A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters believe a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigation of Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump in a legal and unbiased fashion, up from 49% who said the same in January. Thirty percent (30%) disagree, but a sizable 16% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Sixty-three percent (63%) of Republicans are calling for an outside prosecutor to investigate the FBI, along with 52% of voters not affiliated with either major political party. Among Democrats, 46% favor a special prosecutor, up from just 38% four months ago.
Now first and foremost, this is better worded poll. You are only allowed to support, oppose, or consider yourself undecided. There is no range of possible answers, that end up with certain people actually "not knowing" how to even answer.
All three political groups are more likely than not to support a special prosecutor, either with an outright majority with Republicans (63%) and Independents (52%), or a plurality with the Democrats (46-34). Moreover, the gap between Republicans and Democrats is nowhere near as large as they are in regards to the Mueller probe.
You can make an argument that there is bi-partisan support for a Special Counsel probe looking into the FBI. There is not any real bi-partisan support at this time for the ongoing Mueller probe.
26 comments:
You mean Rasmussen Republican poll?
Trump has double digit disapproval on all recent polls except
Rasmussen's and Fox News.'
https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
Never once has he been above water on the RealClearPolitics aggregate. That is simply astounding.
Well, actually not. Not for Trump.
Rasmussen is as legitimate as Info Wars.
This was designed to limit the Muller investigation.
Afederal judge on Friday tossed out former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's lawsuit challenging the scope of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
In her decision, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson wrote that a civil suit is not the way for Manafort to challenge actions by the prosecutors who are working for Mueller's office.
"A civil case is not the appropriate vehicle for taking issue with what a prosecutor has done in the past or where he might be headed in the future," wrote Berman Jackson, who was appointed by President Obama.
"It is a sound and well-established principle that a court should not exercise its equitable powers to interfere with or enjoin an ongoing criminal investigation when the defendant will have the opportunity to challenge any defect in the prosecution in the trial court or on direct appeal.
"Therefore, the Court finds that this civil complaint must be dismissed."
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/385202-judge-tosses-out-manafort-suit-challenging-muellers-authority?amp
Wages rise fastest in 10 years.
The Lost years have Expired.
67% support the Mueller probe as something that is important, as do even 40% of Republicans. The probe clearly has bipartisan support as well as strong popular support in general.
It's kind of funny to cite a large segment one party acting in hyper-partisan fashion to oppose an impartial investigation into that party's leader, and then claim that it means that the "issue" of the investigation is partisan.
You know what would solve this, prevent this sort of thing from happening? Don't select this sort of self-absorbed, unethical and unstable individual, who likes to associate with criminal types and who encourages enemies of the USA in their attack on our democracy, as your presidential candidate. Then Republicans won't have to decide between supporting their leader or supporting an investigation.
Lol @ the New WP.
The sun rose in the East. WP would argue it didn't.
So harsh on Jill Hillary, why?
"Don't select this sort of self-absorbed, unethical and unstable individual, who likes to associate with criminal types and who encourages enemies of the USA in their attack on our democracy, as your presidential candidate." The New WP
I was more harsh than that on Hillary, and on Jill Stein for that matter. You're just getting old and can't remember. Or something.
Poor baby
Tom Brokaw Rips "Sensational" Accuser Claims: I Was "Ambushed and Then Perp Walked"
WhataPussy
Don't be concerned, it's not my problem.
I was more harsh than that on Hillary, and on Jill Stein for that matter." The New WP
So?
《《《 I edited the catty mangnia bleeding part of TNWP's post》》
So your 3 or 4 daily digs over Hillary losing, or double standards regarding Hillary, have had exactly zero impact over the several months that you've been doing it. I thought you might appreciate knowing, if not then carry on.
