Jump to content
WillFranklin

Why Didn't Trump Allow Bolton, Giuliani And Mulvaney To Testify?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

No president has ever refused  to release no  information at all as Trump has.

No president has been the subject of the lies and investigations aimed at him. 

Today, the FBI sent an apology for spying on the campaign. 

 

Why would he cooperate with people who have done nothing but lie about him since before he was elected.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Golfboy said:

No president has been the subject of the lies and investigations aimed at him. 

Today, the FBI sent an apology for spying on the campaign. 

 

Why would he cooperate with people who have done nothing but lie about him since before he was elected.

 

 

 

Trump is busted.

 

You look like shit today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, king of the county said:

Military is no better than it was 

before Trump. No one has invaded

 

economy There will be a crash

 

 

taxes

Trump has  lowered income from taxes, and raised money spent. Its borrow and squander all the way,and it is not sustainable.

 

trade

His trade deals suck

 

 

security 

We are no safer than we were with Obama.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, WillFranklin said:

 

 

Trump is busted.

 

You look like shit today.

busted?  you still can't find a crime, dumbass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

busted?  you still can't find a crime, dumbass.

 

This is not criminal court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WillFranklin said:

This is not criminal court.

So why are you demanding witnesses and evidence?

Just take the damn vote.  You're going to lose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

So why are you demanding witnesses and evidence?

Just take the damn vote.  You're going to lose. 

 

 

As more people tell what happened, the vote may change, and there is more of a price for Republicans to pay each day.

 

We like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WillFranklin said:

As more people tell what happened, the vote may change, and there is more of a price for Republicans to pay each day.

We like that.

lol. 

This is Kavanaugh, all over again.

You've got nothing. 

 

But go ahead and call witnesses and let's draw this out a couple months. 

That'll be the end of the Sanders, Warren, Klobachar and Spartacus campaigns. 

And in the end, Trump will still be your President, and he'll be reelected. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2019 at 9:54 AM, WillFranklin said:

Why Didn't Trump Allow Bolton, Giuliani And Mulvaney To Testify?

 

 

Quote

 

relaxing-outside-smiley-emoticon.gif

'Cause Spanky's

GUILTY AS HELL!!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, neilcar said:

Why didn’t the dims in the house get an enforceable subpoenas.

 

The Federal courts had ruled on that matter before and the subpoenas were enforceable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

lol. 

This is Kavanaugh, all over again.

You've got nothing. 

 

But go ahead and call witnesses and let's draw this out a couple months. 

That'll be the end of the Sanders, Warren, Klobachar and Spartacus campaigns. 

And in the end, Trump will still be your President, and he'll be reelected. 

 

 

We might start with Bolton.

 

But so many have told us Trump's scheme.

 

It all matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, WillFranklin said:

We might start with Bolton.

But so many have told us Trump's scheme.

It all matches.

Yea, I know, it's Mueller Time!!!

I almost feel sorry for you.   Then I just start laughing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

Yea, I know, it's Mueller Time!!!

I almost feel sorry for you.   Then I just start laughing.

 

Biden and Trump can both lose this 2020 thing.

 

Ever think of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2019 at 10:04 AM, WillFranklin said:

No Republicans can answer?

Ducky just answered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kfools said:

Ducky just answered. 

 

Not in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WillFranklin said:

 

Not in this thread.

Yes in this thread. 

 

he cited executive privilege.  He further stated every president has invoked it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kfools said:

Yes in this thread. 

 

he cited executive privilege.  He further stated every president has invoked it. 

 

I can't find that.

 

Anyway the witnesses were legally requested to testify.

 

So that point is moot.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WillFranklin said:

 

I can't find that.

 

Anyway the witnesses were legally requested to testify.

 

So that point is moot.

 

 

First two responses. 

 

 

How the phuck can you miss it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WillFranklin said:

 

I can't find that.

 

Anyway the witnesses were legally requested to testify.

 

So that point is moot.

 

 

In any case executive privilege is also legal. The president has equal powers to the house. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kfools said:

In any case executive privilege is also legal. The president has equal powers to the house. 

 

Executive Privilege is no bar to testimony before impeachment investigators.

 

https://www.justsecurity.org/66941/executive-privilege-is-no-bar-to-testimony-before-impeachment-investigators/

 

 

It is not clear if Cooper or the others who have provided testimony were concerned about the executive privilege issue, but no matter: the privilege presents no bar to such testimony in the context of a presidential impeachment investigation—and, following the October 31 resolution, there should be no doubt that the House is engaged in an impeachment inquiry.

There are three reasons why executive privilege is not an impediment to the appearance of any witness before the House Intelligence Committee in the context of an impeachment inquiry. First, history suggests that, where the authority of the House to investigate the President is concerned, impeachment is different. Presidents have claimed from the earliest days of the republic that they have a protectable interest in the confidentiality of communications with their advisors. In 1786, for example, George Washington famously declined to turn over certain papers related to the Jay Treaty—but, as professor Jean Galbraith has observed, Washington carved out a specific exception: when the House has the “purpose … of an impeachment.” His advisors agreed that executive privilege ought not apply to impeachment.

The second reason why executive privilege does not apply in the impeachment context flows from the Supreme Court’s 1974 decision in United States v. Nixon. There, the court considered the question whether the privilege protected from disclosure information sought in connection with an ongoing federal criminal proceeding. As an initial matter, the court observed that the importance of full candor from the president’s advisors “is too plain to require further discussion.” It follows that the need to prevent disclosure of such communications drives the privilege, to ensure the president is not denied the honest counsel he needs to undertake the various duties and responsibilities of the office.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, WillFranklin said:

 

The Federal courts had ruled on that matter before and the subpoenas were enforceable.

No they have not. You just made that up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WillFranklin said:

 

Executive Privilege is no bar to testimony before impeachment investigators.

 

https://www.justsecurity.org/66941/executive-privilege-is-no-bar-to-testimony-before-impeachment-investigators/

 

 

It is not clear if Cooper or the others who have provided testimony were concerned about the executive privilege issue, but no matter: the privilege presents no bar to such testimony in the context of a presidential impeachment investigation—and, following the October 31 resolution, there should be no doubt that the House is engaged in an impeachment inquiry.

There are three reasons why executive privilege is not an impediment to the appearance of any witness before the House Intelligence Committee in the context of an impeachment inquiry. First, history suggests that, where the authority of the House to investigate the President is concerned, impeachment is different. Presidents have claimed from the earliest days of the republic that they have a protectable interest in the confidentiality of communications with their advisors. In 1786, for example, George Washington famously declined to turn over certain papers related to the Jay Treaty—but, as professor Jean Galbraith has observed, Washington carved out a specific exception: when the House has the “purpose … of an impeachment.” His advisors agreed that executive privilege ought not apply to impeachment.

The second reason why executive privilege does not apply in the impeachment context flows from the Supreme Court’s 1974 decision in United States v. Nixon. There, the court considered the question whether the privilege protected from disclosure information sought in connection with an ongoing federal criminal proceeding. As an initial matter, the court observed that the importance of full candor from the president’s advisors “is too plain to require further discussion.” It follows that the need to prevent disclosure of such communications drives the privilege, to ensure the president is not denied the honest counsel he needs to undertake the various duties and responsibilities of the office.

 

Others disagree. 

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/479678-gop-warns-of-drawn-out-executive-privilege-battle-over-bolton-testimony

 

This is what the courts are for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, neilcar said:

No they have not. You just made that up. 

Yes he did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...