• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

If Congress is denied powers of oversight, then we are one step closer to TYRANNY

apdst said:
It's presidential oversight of Congress. Congress doesn't have unlimited power. The court will have to decide who's right. That's why we have three branches of government and not two, and they're co-equal.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.
 
Craig234 said:
Say, when Republicans demanded documents - on Fast and Furious, Benghazi, and many other topics.
Click to expand...

Those are government documents, not private documents. Congress has every authority to subpoena those.

Next?
 
OscarLevant said:
The media has been correct about collusion, as the Mueller report reveals no less than 127 documented communications between Trump's campaign and Russia. What the media did not accuse Trump of, which is what the Rosenstein mandate was about, was "coordination", however, at times, suspicions were raised, no doubt.
Click to expand...

It's worse than that. Mueller documented that the trump campaign and Putin behaved in each others' interest whether it was 'just understood' or explicitly coordinated; he simply did not find evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of conspiracy, but noted that he did not get cooperation to fully investigate, so it's an open question. And the collusion he DID find was wrong, criminal or not.
 
I don't understand why anybody thought Trump was going to let anybody testify to Congress. This is the same guy that week by week, month by month starting with "I am DYING to interview with Mueller" walked that back to not interviewing with Mueller.

Were you all once again "listening" to MSM talking heads? Those clowns MUST these days pay attention to the daily news cycle ebb and flow as if it means something and pontificate on it as if means something because half of them would be eliminated in an instant, off the air and ditch digging if they did not make every 24 hours seem meaningful.

Trump was never going to let anybody testify. Just Barr was bad enough for DonDon. He gave Barr a shot, didn't the result and that was that.

That said, Trump's error here is that he has made obstruction of the Article 1 Branch a campaign issue and he will get it shoved right down his windpipe.
 
OscarLevant said:
You called them "lazy".

My refutation of that point has been made, and you've not successfully rebutted it.
Click to expand...

If I thought your words worthy I might have bothered. I have no obligation to respond to every inconsequential comment you pass like gas.
 
OscarLevant said:
If Congress is denied powers of oversight, then we are one step closer to TYRANNY

The Congress has a duty to provide oversight to the executive branch.

This is the design, because congress, operating democratically, has the better odds of producing a result consistent with the ideals of the constitution.

If we did n't have it, then we are one step closer to a fascist society.

IT DOESN'T MATTER if you think congress is acting partisan. They are acting DEMOCRATICALLY. They are according the will of the people. The president was elected by a minority of the population, he does not have the will of the people.

By design, a Congress operating autocratically is impossible.

However, since presidency is occupied by one person, acting autocratically is possible.

This is WHY Congress is the check on the other branch, and not the other way around.

Removing the check means he will do just that, acquire dictatorial powers.

Trump doesn't give a damn about the rule of law, he doesn't give a damn about the constitution, he only gives a damn about doing whatever the hell he can get away with. That's who Trump is, he's been doing that all of his life, and no one has stood up to this tyrant wannabe. He gets warm and fuzzy with murderous dictators, he said of Kim Jong Un, who sent us one of our own home in a coma, "We fell in love".

He admires dictators. Why is that? Because they do not have to answer to anyone, and Trump would love nothing more to have that kind of power. He feeds on power, he's a narcissist sociopath, power is a narcissist sociopath's dream. A guy like Trump should have never been allowed to become president, for that very reason.

If you do not support congress in this effort, then you are for fascism and the end of the rule of law.

Shame on you.
Click to expand...

The tyranny is the abuse of power to take down a legitimately elected president and trying to call it "oversight".
 
The OPer is ranting that Democrats in the House of Representatives MUST be able to commit any crimes and eliminate both the US Constitution and Bill Of Rights or it will not be possible to establish a fascist government with a socialist economy.
 
OscarLevant said:
If Congress is denied powers of oversight, then we are one step closer to TYRANNY

The Congress has a duty to provide oversight to the executive branch.

This is the design, because congress, operating democratically, has the better odds of producing a result consistent with the ideals of the constitution.

If we did n't have it, then we are one step closer to a fascist society.

IT DOESN'T MATTER if you think congress is acting partisan. They are acting DEMOCRATICALLY. They are according the will of the people. The president was elected by a minority of the population, he does not have the will of the people.

By design, a Congress operating autocratically is impossible.

However, since presidency is occupied by one person, acting autocratically is possible.

This is WHY Congress is the check on the other branch, and not the other way around.

Removing the check means he will do just that, acquire dictatorial powers.

Trump doesn't give a damn about the rule of law, he doesn't give a damn about the constitution, he only gives a damn about doing whatever the hell he can get away with. That's who Trump is, he's been doing that all of his life, and no one has stood up to this tyrant wannabe. He gets warm and fuzzy with murderous dictators, he said of Kim Jong Un, who sent us one of our own home in a coma, "We fell in love".

