World, Writing, Wealth discussion

13 views
World & Current Events > Breaking news: US Congress issues Russia probe subpoenas

Comments Showing 1-7 of 7 (7 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Alex (last edited May 31, 2017 04:51PM) (new)

Alex (asato) The beginning of the end of this President's administration or merely desperation on the part of the special prosecutor Mueller?

Speculative thoughts?

US Congress issues Russia probe subpoenas
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-ca...


message 2: by Nik (last edited Jun 01, 2017 12:57AM) (new)

Nik Krasno | 13089 comments Well, I guess it's logical to ask for people's version when something is investigated. In this sense subpoenas as a summon to come and testify make sense. Thus wouldn't give them too much weight, however the testimonies, if given, might clarify things..
Wonder how the system works. They say there are 4 congressional committees investigating: 2 of the House and 2 of Senate. So each conducts independent investigation, issues subpoenas and so on or how it works? What if they arrive to opposite conclusions?


message 3: by J.J. (new)

J.J. Mainor | 2103 comments If you think 4 separate Congressional investigations is overkill, think back to how many the Republicans held over Benghazi, and then the email server issue. They're worth watching, and we'd like to hope something tangible comes from them, but more often then not, these investigations are nothing more than a chance for politicians to put forward a tough face for their base. With all the hearings on Benghazi, they find plenty of fault, but there were no repercussions issued and they stop short of some sort of finding that justifies holding so many hearings. It's not to say these current hearings are worthless or whatnot, but it's more a disillusionment with Congress that they generally don't do their jobs, that these scandals are nothing but a chance to put on a circus and grandstand for the sake of their upcoming reelection campaigns.

On topic, the subpoenas aren't some sudden game-changer because they shouldn't have been unexpected. On one note, I thought Flynn invoked his 5th Amendment rights which mean calling him to Capital Hill will just be a show for Democrats since Flynn's silence means he won't be able to defend himself - keeping in mind his silence is his choice so don't feel too sorry for him.

Comey will be the one to watch. Expectations are that he'll detail Trump's attempt to interfere with the investigation through his termination, so it'll be worth watching to see if he goes that far, or if he words his testimony carefully to imply it without giving the committee the chance to say he actually did.


message 4: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 9228 comments The subpoenas were inevitable, given the current political firestorm. I don't know enough about the American judicial system to know what Flynn ought to do, but I would have thought the Constitution over-rides all other law, so he should have the right to silence. If he exerts that right, the politicians have to prove their case, surely, without him. Sure, there will be a lot of political grand standing, but I have the impression that this is merely a fishing expedition, hoping Flynn will snag himself, or alternatively, an excuse for more political grandstanding.


message 5: by Matthew (last edited Jun 05, 2017 12:49PM) (new)

Matthew Williams (houseofwilliams) J.J. wrote: "If you think 4 separate Congressional investigations is overkill, think back to how many the Republicans held over Benghazi, and then the email server issue. They're worth watching, and we'd like t..."

Well said, J.J.! Benghazi was not only one of the most over-investigated issues, it also gave rise to the endless scandal over "emails, emails, emails". If there's one thing DCers love, its scandal porn!

And speaking of them not getting anything done, does anyone here recall the Iran-Contra hearings? I was a bit young to follow them myself at the time, but I heard quite a bit about them in the years that followed. Talk about a joke! Technically, high-treason was committed, and the man who was thrown under a bus captured the hearts of millions of Americans by spouting patriotic bullshit at the trial.

On the subject of Flynn, he did invoke, but then he offered his testimony in exchange for immunity. I'm not sure if the parameters have changed from a legal standpoint now that a special prosecutor has been appointed, but he may be forced to retake the 5th if questioned.


message 6: by J.J. (new)

J.J. Mainor | 2103 comments Matthew wrote: "And speaking of them not getting anything done, does anyone here recall the Iran-Contra hearings? I was a bit young to follow them myself at the time, but I heard quite a bit about them in the years that followed. Talk about a joke! Technically, high-treason was committed, and the man who was thrown under a bus captured the hearts of millions of Americans by spouting patriotic bullshit at the trial...."

I was old enough to remember them, but too young to really understand...all I knew was it was summer break and they preempted Price is Right to show the hearings...But I was a little surprised to find out Oliver North is still a public figure, and turns out many in the military community have ill feelings toward Reagan for throwing him under the bus like he did.

What we the public don't like but have come to accept is that our leaders always have a scapegoat to put between them and the scandals...then there's a little thing called plausible deniability ("Gee, I didn't know what was going on!") End of the day, the only recourse we have is through the electoral process, but too often people don't punish our leaders, and that just leads to these scandals growing bigger and bigger as time goes on and they see how much more they can get away with.


message 7: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 9228 comments I agree with J.J. Politicians are taking arse-covering to completely new levels, and they get away with it when "national security" is a reason for withholding information. Often, but not always, it is really "politician security" at stake.


back to top