. So technically he was still CEO and able to act as such. That may need to be changed but lets remember this was the first time (at least in modern times) a non politician ran for president. Not sure we should expect a businessman to sell everything just to run, he could have lost and wanted to go back to that. I agree its troublesome and awkward but not sure how it can be handled.
It doesn't change the fact that it makes him dangerous.
 
Mar 2012
56,305
37,878
New Hampshire
#49
Fair point about abuse of indictments but this country can't survive if we decide that we elect "Kings" every 4 years who are above our laws.
That's not America!
True but nobody seems to want it changed. Oh sure they say they do but when they get the power to do so, they dont. Its why white collar crime is generally overlooked. Nobody wants to be bothered because in many ways they are all guilty of something.