• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House Foreign Affairs chairman says committee will hold hearings on Trump-Putin relationship

apdst said:
Talking to foreign heads of state is one of those duties. :lamo
Click to expand...

OK, so you would agree that a President who talked to the head of state of another country about how to destroy the United States of America (not saying that that has actually happened) would only be "performing his constitutional duty", would you?
 
Chomsky said:
After all that's come out since Trump's been in office, how can they not?
Click to expand...

The House would be negligent in their duties if they did not look into the matter.
 
apdst said:
He hasn't broken any laws.
Click to expand...

The keen insight and depth of factual knowledge (that your post exhibits and substantiates) that you possess really influences how I regard your statement.

Possibly you'd like to help us poor uninformed people who do NOT have access to the transcripts and notes about the meeting by posting the copies that you possess.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
The keen insight and depth of factual knowledge (that your post exhibits and substantiates) that you possess really influences how I regard your statement.

Possibly you'd like to help us poor uninformed people who do NOT have access to the transcripts and notes about the meeting by posting the copies that you possess.
Click to expand...

If you dom't have access to the transcripts, then it was obviously kept secret.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Thank you for providing half an answer to the question.

Now, about the "on what evidence" bit - hmmmm?
Click to expand...

I can't prove a negative, but feel free to show us the transcripts of the meeting, if you insist it wasn't secret.
 
apdst said:
If you dom't have access to the transcripts, then it was obviously kept secret.
Click to expand...

But, you have hinted that YOU do have access.

I'll accept that those must be kept secret for national security reasons, right after you make this simple, positive, statement


I, "apdst", have personally reviewed the transcripts and notes of the meeting between Presidents Trump and Putin, and, upon my honour, swear that there is absolutely nothing in them that would indicate even the slightest possible chance of any illegal activity having taken place."
​

Can you make that simple, positive, declaration?

PS - A simply, positive, statement indicating that you have obtained a law degree from some accredited and reputable law school will only strengthen my assessment of your first simple, positive, statement.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
But, you have hinted that YOU do have access.

I'll accept that those must be kept secret for national security reasons, right after you make this simple, positive, statement


I, "apdst", have personally reviewed the transcripts and notes of the meeting between Presidents Trump and Putin, and, upon my honour, swear that there is absolutely nothing in them that would indicate even the slightest possible chance of any illegal activity having taken place."
​

Can you make that simple, positive, declaration?

PS - A simply, positive, statement indicating that you have obtained a law degree from some accredited and reputable law school will only strengthen my assessment of your first simple, positive, statement.
Click to expand...

:lamo
 
apdst said:
I can't prove a negative, but feel free to show us the transcripts of the meeting, if you insist it wasn't secret.
Click to expand...

I never said that it was, it was you who implied that it was.

However, I am still as ready as I ever was to accept your personal assurance that you have reviewed the transcripts and notes (without revealing a single word of what is in them) to buttress your position that "nothing happened".
 
apdst said:
:lamo
Click to expand...

OK, so you cannot say that you have had access to the transcripts and notes, but how does that mean that you can know what is in them?

Did you use the "William Lyon MacKenzie-King Method"?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
I never said that it was, it was you who implied that it was.

However, I am still as ready as I ever was to accept your personal assurance that you have reviewed the transcripts and notes (without revealing a single word of what is in them) to buttress your position that "nothing happened".
Click to expand...

I still say it's been kept secrer. You can prove me wrong by posting the transcripts.
 
Amelia said:
Obama dares to say that after he is reelected, he will have more flexibility in dealing with Russia. Republicans go apoplectic.

Trump has secret meetings with Putin, calls for notes to be destroyed, expresses faith in Putin over America's intelligence agencies, expresses love for other murderous dictators, changes his military policy during phone calls with dictators without even letting the Pentagon in on the changes which are about to happen, etc., ... and somehow investigations into this are a nefarious plot by Democrats.
Click to expand...

The party of "personal responsibility" refuses to take any themselves.
 
The the House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) announced that the panel will hold hearings on President Trump’s relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin is hardly any sort of surprise.

Aren't these the same people who have been flogging the 'Trump / Russian Collusion' narrative from the last 2 1/2 years, way past its 'consume by' date?

Aren't these the same people who don't hesitate using government institutions and power against their political enemies to further their political agenda and ambitions?
They are.

Aren't these the same people who operate on 'by any means necessary'?
Why, yes, yes, they are.

So no surprise at all, is it?
 
apdst said:
I still say it's been kept secrer. You can prove me wrong by posting the transcripts.
Click to expand...

Why would I even attempt to prove someone who has personal and inside knowledge of what actually happened wrong?

By the way, did you know that the US government keeps all really secret documents locked up in Grant's Tomb? You can prove me wrong by wrong by revealing where they are actually kept.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Why would I even attempt to prove someone who has personal and inside knowledge of what actually happened wrong?

By the way, did you know that the US government keeps all really secret documents locked up in Grant's Tomb? You can prove me wrong by wrong by revealing where they are actually kept.
Click to expand...

National Archives |
 
apdst said:
......
Click to expand...

That doesn't prove what you say it proves.

I want you to prove where the REAL secret storage location for the REAL secret documents is.

Anything that is in the National Archives, isn't REALLY secret because people know what documents are in the National Archives (even if they don't know what the contents of those documents are).
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
That doesn't prove what you say it proves.

I want you to prove where the REAL secret storage location for the REAL secret documents is.

Anything that is in the National Archives, isn't REALLY secret because people know what documents are in the National Archives (even if they don't know what the contents of those documents are).
Click to expand...

Talk about moving goal posts. :lamo
 
apdst said:
Talk about moving goal posts. :lamo
Click to expand...

I'll be quite satisfied if you obtain a statement from the National Archives that says something like

100% of all secret American government documents, even the ones that we don't know exist, are deposited with the National Archives the moment that they are created.
​

Heck, I'd even be content if you were to state

From my own personal knowledge, I know that all secret documents of the United States of America - even the ones that neither I nor the National Archives know exist - are deposited with the National Archives the moment they are created.
​

After all, it IS your position that ALL secret documents of the United States of America are deposited with the National Archives, and you wouldn't expect me to accept second, third, fourth, fifth, or worse, hand information would you?
 
Last edited:
TU Curmudgeon said:
I'll be quite satisfied if you obtain a statement from the National Archives that says something like

100% of all secret American government documents, even the ones that we don't know exist, are deposited with the National Archives the moment that they are created.
​

Heck, I'd even be content if you were to state

From my own personal knowledge, I know that all secret documents of the United States of America - even the ones that neither I nor the National Archives know exist - are deposited with the National Archives the moment they are created.
​

After all, it IS your position that ALL secret documents of the United States of America are deposited with the National Archives, and you wouldn't expect me to accept second, third, fourth, fifth, or worse, hand information would you?
Click to expand...

Lift with your knees.
 
apdst said:
Lift with your knees.
Click to expand...

In short, you have no ACTUAL knowledge about where "secret" documents are stored unless someone tells you that the document is stored in some particular place and for those REALLY "secret" documents that no one is even telling you exist you have even less knowledge of where they are stored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom