General Question

Yellowdog's avatar

Can congress withhold or withdraw funding for Attorney General Barr and the DOJ if they begin probing into the origins of the Trump / Russia narrative?

Asked by Yellowdog (12183points) April 18th, 2019

Attorney General William Barr will look into the origins of the Christopher Steele dossier and its use to obtain FISA warrants to surveil the Trump campaign. Many Americans want to know how all this Russia collusion narrative got started.

My question is, isn’t all the mostly Democrat congress has to do in order for these investigations to cease, is to simply de-fund the Department of Justice and William Barr?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

15 Answers

Hawaii_Jake's avatar

The Congress isn’t mostly Democratic. Only the House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats. The Senate is controlled by the Republicans. The 2 houses of Congress must work together to fund the government, and since one part is controlled by the Republicans, they will not defund the Dept. of Justice.

zenvelo's avatar

The origins are known, although the GOP refuses to accept the truth. It started with one of Marco Rubio’s backers attempting to get dirt on Trump during the primaries. So it wouldn’t be enough for anyone to shut down the DOJ over known facts.

Yellowdog's avatar

Well, you are right that the origins of the Trump/Russia collusion narrative and the Steele dossier are well known and documented. But you are wrong about what that origin is.

It was written by Christopher Steele and paid for by Hillary Clinton by funneling money through the law firm Perkins Coie

Darth_Algar's avatar

Does it matter what the origins are? If you go to the police with evidence of criminal activity by your neighbor should the police dismiss your evidence because you don’t like your neighbor?

seawulf575's avatar

Does it matter what the origins are? Of COURSE it does!!! You had unsubstantiated opposition research being used as the basis for of the entire investigation. It was used to obtain FISA warrants. It was given credibility without verification by the FBI. That means that the FBI has been turned into a political weapon. Is that acceptable to you?!? If you don’t investigate this now, you give tacit acceptance to that sort of behavior. So unless it is your goal to live under a dictatorship where the secret police do whatever they want to whomever they want, you should be clamoring for this investigation into the origins.

Yellowdog's avatar

The overwhelming effort to do away with Barr is because many on the Left do not want all of this out. That’s why I wonder if congress will withdraw funding of the DOJ

But more importantly, a lot of people responsible for the disinformation foisted on the American people these past two years will go to jail. Withdrawing the DOJ’s funding might be how they would keep any investigations from going that far.

Darth_Algar's avatar

What’s the weather like on the planet where you two live?

flutherother's avatar

I’ll tell you the origins of the Trump collusion narrative. The Russians, and possibly others but certainly the Russians, made significant attempts to impact the 2016 elections.

Trump and his associates also had extensive business dealings with the Russians and had met with Russian officials on numerous occasions. It was only prudent to investigate the possibility of collusion to clear the air if for no other reason.

seawulf575's avatar

Yes, yes, I know…it’s PRUDENT to investigate. So would agree, then, that it would be PRUDENT to investigate the origins of the Trump/Russia investigation, right? After all, there is strong evidence that Hillary, the DNC, and the FBI may have colluded to screw Trump over, right? Wouldn’t it be PRUDENT to investigate that since it points to the FBI acting as a political weapon?

flutherother's avatar

If you accept that it was prudent to investigate the Trump collusion question there is really no need for any more investigations.

Yellowdog's avatar

And, what was the Trump collusion lie based on? Facts? Evidence?

It originated with Obama— Hillary Clinton was cleared of REAL crimes (including destruction of evidence, emails, servers, etc etc) and Trump was HEAVILLY laden with completely fabricated ones using powerful British and U.S. intelligence agencies to sway or steal an election. Once elected, this same propaganda, completely fabricated, was used to try and sabotage the Trump presidency. Never before in U.S. history has there been a coup attempt against a U.S. president.

Lets hope that Brennan, Comey, Clapper, Schiff, Stzrok and others see some lengthy prison terms. Right now, I’d give it a 50/50 chance. Why do you think the Left has become so militant about “impeaching” William Barr?

zenvelo's avatar

cleared of REAL crimes

yep, cleared of crimes that Darrel Issa and Trey Gowdy, the GOP House pit bulls were never, ever, ever able to demonstrate or prove.

And Trump’s birther movement, “this same propaganda, completely fabricated, was used to try and sabotage the Obama presidency. Never before in U.S. history has there been a coup attempt against a U.S. president.”

Get your facts straight @Yellowdog;

Yellowdog's avatar

(1) No one attempted to sabotage the Obama presidency. That kind of overrules everything you said.’

(2) No one ever spied on the Obama campaign from a presidential office (or any other presidential campaign before, in U.S. History.

(3) Obama was the darling of the American media. The American media were a part of this against Trump

(4) It hasn’t quite yet sunken in, but it is now plain that a real, actual coup attempt was made the first time in American history. And Obama may well go down as the main culprit.

zenvelo's avatar

1. The GOP and Trump in particular did their damndest to sabotage the Obama Presidency. You cannot ignore Mitch McConnell “we will make Obama a one term President”. Trump spent years trying to prove Obama was not a legitimate President.

2. No one spied on the Trump campaign from the White House. Obama is being criticized for not taking more action to stop Russian interference in the election.

3. Media darling? Obama was given four weeks to completely turn the economy around before Rick Santelli on CNBC (on February 19, 2009) ranted and started the Tea Party Movement, and Fox News spent the next eight years condemning every single action that Obama took. They even criticized the Obama Administration for how Osama Bin Laden was caught.

4. This is not a coup, there is no armed takeover of the government. More exaggeration and misstatement from Trump who cannot keep his lies consistent.

Darth_Algar's avatar


A coup d’etat is the, usually, but not always, violent, overthrow of an existing government. There is no coup here. Even if Trump were removed from office the United States government remains in place. If Trump were removed from office (which could, by the way, only happen by processes laid out in the Constitution, the cornerstone of our democracy) then Mike Pence becomes President, members of the presidential cabinet remain in position and all members of Congress remain in office. Continuity of government endures. That is not a coup.

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther