oldmanfan

I just posted above I was glad to read more about the IRS thing. To me it is an example of what I want to see, a part of the executive branch overreaches, the legislative beach through its oversight corrects it. So you can stick your dishonesty stuff.

Well this is brilliant on your part. I looked at it and agreed with you. The IRS did something wrong here, the legislative branch examined it and brought it to light, and folks got fired. You are apparently so locked into your preconceived views on things you can’t see the forest for the trees so I will say it again. 1. I did not vote for Obama therefore I have no specific allegiance to him 2. I am for our constitution and 3 co-equal branches of government each overseeing the other. Sadly

An example of what I want done. An abuse of power by an agency under the Executive branch, properly investigated by the legislative branch. Let me remind you I did not vote for Obama. I’ll have to check this out. Maybe it’s time the current president realize his words have meaning.

I am taking the point that if there are transgressions in the executive branch that you have both the legislative and judicial branches to execute proper oversight and if required legal action.

Did a little quick search on this. Obama wanted the law changed to ease burden on consumers? And did not make an executive order from what I could see. If that is incorrect send along the info for me to look at. And no, I would not say this would equate to dictator. Presidents want what they want. Trump takes it to extremes. I believe he wants to operate without either the legislative ir judicial branch inhibiting him whatsoever. My opinion of course, but that to me would destroy our country.

From what I can tell on this side of the board, diving into source documents equates to finding sources that back your preconceived opinion. I on the other hand will wait for actual congressional investigations if and when they take place.

Everything you have there such as using the IRS to get back at enemies is your opinion. You have a view of the world, that somehow there is this deep state conspiracy that the former administration used, and you interpret all things to fit your narrative. They are not fact. Fact will or will not be ascertained by actual investigation.

I came into this thread to answer the OP, which I did. What you all consider fact remains to be shown as so by proper investigation. Some people are having a fit right now about Graham and Johnson having hearings. Not me. That is how the facts will actually come out. Assuming subpoenas to the appropriate individuals are answered as they were not during the Ukraine hearings. Rhino claims facts. He confuses his opinion, based on his deep state bias, as fact. But even paranoid people have enemies.

And you keep parroting your same fake I know better than everyone else stuff like you are somehow more omniscient than everyone. You’re not.

No I do not think Obama wanted to be a dictator. Yes I think Trump does and the evidence of that to me is irrefutable. On the topic of thinking, it is apparent you do not and only continually either parrot you deep state material or insult those who dare to call you out on it. I think about things and have opinions you may not agree with. You do not think about things and reflexively try to fit everything into your preconceived agenda.

I just said above it was wrong. The difference to me is Trump does it because he wants to be a dictator. You disagree fine. But I’m full of it? You don’t like my posts because you’ve found a niche here where you can spout your Deep State talking points, and when you have someone that recognizes your biases for what they are and how they cloud your outlook you have a hissy fit. I get your point.

Wrong. Again you think you are the expert theorist around here but every single tale of your is biased.

I do not know what you are referring to in the latter part of your post. If that happened to a woman nominee I would agree with your stance but I have no knowledge of that happening? I agree with you on Kavanaugh. We disagree on Garland. To me that was neither legal nor acceptable. Legal is not really a term to be used for that fiasco since there were no laws per se surrounding it. But certainly unacceptable. There was a vacant spot, the president nominates, the senate does advise and consent. The senate did not do its constitutional job because of the slimeball from Ky.

Understand. I’m not sure what the best way is to say that. If it were my daughter I’d believe her, but when nothing has been said for decades and then it comes up what do you do? My daughter and I have discussed and even she struggles with it. How do you go back 20 years and then make claims of misconduct?

