General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWSJ argues that Trump-investigations must be shut down, bc there are too many going on right now.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/stop-the-impeachment-fishing-expedition-11550188732The president is not one among many, as are legislators and judges. Crippling his ability to function upsets the constitutional balance of power. For this reason, the Justice Departments Office of Legal Counsel has repeatedly concluded that a sitting president may not be indicted or prosecuted. The same logic should apply to congressional investigations.
...
If Congress can use its investigatory power to fish for evidence of impeachable acts, presidents will become politically accountable to Congress, not the people. Impeachment proceedings must be designated as such from the get-go, not obfuscated as amorphous investigations.
To protect the separation of powers, the president should defy all demands for information about his prepresidential activities. If Congress or private litigants seek to enforce these demands, the Justice Department should move to stay these proceedings while Mr. Trump is in office. If Democrats want to remove Mr. Trump from office, there are two legitimate ways to do so: By defeating him at the polls in 2020 or through properly conducted impeachment proceedings based on evidence of high Crimes and Misdemeanors committed while in office.
I totally agree. Congressional investigators looking for evidence of criminal behavior is clearly out-of-bounds and unfair. They are actively trying to find something!!! Who has ever heard of that???
Me.
(35,454 posts)which is the very reason they need to investigate. And Barr has no power/ability to stop what a separate branch of government is doing. Is the WSJ so ignorant? And presidents can be impeached and then indicted/prosecuted, so to stop the process would be unconstitutional.
ProfessorGAC
(65,246 posts)Is both yes and no.
They know Barr can't do this, so that's not ignorance, it's partisan nonsense
On the yes side, the notion that too many investigations into probable wrongdoing is an ignorant opinion.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)still_one
(92,454 posts)during the last 8 years investigation of the Obama administration, and investigations in Hillary.
The WSJ editorial, and the republican party are being their usual hypocrites.
Congress is doing their job, which is OVERSIGHT.
That the WSJ is calling for Barr to interfere with that responsibility is an outrage, and I would argue against the intent of the Constitution which is for Congress to provide oversight of the executive branch.
GoCubsGo
(32,097 posts)And that actually WAS a fishing expedition/witch hunt.
Got to wonder if Murdoch and/or the WSJ are about to get caught up in the whole thing.
still_one
(92,454 posts)underpants
(182,949 posts)when you are getting your ass kicked.
procon
(15,805 posts)and is not entitled to a free pass simply because he sits in the Oval Office. In Trump's case, keep in mind that he would not be the subject of so many investigations if he had not deliberately engaged in so many blatantly illegal and suspicious activities.
If anything, Trump needs more investigations to root out everything he's done that poses harm to America and every citizen in the country.
jcgoldie
(11,655 posts)The president is fresh off shutting down the government over a stupid temper tantrum and has declared a national emergency over a "problem" which all statistics prove is in a better state than it has been in 50 years, and the WSJ is concerned that Congress is stepping on presidential powers?
bdamomma
(63,930 posts)he said "he didn't have to do this" just like when he owned the government shutdown. This POS needs to be removed. I am hoping with all of his medical issues he will have a stroke or his liver will shut down. He looks horrible, and what were those red marks on his lower brow. Did anyone notice those red spots??? from yesterday.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)Too many? Hell yeah!
Poiuyt
(18,131 posts)When Mueller finishes his report, it can be folded into the House impeachment hearing.
NewJeffCT
(56,829 posts)Congress should stop investigating the corruption?
MagickMuffin
(15,962 posts)He has continued to Obstruct Justice at every turn and we keep finding out every day how much Obstruction there is.
MiniMe
(21,719 posts)enough said
struggle4progress
(118,379 posts)struggle4progress
(118,379 posts)By Jonathan Chait
... Rivkin, a veteran of the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, is perhaps the state-of-the-art conservative-movement legal apparatchik, regularly published in the Journal and quoted in the mainstream media arguing that the Constitution demands whatever the party happens to need at any given moment. Rivkins latest essay blazes a new trail in Trumps legal defense. It asserts Congress has no right whatsoever to investigate anything Trump did before assuming the presidency ...
The obstacle to this claim of legal impunity is the legal precedent in the case Clinton v. Jones. This was a lawsuit brought by Paula Jones, against President Clinton, and which created the precedent that presidents can be sued for behavior that occured before their presidency. Conservatives enthusiastically supported this precedent when the target was a Democrat. Indeed, the notion of investigating the presidents pre-presidential conduct drew rabid support on the right. The Wall Street Journal published so many editorials demanding investigations of Whitewater (a Bill Clinton Arkansas-era deal) that the books republishing them ran well over 500 pages. After eight years fanatically hounding a president over a land deal, and producing no evidence of a crime, it is astonishing to see the Journal turning around and insisting pre-presidential conduct should never be investigated at all.
What is the difference between the cases of Clinton and Trump? Rivkin and Foleys explanation is hilarious. They argue that the investigations of Clinton were found not to threaten interference with the Presidents duties. By contrast, the investigations of Trump do ...
In other words, Trump cant be investigated because he is such a massive crook. The president could function when he was defending one private lawsuit and one financial investigation, but not when he is defending a series of elaborate global rackets. Its just a simple matter of time management ...
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/trump-so-many-crimes-investigate-congress-russia-mueller.html
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Because I'm not seeing anything he's doing that's so indispensable to the continued functioning of the nation.