Trump openly admitted on live TV to doing the thing he's accused of in the impeachment inquiry

[GodLovesCats]

I'm confused.

I don't think that the public has any right to the content of conversation between the president and foreign leaders.

I believe that the president has the right to restrict the access to any of these calls to everyone, with the only exception being that there must be a record for the future, a tape with no access can meet this need.

The problem is Donald Trump asked a White House staffer to remove specific words and sentences so the public can't see quid pro quo before relasing it, which is a strong hint that he is hiding a crime.

 

[SimplyMe]

I'm confused.

I don't think that the public has any right to the content of conversation between the president and foreign leaders.

I believe that the president has the right to restrict the access to any of these calls to everyone, with the only exception being that there must be a record for the future, a tape with no access can meet this need.

The issue with that is that there are people in the administration that need to know what the President and the other leader talked about and any agreements they reached. As has been pointed out, the President determines foreign policy and those that implement that policy (White House staffers, State Department personal, the DoD) need to know what those policies are, what things may have been promised or issues that our two countries may want to work on together.

To give an example of this, Trump did have a private discussion with Putin, at the summit in Helsinki, and apparently no notes were taken. A few days later, Russia made requests of our military, claiming that Trump had said we would do it -- and it was unclear if it was something Trump agreed to but never let anyone know, or if it was a misunderstanding of Putin's that he and Trump talked about but didn't agree to do. Or, if it was something that they didn't really talk about but Putin, knowing Trump didn't have any transcripts of the talks created, felt he could "fake" -- with Russia claiming it was in their transcript know Trump had no evidence that it wasn't talked about.

That isn't to say that a President can't have a private discussion -- just that it tends to be a bad idea. The point remains though, it still doesn't require any transcript to be placed on a Classified server; there are other ways to limit access without classifying it.

 

[Kaon]

Apples & oranges

Israel's corruption perception index is twice as good as Ukraine's:

Corruption Perceptions Index - Wikipedia

Only for people who are afraid of being called anti-Semites (almost the entire planet) for calling out Israel's hypocrisy.

Israel is savage; the exiles and role as resource barons for the region should be enough to raise an eyebrow - not to mention the "removal" of those who bring up genetic Hebrew lineage, and their right to be in Israel.

 

[mark46]

Let's be clear. There is no such law. If Congress wants the right to review every conversation between the president and a foreign leader, then they should pass such legislation

Personally, I think that this is a terrible idea. It greatly limits the ability of the president to conduct foreign policy. Historically, One of the crucial tools of the president was private conversations with foreign leaders.

I'm sure that there is lots that the PM or president of a country might have said to Obama that they wouldn't have wanted the Republican leadership to hear. So, in 2019, it is just wrong (IMO) to require that a foreign leader to have all conversations with Trump receivable by Pelosi and Shumer.
=====
I think I understand your view of wanting to move to a greater role for Congress in foreign policy. I disagree.

I think another exception must be to accommodate the oversight role of Congress.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Nobody said Congress should review every conversation between the President and a foreign leader. This, however, is one that Trump MUST be impeached for, so an exception needs to be made. Even if there is a law like you suggested, the July 25 transcript would still be subject to a subpoena.

 

[mark46]

You saying so doesn't make it true.

My opinion is different than yours. I believe that Trump can call Putin on the phone and not disclose this to Congress, even under subpoena. Congress requires a record for historical purposes.

Nobody said Congress should review every conversation between the President and a foreign leader. This, however, is one that Trump MUST be impeached for, so an exception needs to be made. Even if there is a law like you suggested, the July 25 transcript would still be subject to a subpoena.

 

[mark46]

You implied that they should be able to monitor any conversation they want. If this were the case, then the president should allow no one to be on calls that he wants confidential.

Nobody said Congress should review every conversation between the President and a foreign leader. This, however, is one that Trump MUST be impeached for, so an exception needs to be made. Even if there is a law like you suggested, the July 25 transcript would still be subject to a subpoena.

 

[GodLovesCats]

You implied that they should be able to monitor any conversation they want. If this were the case, then the president should allow no one to be on calls that he wants confidential.

I only implied this specific call should be subpoenaed becaues it was clearly illegal and the cause for a big investigation by Congress.

 

[mark46]

If the president had a bit more care, NO ONE would have been on the call but the president and the president of Ukraine. Then, there would have been no BIG investigation by Congress.

I only implied this specific call should be subpoenaed becaues it was clearly illegal and the cause for a big investigation by Congress.

 

[GodLovesCats]

If the president had a bit more care, NO ONE would have been on the call but the president and the president of Ukraine. Then, there would have been no BIG investigation by Congress.

Actually it is normal procedure for someone else to be on the call. Somebody has to write the transcript. I have no idea why Vindman and Williams were in the Situation Room though.

 

[mark46]

Sigh

Yes, it IS normal for someone else to be on the call, and several SHOULD be on the call. HOWEVER, if Congress insists on the right to the contents of every call that they find out about, then my position is that the president shouldn't have anyone on the call, so that he can have confidential discussions between heads of state.

Actually it is normal procedure for someone else to be on the call. Somebody has to write the transcript. I have no idea why Vindman and Williams were in the Situation Room though.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I never said Congress should be on every phone call. I was saying this call must be subpoenaed because it is the source of the investigation.