View Single Post
  #75  
Old 05-09-2019, 03:14 PM
Steophan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 8,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Are you aware that the Supreme Court found that forcing Americans to testify before the House Un-American Affairs Committee to interrogate them about possible Communist sympathies was found to be a "legitimate legislative purpose?"

On your scale of legitimate purposes, where does routine oversight of tax laws as they apply to the President rank in relation to a witch hunt for Communists? It sounds like lower, but I just want to be sure.
My scale of legitimate purposes is entirely irrelevant here, as is yours. It's the opinion of the majority of the Supreme Court judges that matters here, and as it stands they will almost certainly find for Trump and the Republicans if there's a fig leaf of precedent to hide behind (and quite possibly even if there isn't).

It was the aftermath of the HUAC situation that lead to the Supreme Court decision I referred to earlier, which placed limits on Congressional investigations, including that their job is not to investigate crimes.

My opinion, ultimately, is that Congress should not be investigating allegations of crimes, and that it has avenues open to removing an unacceptable or incompetent President without needing to do so, and that any protections that President has against investigation or prosecution will end when that happens. The problem is, Congress does not agree that the President is unacceptable or incompetent.

As for your actual question, as to which is worse, there's not much difference. In both cases, those being investigated were accused of being traitors with ties to Russia. The problem with HUAC is that it kept catching people who weren't communists, not with it's stated purpose.