icon bookmark-bicon bookmarkicon cameraicon checkicon chevron downicon chevron lefticon chevron righticon chevron upicon closeicon v-compressicon downloadicon editicon v-expandicon fbicon fileicon filtericon flag ruicon full chevron downicon full chevron lefticon full chevron righticon full chevron upicon gpicon insicon mailicon moveicon-musicicon mutedicon nomutedicon okicon v-pauseicon v-playicon searchicon shareicon sign inicon sign upicon stepbackicon stepforicon swipe downicon tagicon tagsicon tgicon trashicon twicon vkicon yticon wticon fm
1 Oct, 2020 20:16

‘What could go wrong?’ Former FBI assistant director suggests bipartisan committee ‘VETTING’ candidates – to prevent another Trump

‘What could go wrong?’ Former FBI assistant director suggests bipartisan committee ‘VETTING’ candidates – to prevent another Trump

Frank Figliuzzi, former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence, says a President Trump “can’t happen again,” so a “bipartisan committee,” rather than voters, should “vet” and approve future candidates.

Figliuzzi, who worked under Robert Mueller at the FBI, made it clear during a Thursday appearance on MSNBC he buys into conspiracy theories about Donald Trump being influenced by the Russian government, calling him “the most vulnerable president in history.” 

Vaguely mentioning various business dealings the president had previously had with foreign companies, the current NBC News national security contributor said the US needs to have a “national discussion” to avoid another Trump.

Also on rt.com Stiff competition: Pornhub traffic plummeted during Trump-Biden debate, particularly in swing states

“We’ve got to have a national discussion about how we vet a presidential candidate. We screwed this up,” he said. 

The NBC contributor suggests a “bipartisan committee” that would require tax returns and personal financial information to be handed over before a candidate can be approved.

“We got this wrong, and this can’t happen again,” he said of Trump.

He doubled down on the comments later, reposting them himself on Twitter. 

“Here's why I say it’s time for a different approach on vetting a candidate,” he wrote.

Figliuzzi’s suggestion of giving a vague “committee” more power over the selection of presidential candidates than actual voters has earned criticism from both liberals and conservatives on social media, with many seeing the idea as “scary” and a step in the direction of countries where people have little power in who is put in power.

“Reminds me of Iran’s Guardian Council, which has 12 members. The Guardian Council approves candidates for president and majlis (Congress),” Huffington Post journalist Yashar Ali tweeted, adding, “Great idea, let’s become like Iran… that’s going to turn out well, I’m sure.”

“Or, and hear me out, we don’t do this,” Washington Examiner writer Jerry Dunleavy simply responded. 

If you like this story, share it with a friend!