Trump threatens to investigate Obama. Does he have the right? - The Best Online Debate Website | - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website |

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.

The best online Debate website -! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Trump threatens to investigate Obama. Does he have the right?
in Politics

He is acting like a petulant dictatorial child with something to hide. He does not have the right to abuse his power.
  1. Live Poll

    Does Trump have the right to investigate Obama?

    6 votes
    1. No.
    2. Yes.

Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place

Details +


  • I haven't seen where Trump said any such thing, but a common refrain found in the media about the Mueller investigation is that "if Trump has nothing to hide, he shouldn't be concerned about an investigation".  I don't see why the same logic wouldn't apply to 0bama.  We've never had a current administration investigate a former administration.  OTOH, we've never seen an administration abuse federal agencies to spy on an opposing candidate's campaign or use an allied campaign's fraudulent oppo research as the basis for an independent investigation.
  • My understanding is that the president does not have such direct power over the Department of Justice. At the same time, he does have the power to fire or appoint various high-ranked employees in Department of Justice. Jeff Sessions resigned just this week over apparently major disagreements with president Trump, and the president is likely to appoint someone as Attorney General who wants to investigate Obama and does not want to investigate Trump.

    Every governmental system is pretty corrupt, and the US system is no exception. Even when the direct power to do something is not available, there are often many indirect ways to use one's other powers to lead to that something done. Whether Trump has the official power to launch the investigation is irrelevant; whether his actions can lead to the launch of such an investigation is a more relevant quest, and the answer is the sounding "yes".

    Such witch hunts after one's predecessors are unprecedented for the US, and are a sign that we are descending into darker times ethics-wise - but they are very common for younger democracies, such as South Korea or Czech Republic. I do not see it as something terrible earthshaking.

    Not to mention that Trump most likely does what he does 99% of the time: talk to gain some publicity, with no actual intention to do anything.
  • @YeshuaBought

    On CNN this morning, there were two news anchors and I think a political strategist and another individaul who was a political commentator, and for nearly 6 minutes of camera time they one at a time talked about Trump, (I think one of them referred to Trump as a "man baby") and neither one of the news anchors questioned whether or not calling Trump a "man baby" was maybe proper neutral tv news outlet etiquette? 

    Google the phrase, it exists.

    It makes wonder, if maybe some of the tv news media outlets, maybe aren't harboring a sort of probable bias towards some of the political representatives that are currently in their political offices as we speak? 

    The glaring issue with POTUS Trump is that he apparently doesn't play political games like some of the liberals appear to.

    He's a business person, who happens to be President of the United States at the same time.

    And some might think that after 24 months of going after Trunp and thinking that he would play the same political games with them that the other former political representatives that are former Presidents maybe played while they were in office? 

    And because Trump doesn't play by the same political rules, it apparently irks some of the Democrats? 

    From news politics 

    "Senator Mitch McConnell, R, Kentucky,  "Openly questioning Wednesday whether the House Democrats strategy of "presidential harassment" will work for them as they are set to retake the majority in January.

    McConnell argued that he does not believe a push by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to obtain the president's tax returns or other moves, including impeachment , will go over well for them politically, as the Republicans have learned in the past.
    The whole issue of "presidential harassment is interesting," McConnell said at a Wednesday press conference, pointing to GOP efforts to impeach former President Bill Clinton in the late 1990s, nothing that it backfired.

    "The Democrats on the House will have to decide just how much presidential harassment they think is a good strategy," McConnell said, "I'm not sure it will work for them." 

    "All I'm doing is making a observation that the business of presidential harassment, which we were deeply engaged in the late 90's, improved the president's approval rating and tanked ours,"McConnell said. "Thus my observation is that might not be a good strategy. But it's up to them to decide how they want to handle that." 

