Republicans block subpoena for Helsinki summit translator

[dank69]

http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-republicans-block-subpoena-for-helsinki-summit-translator-2018-7

Remember this kind of stuff when Democrats fail to take the House or the Senate in November.

I think everyone is right. We liberals just need to be much nicer to the conservatives.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

There's a "two sides", not "bothsides" component here. Presidents have some rights, one of them is to meet in private with others including heads of state. In today's Upsidedown, we have someone abusing that right to the point of absurdity and that's the rub. Congress should not be subpoenaing someone to invade the President's official communications where there is no legal basis in terms of proof of wrongdoing in this instance.

But

With that said this isn't "normal", but intentional concealment where the only legitimate purpose would be for something Trump does not want us to know between himself and Putin. Normally I'd be put off, but this isn't 44, or even 43 in Office. This is someone who had demonstrated treasonous intent and If Congress tried I'd let the SCOTUS decide if it came to it.

Trump doesn't even let his own DNI know what's going on.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

They are right on this in my opinion
The translator is not a sternographer (spelling?), the translator is there to translate not take notes.
If this happens today it will happen again in the future for political gain.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

They are right on this in my opinion
The translator is not a sternographer (spelling?), the translator is there to translate not take notes.
If this happens today it will happen again in the future for political gain.

To play devil's advocate for purposes of discussion, not support of Trump, what could happen if Congress did bring the translator to a hearing?

 

[Jhhnn]

As I said in another thread, if we require translators to testify then we won't have any translators. Calling for it might make good headlines but it's counterproductive in the greater scheme of things.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

To play devil's advocate for purposes of discussion, not support of Trump, what could happen if Congress did bring the translator to a hearing?

Every. Single. Translator for every future President will be required to testify. This it will become impossible for the President to have any private conversations. Extreme left and right pundits will eternally bicker over the choice of words.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

As I said in another thread, if we require translators to testify then we won't have any translators. Calling for it might make good headlines but it's counterproductive in the greater scheme of things.

Every. Single. Translator for every future President will be required to testify. This it will become impossible for the President to have any private conversations. Extreme left and right pundits will eternally bicker over the choice of words.

Two good responses and I'll add that proper foreign relations becomes impossible as there cannot be confidentiality between two leaders of different languages done for legitimate reasons.

Do I want to know what was said? Hell yes. I suspect things worthy of the charge of treason may have come up but even so it breaks the future in itself. We have other means at our disposal. As much as I hate to drag it out, any criminal findings against Trump should wait until after midterms. That way "The deep state" crazies have no basis for saying the timing was set up to attack Trump and his Republican slaves in Congress. Hopefully Dems will make gains and have balls if they win and let justice be done.

 

[OutHouse]

its a bullshit move and blocking this bullshit move was the right call.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Yeah this comes close to overreach into the Executive Branch by congress. I'm on the fence on this one. At the same time there are legitimate concerns on what happened during the meeting that no one seems to know. In that case the GOP should be pressing the admin publicly at this point.

 

[trenchfoot]

Given the situation Trump currently finds himself in where he is being investigated by our own security agencies for his connections with Putin and his oligarch puppets, where he and his Repub controlled Congress is frantically trying his/their best to block, terminate and/or discredit the agencies investigating him, where Trump has openly stated his admiration and respect for Putin, where Trump is a known pathological liar totally undeserving of the trust of the nation he represents, where he has been behaving like a bank robber cornered in the vault trying to explain to the police why he and the bank manager are simply having a discussion over the procedures for emptying out the place of any loose cash lying around, well, I think Trump could at the least act a little more presidential and trustworthy than that.

So here I am faced with all of this and the fact that Trump still has, for some mysteriously awkward and disbelieving reason(s) the backing of the majority of his party's constituency of which I find very very hard to fathom given all that has been revealed of Trump by those of us who have a vested interest in promoting honesty and integrity in our leaders compared with Trump's loyalists who act like they really don't give a shit what Trump does or doesn't do for the nation.

Trump's total lack of moral fiber, honesty, ethics, compassion for his fellow human beings, empathy for the middle class and the poor and his penchant for putting self over all others is very well known and undeniably damaging to the nation's health and welfare. These things alone makes him out to be someone that can't be trusted. Add that to the fact that he's been so secretive of his financial dealings with the Russians, that he wants the sanctions on Putin and his oligarchs lifted, that he's been angling to have Russia given oil exploration rights in the North Atlantic and on and on and on......

I mean come on now, it's much easier to ask why Trump should be trusted given the total lack of reasons in this regard rather than the mounting endless stream of facts and evidence of why he shouldn't.

 

[sandorski]

Though I'd agree that the precedent of this is problematic, it shows the lack of trust in the current POTUS. He should have included someone that could be Subpoenaed, but he didn't, which IMO may have been intentional in order to avoid any kind of oversight. That makes it even more suspicious, especially when he is already under a cloud regarding this very potential relationship. For that reason making an exception is not unreasonable, but should be held off camera and confidentially by a BiPartisan committee, if it were pursued.

 

[Maxima1]

They are right on this in my opinion
The translator is not a sternographer (spelling?), the translator is there to translate not take notes.
If this happens today it will happen again in the future for political gain.

Pretty silly. Donnie is under criminal investigation and has raised a lot of suspicion. Don't see how it makes a broad precedent. Moreover, what's to stop Republicans from doing it in the future if the Democrats are considering it now? The Republicans are already running roughshod over the rule of law.

 

[soundforbjt]

The republicans will do this sometime down the road and then use the excuse that Democrats thought of it first, then scream bloody murder if Democrats try it after the republicans actually do it.

 

[dank69]

The republicans will do this sometime down the road and then use the excuse that Democrats thought of it first, then scream bloody murder if Democrats try it after the republicans actually do it.

This.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's a ridiculous way to proceed. Trump introduced a whole lot of ridiculousness. He's currently trying to bullshit his way through with whataboutism & claims that Obama was a pussy towards Russia even as he moves to roll back the sanctions Obama put in place. Because nobody is tougher on Russia than him.

Ukraine? Sux to be them. Losers! Trump goes with the Winners!

 

[Fern]

To play devil's advocate for purposes of discussion, not support of Trump, what could happen if Congress did bring the translator to a hearing?

Executive Privilege should be invoked. Seems like a classic of what E.P. is all about.

Fern

 

[Jhhnn]

I'll go with this-

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Trump or no Trump we need to let people do this very important job free of becoming fodder for a congressional dog & pony show.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Can Mueller include the interpreter as within the scope of his investigation?

 

[Jhhnn]

Can Mueller include the interpreter as within the scope of his investigation?

I doubt that he would. He's a traditionalist, I think, who'd find the whole notion off-putting. He has several more interesting people with their feet put to the fire & smoke coming off their boots...