Congressman Dan BishopKonto zweryfikowane

This is asinine. Were their conditions that you have to investigate my political opponent? If not, then that seems like a pretty big distinction. I can hear the argument that this isn’t worth removal. The idea that Trump did nothing wrong is itself corrupt and brainless.https://twitter.com/MarshaBlackburn/status/1220372381325238273 …

if we're going to make up arguments, then your argument would be if corruption exists, then it would be wrong for to investigate if it was a political opponent?

No, if Trump told DOJ to investigate it, that’s his prerogative. Leveraging foreign aid to force another government to investigate a domestic political opponent should be out of bounds for the President.

Using aide to force a country to investigate corruption is not out of bounds. That would be an absurd position to hold.

So when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, if she had told Putin no more aid until you investigate Donald Trump and Don Jr. trying to make a business deal in Russia that I believe is corrupt, you would have been perfectly fine with that?

If there were an articulable basis for suspicion of corrupt wrongdoing in frmr ofc, absolutely. See, eg, DOJ IG report on Obama’s (FBI) investigation of opposing campaign. Interview of George P based on tip from Aussies, fine. Subsequent FISA spying w/o basis was not.

Is your view that a corrupt former official achieves absolute immunity from investigation by declaring a candidacy?

No, it is my view that the President can’t be involved in leveraging taxpayer money in a way that might result in his domestic political gain. If an investigation into his political opponent is necessary, he needs to be firewalled from it. Not the lead negotiator.