Now our esteemed host is depending on "on line" polls as the source of his opinion....I do recall his railing against those type of polls not long agp...now he embraces them because they support his bias...Shocking he can be so transparent and naive at the same time...Kinda like the fraud of kansas who just makes up numbers like menstral, to support his opinion....The lost busch years and 2.3% gdp show trumps vast success....LOL
Anonymous wphamilton said...
67% support the Mueller probe as something that is important, as do even 40% of Republicans. The probe clearly has bipartisan support as well as strong popular support in general.
splendid. so a large percentage of the american people are woefully uninformed or misinformed. sounds about right.
kim strassel get's it:
On "Happening Now," Strassel said criticizing or threatening to fire Mueller won't help Trump, and explained two bold actions she believes he could take to "reset" the Russia dynamic.
She said the first is to have his legal team make the argument that the Mueller probe is no longer looking into possible collusion, but instead obstruction of justice, which she said is a "non-starter" on constitutional grounds.
"You cannot construe a president to be obstructing justice when he's engaged in his core constitutional functions, and that includes directing law enforcement and firing people like Mr. Comey," Strassel said, explaining that could take the entire obstruction topic off the table.
She said the second action Trump could take would be to direct the Justice Department to completely release everything underlying the FBI's Russia investigation and the FISA application to surveil former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.
"Obviously with deference to sources and methods -- we don't want that to come out -- but the public just needs to see all of this. And it's very clear the Department of Justice and FBI are doing their very best to keep it hidden, even from Congress," Strassel said.
She explained that would shed light on many unanswered questions, such as what role the infamous anti-Trump dossier played in the FISA application.
"This is an unusual circumstance. And this is needed to restore some confidence in law enforcement, and to just start with a clean slate."
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/04/27/kim-strassel-trump-could-reset-russia-dynamic-these-2-bold-actions
obstruction of justice, eh? a tall order since trump was and is well within his constitutional authority of the executive branch tio fire a piece of shit like comey.
he's well within his authority to fire mueller for chrissakes. what prevents him is politics, not executive authority.
you fucking clowns have been paying too much attention to max scene waters and not enough to the actual law. even alan dershowitz has stated repeatedly that trump has the authority to fire who he wants for whatever reason he wants.
this charade is being kept alive by a sore loser press and sore loser democrats.
and yes, we should follow this precedent the moment a democrat president is inaugurated. or better yet, trump can just start wiretapping all the democrat candidates in the run up to the next election.
splendid. so a large percentage of the american people are woefully uninformed or misinformed. sounds about right.
However you feel about their opinion, most are still supportive of Mueller investigating Trump.
If and when the investigation wraps up, that large percentage will become better informed, so there's that to look forward to.
"Jill Stien cost Hillary the Election."
Jill Stien is a waste of space, her nullity having the sole beneficial affect of costing Hillary a point or two here and there.
December 01, 2016 - 03:43 PM EST
Trump's victory margin smaller than total Stein votes in key swing states"
Ok, one more reason the self-absorbed, unethical and unstable individual, who likes to associate with criminal types and who encourages enemies of the USA in their attack on our democracy, as your presidential candidate losy.
"Ok, one more reason the self-absorbed, unethical and unstable individual, who likes to associate with criminal types and who encourages enemies of the USA in their attack on our democracy" is now President.
Could have been worse. Will be better, soon enough.
Poor Baby WP.
Digs, nope. Jill Stien cost Hillary the Election.
Everyday I celibrate the Trump Win.
this charade is being kept alive by a sore loser press and sore loser democrats"
Look at the butt hurt 5 liberal stooges of CHT.
One belives Pres. Will soon be Impeached, or is he talking assassination????
or is he talking assassination???? By his wife would work for most....
And that is how he earns his title "Dopie" everyday.
If you only had a degree.....LOLOLOL
Sucks when others speak for you.....eh asshole???????
Blogger KD said...
Poor Baby WP.
Digs, nope. Jill Stien cost Hillary the Election
The only thing she did right IMO. Poor KD, obsessed with Stein and mentally stuck in 2016.
Post a Comment