    The above is an engaging article in regards to presidential harassment. 
  • @TTKDB Freedom of speech and the press are rights. Trump is a mentally deranged man baby, and everyone knows it. If you don't like speech on tv, turn the channel, or get out of doge.
  • @YeshuaBought

    "Freedom of speech and the press are rights." 

    So besides the TV, what newspaper's would you recommend that I should avoid reading, instead of watching the news on TV then?

    Basic journalism is supposed to be based on this criteria; 

    Any news story is about the "what, when, where, why, who, and the how." 

    So when the millions of the citizens in the United States, turn on the news they are looking to be informed by any news media outlet, and the goings on in the country.

    (But when some in the news appear to be personally trashing an individual, that goes against what basic journalism is, isn't it?

    Do you think that some of the  press has a right to act that way?)

    (Or, some of the press, I would imagine should also be able to maintain an inner system of checks and balances to help keep it's individual journalistic integrity intact.

    Or do you think the press should be this way?)

    Because it would seem that some of the news media/ press seem to have dropped what the basic elements of journalism of what the news is supposed to be comprised of, and instead replaced those known journalism standards apparently with opinionated commentary instead?  

    "Trump is a mentally deranged man baby, and everyone knows it. If you don't like speech on tv, turn the channel, or get out of dodge."

    I believe in a fair press informing the millions of the citizens in our country in a neutral and fair manner, and informing the entirety of this country as a whole, instead of maybe choosing one side over the other? 

    Do you agree with a fair an neutral press? 

    Anybody should be able to tune to any of these news media outlets, and be neutrally informed by the press in a fair and neutral manner;


    Or would any of the public be wrong for thinking that when they turn on any of the above news media outlets TV stations, that they may not be able to get some probable fair and neutral news media content from any of them? 
  • @YeshuaBought

    Liking free speech does not mean liking every instance of exercising free speech. I may respect someone's right to berate an individual, but I do not have to respect them actually getting out of their way to launch a hate campaign against some individual just because they disagree with their views.

    I cannot stand Trump, but I also do not broadcast my feelings 24/7 for everyone to see, for years and years and years, until everyone gets so sick of me, they turn to marginal conspiracy sources instead just to get away from me.

    What these primary media channels do to Trump - is despicable. They should criticize his policies, his job as a president - instead, they resort to endless cheap personal attacks, unverified claims, putting words out of context, etc. That is especially noticeable in contrast with the previous two presidential terms, when companies like CNN turned a blind eye to every fault of that administration and went after its critics instead. It is okay to have a political leaning; it is not okay to throw consistency and integrity out of the window over it. The media should be held to a higher standard than "we have free speech, so it is okay for them to say whatever they want".

    You are right that if one does not want to hear what the media have to say, they can just turn off the channel or close the website. It is, however, important to point these things out, because they affect the opinion of dozens millions people, and they are exactly the things that lead populists into power, who play on people's frustrations with the extreme media biases and offer what can be seen as a viable alternative.

    This is a free country. We cannot dictate how one makes money. We can, however, provide feedback as we see fit, since freedoms apply to all sides, not just to those you like.
  • @TTKDB I don't watch tv. I have bad adhd and can't take take anything for it. While I am a progressive, I get my news from a variety of sources online and prefer to weigh both sides of the story. I alone bear the responsibility for my news and hate depending on someone else for my personal choices, like which media I choose to believe. I get updates from the ACLJ, AND the ACLU. Maybe I am center left instead of all the way left, because I consider indidual issues, instead of buying into a collective.
  • If Obama could spy on Trump during his 2016 election campaign, then I think it would be fair that Trump also investigate Obama. You never know what he's plotting to do to him. (Also I accidentally pressed on "no" when I should have pressed on "yes" on the poll.)
    “Communism is evil. Its driving forces are the deadly sins of envy and hatred.” ~Peter Drucker 

    "It's not a gun control problem, it's a cultural control problem."
    Bob Barr
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019, All rights reserved. | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us
Awesome Debates
Terms of Service

Get In Touch