He admires dictators. Why is that? Because they do not have to answer to anyone, and Trump would love nothing more to have that kind of power. He feeds on power, he's a narcissist sociopath, power is a narcissist sociopath's dream. A guy like Trump should have never been allowed to become president, for that very reason.

If you do not support congress in this effort, then you are for fascism and the end of the rule of law.

Shame on you.
Click to expand...

What I'm not sure if this is oversight or just a very partisan political vendetta, political revenge by the democratic party for losing an election.

I'd probably not be wondering if the Democrats hadn't started, set their objective to destroy Trump the day after the election. This fits that objective to a T. With all the very partisan propaganda about the Mueller investigation being spouted from both sides, I said I would wait for Mueller's final report before deciding whether Trump colluded or not. Mueller said no, that I thought would be the end of it.

It wasn't and isn't. What I fear with this precedence being set is that, the party that loses the election will set out from day one to destroy by hook or crook all future presidents. I suppose this is the era of politics were in, of polarization and ultra high partisanship where the needs and good of the country is long forgotten as each party places their good in either an attempt to gain power or retain power over this nation.

Sad times we live in.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Those are government documents, not private documents. Congress has every authority to subpoena those.

Next?
Click to expand...

trump is blocking *every subpoena by Congress*.

Are you clueless or lying?
 
Perotista said:
What I'm not sure if this is oversight or just a very partisan political vendetta, political revenge by the democratic party for losing an election.

I'd probably not be wondering if the Democrats hadn't started, set their objective to destroy Trump the day after the election. This fits that objective to a T. With all the very partisan propaganda about the Mueller investigation being spouted from both sides, I said I would wait for Mueller's final report before deciding whether Trump colluded or not. Mueller said no, that I thought would be the end of it.

It wasn't and isn't. What I fear with this precedence being set is that, the party that loses the election will set out from day one to destroy by hook or crook all future presidents. I suppose this is the era of politics were in, of polarization and ultra high partisanship where the needs and good of the country is long forgotten as each party places their good in either an attempt to gain power or retain power over this nation.

Sad times we live in.
Click to expand...

Now, while you're wrong about Democrats, since you're against this whole 'Congress sets its sights on defeating the president as its top priority' thing, let's see if you're a complete hypocrite: do you condemn Republicans who actually DID that to Obama - blocked any legislation, even if they otherwise agreed - even blocked him from his rightful Supreme Court appointment for a year to steal it, and many other judges?
 
Moderate Right said:
The tyranny is the abuse of power to take down a legitimately elected president and trying to call it "oversight".
Click to expand...

If trump told you the sky is pink, you'd be here calling the Democrats liars for saying it's blue. Person breaks laws, law enforcement enforces laws, you say law enforcement is 'abuse of power' trying to 'take down' the criminal even when they're in the investigative phase. I guess Congress was abusing power trying to take down legitimately elected Nixon calling it 'oversight' when they demanded his documents and tape, also, you should say.
 
jnug said:
That said, Trump's error here is that he has made obstruction of the Article 1 Branch a campaign issue and he will get it shoved right down his windpipe.
Click to expand...

trump's errors include decades of tax fraud, welcoming Russian help, appointing people who were terrible, who interacted with Russia, some criminally, in firing James Comey which triggered Mueller, in all the obstruction documented in the Mueller report, and much more.
 
Craig234 said:
Now, while you're wrong about Democrats, since you're against this whole 'Congress sets its sights on defeating the president as its top priority' thing, let's see if you're a complete hypocrite: do you condemn Republicans who actually DID that to Obama - blocked any legislation, even if they otherwise agreed - even blocked him from his rightful Supreme Court appointment for a year to steal it, and many other judges?
Click to expand...

Like with Trump, with Obama I supported him on some things and opposed him on others. I'm not a party animal like so many others. If you followed me, I said many times that McConnell ought to allow a vote on Garland. But I don't think it was stealing as the Republicans controlled the senate and they had the votes to defeat any presidential nomination for the SCOTUS. Not allowing the vote was idiotic hyper partisanship, especially when one knew the votes were there to deny confirmation. Not allowing a vote on him was asinine to the max.
 
Perotista said:
Like with Trump, with Obama I supported him on some things and opposed him on others. I'm not a party animal like so many others. If you followed me, I said many times that McConnell ought to allow a vote on Garland. But I don't think it was stealing as the Republicans controlled the senate and they had the votes to defeat any presidential nomination for the SCOTUS. Not allowing the vote was idiotic hyper partisanship, especially when one knew the votes were there to deny confirmation. Not allowing a vote on him was asinine to the max.
Click to expand...

You're not a hypocrite on that one issue.

You didn't answer on the larger issue - do you know on Obama's first night McConnell held a GOP meeting and announced their top priority was to obstruct Obama on any accomplishments, even if they'd otherwise agree, to try to deny him re-election - and will you condemn that?
 
Moon said:
I’m not going to go over the falls with you. You’re on your own.
Click to expand...

And, I'm right, and you're wrong, but can't admit it. So you post things like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom