Sunday, May 7, 2017

On eve of fired Justice Department official's testimony, Trump tweets about Russia inquiry Laura King

President Trump went to Twitter on Sunday to criticize the scope and nature of investigations into Russian interfering within the U.S. presidential election back in 2016.Trump’s Sunday tweet did not mention former Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates name or have mentioned to her scheduled testimony on Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.But Trump being Trump  he is repeatedly between constant ongoing congressional and FBI probes of potential collusion between his campaign and Russia, Trump says that investigative attention, and media reports, were misdirected and should be appointed to more important matters. Yates, was serving at the as acting attorney general,until she was fired by Trump at the end of January for refusing to defend Trumps travel ban in court which she has every right and the power too, and it remains under legal challenge for not supporting freedom of religion. She is expected to be questioned by senators about her warnings to the White House in January regarding the then-national security advisor, Michael Flynn. Flynn was fired for misleading Vice President Mike Pence and others about his contacts with the Russian ambassador,there is  caution that Flynn could have left himself vulnerable to Russian blackmail by making untrue statements and his firing.  Flynn’s dismissal came was after the Washington Post reported that he had misled Pence about what discussions in his phone calls with the Russian envoy. Trump has tried to misguide attention from him and his possible ties between Moscow and his campaign, in March, he accused former President Barack Obama of having his wires tapped at Trump Tower. Intelligence officials and congressional investigators have said there is no evidence to support that claim. 

This has to do with AP Gov because this is similar to Nixon and the Watergate situation. I hope the government contines to investigate and find that Russia played a role in his election because that would make him look like a president worse than he actually is, and I hope that the punishment leads to his impeachment and the vice president too because it looks like he fired Flynn to cut loose ends. What do you think of the situation? Do you think Trump receivedaid from russia?What should the punishment be if he did? http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-on-eve-of-fired-justice-official-s-1494159676-htmlstory.html







4 comments:

  1. Can we trust a government to investigate it's own? Nixon should have been brought up on criminal charges but he resigned and then the next president gave him a pardon. Even if the investigation finds him complicit, will anyone or thing hild him accountable? If Russia tampered with the election, should everyone in that administration have to resign and we conduct new elections?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think if he is found guilty he should be impeached then in court because if cheating the presidential election should be a crime and there should be no pardon. If Russia had something to do with election I don't think that we should hold new elections but have a bureaucracy should be assigned to fix it and monitor them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with the point that Ms.Harris made previously about the trust that citizen should be able to place on their government. An election is the foundation of our government and our democracy, the fact that even put elections can not be trusted is a testament to the decline in social values and patriotic morals we hold dear to us. To answer Ms.Harris question I don't believe another election will help because who could we trust to conduct the votes.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I believe that there should be some sort of separate branch to investigate issues like this. As Ms. Harris brought up I don't really feel like we can trust the government to investigate its own. It would have to be something separate that is almost unaffected by the other 3 branches. To prevent it from becoming too powerful the branch should only be able to be active in situations like this one. The only issue with this is that there would have o be a full proof way of getting the right officials to take up this position

    ReplyDelete