As for Kavanaugh, I think it was bad. I don't necessarily agree with his judicial views, but presidents get to pick their justices and having an 11th hour woman who had no real evidence of his misconduct was wrong. And I say that as one who has daughters and is firmly on the side of women who, if they feel they have been wronged, should be encouraged to come forward and who should be heard. They just should have some evidence in support. Same thing with this Reid woman and Biden. Garland I thought was ridiculous for the same reason. The president has the right to send up nominees for the court, it's his constitutional responsibility. And they should be considered by the Senate. I am not a big fan of professional politicians and McConnell to me is the slimiest of the current bunch. Because he has already stated he would seat someone this year before the election. Going back to what I would do if I were Obama, or if I had been Trump last fall, I absolutely agree with innocent before proven guilty, a bedrock of our legal foundation. what I am saying is that if I knew I was innocent, and a Congressional committee, using its oversight authority, called my staff as witnesses (or even myself), I would have no problem having myself or them testify. Because I would know I was innocent, and from a more political perspective I know it would look really bad on the opposing party. I believe IG's should be independent, or else they have no real authority. If you haven't caught on yet, I am a big believer on transparency in government. I understand there are some secrets that have to be held based on national security concerns, but the bottom line is everyone in that city works for us and are accountable to us, the citizens.

I didn't think that was right either.

Thanks, like this response. We disagree on a couple things but overall I think we’re on the same page. Again they’ll have them and I suspect you’ll be disappointed in the outcome.

They’ll have hearings. I suspect you’ll be disappointed as you were with Benghazi and as Democrats were last fall.

When he said he has power over all governors was one. I also don’t like firing inspectors general and I don’t like telling Congress they don’t get to exercise their oversight responsibilities by telling folks to ignore subpoenas. As for current Dems I would have wanted Klobuchar. More moderate to me, liked her stance on having to actually have a way to pay for programs. Agree on Kavanaugh. Not my cup of tea; to me I’d want 9 justices that are true middle of the road. But that sadly can’t happen anymore. I agree truth is a is a hard thing to find in DC. Our difference is that to me that door swings both ways.

I voted for Johnson in 2016 because I could not stomach either of the other two choices. I would say in most every presidential election I've voted in I voted for the person I thought would do the least damage. Biden would be this time because I believe Trump wants to be dictator of the US and not president, and while it pains me to do so because of fiscal policies it's not like debt has gone down the past 4 years..

Because I’m not wedded to your deep state conspiracy stuff. Yiou have confirmation bias.You have that as your primary view and select media that supports your preconceived theory. When I look at references many people cite here they are from ultraright wing individuals with an agenda. As ultraleft wing media does as well. Republicans want to investigate? Great. Democrats want to investigate? Great. I’d show up and answer their questions if I believe I’m innocent, regardless of party affiliation.

I am not protecting anyone. You come on here pretending to be all knowing and you're not. Here's what I would do if I were Obama and Biden right now. I would come to Washington, walk to the capital, and demand to have a hearing today. I'd demand open televised hearings. I'd do so because I believe I'm innocent. And guess what? I would have done the same thing if I were Trump several months ago. If you're innocent, you should have no problems standing in front of the American people and its representatives and answer questions. You also should have no problem making sure every single person in this country has their constitutional right to vote protected, because you believe your views and policies should win their vote. I believe in our Constitution and our form of government set within. I believe in the rule of law. Other than your Deep State stuff, I have no idea what you believe in. It looks suspiciously like anarchy.

Then all the more reason to allow your staff to testify. If you are innocent then there should be no problem with folks testifying. And that escapes the point., The point is that there is supposed to be a balance of power as envisioned by our founding fathers. And it is apparent to me that Trump wants to ignore that. I do not recall any other president saying, and I'll paraphrase here, that they have complete power. Do you want a dictator or president? I want a president. And I will come back to one of my original points. If the party labels were different and this were a Democrat would your response be identical. To be fair, I think yours would. I would not say that for many. Yes I voted for McCain. And Romney. I started this off indicating I would like to have a civil discourse on this but expected the opposite. And here you are calling me a liar. As I expected. I have never actually voted for a Democrat for president and my first presidential vote was 1976.

Look at the past week

Inspectors general being fired. Not allowing executive branch members to testify in front of congressional committees charged with oversightz