Jump to content
leftwinger

House managers to turn attention to obstruction-of-Congress charge against Trump

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Olivaw said:


 

The three branches are not a democracy where you need 2/3 branches to accomplish anything. Each branch has specific powers established in the Constitution and through Judicial precedent. 
 

Ordering the entire federal government to ignore Congress is unprecedented and entirely inconsistent with precedent. It’s a significant threat to the balance of power and congress needs to use it’s most powerful tool to thwart it.
 

The tables will be turned at some future time. We don’t want a Democratic president ignoring Congress either.  Why can’t we all agree on this?

It wasn't the entire federal government, just those departments under the executive 😉

 

I agree it's a bold move but one that is allowed under our current system of checks and balances. 

Share this post


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

It wasn't the entire federal government, just those departments under the executive 😉

 

I agree it's a bold move but one that is allowed under our current system of checks and balances. 

No it's not silly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill Clinton handed over 80,000 documents in his impeachment. And everybody that was supeonaed testified. 

Share this post


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

It wasn't the entire federal government, just those departments under the executive 😉

 

I agree it's a bold move but one that is allowed under our current system of checks and balances. 


Fair enough - it only covered the 2 million + federal civil servants who operate under the Executive branch. Congressional staffers and judges were free to talk to congress. 🙂

Share this post


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

Bill Clinton handed over 80,000 documents in his impeachment. And everybody that was supeonaed testified. 


That’s different, a blowjob was involved. Republicans found it titillating. 😏

 

This is Russia, Ukraine and the integrity of US elections. Republicans are disinterested. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoe Logren: Congress was ready to receive Chief of Staff Mulvaney to testify. Trump ordered Mulvaney not to appear to Congress. This is an attempt by Trump to intimidate a witness.

Share this post


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


That’s different, a blowjob was involved. Republicans found it titillating. 😏

 

This is Russia, Ukraine and the integrity of US elections. Republicans are disinterested. 

 

 

I don't mind Trump subverting US law in order to help Putin attack our nation. Just don't get a blow job.

Share this post


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


That’s different, a blowjob was involved. Republicans found it titillating. 😏

 

This is Russia, Ukraine and the integrity of US elections. Republicans are disinterested. 

 

Yes Trump is Teflon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reviewing testimony by Ambassador Yovanovitch  stating he was threatened by Trump saying "she will go through some things"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

 

I don't mind Trump subverting US law in order to help Putin attack our nation. Just don't get a blow job.

Lol lmao. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Olivaw said:


The President is allowed to challenge congressional subpoenas on a case by case basis but there is no precedent or judicial interpretation which grants him the authority to issue a blanket order to the federal government to ignore congressional subpoenas. If it went to the Judicial branch, how do you think it would rule? I submit that it would rule as It has in the past. The administration has to turn over the data.

 

Is this another process objection? You want the formality of a protracted legal battle that Congress would surely win? 

Get a enforceable subpoena and if the President doesn’t comply then you have obstruction of Congress. Until then all you have Is a piece of paper. 

Share this post


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

Get a enforceable subpoena and if the President doesn’t comply then you have obstruction of Congress. Until then all you have Is a piece of paper. 

 

House attained five legal subpoenas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

Zoe Logren: Congress was ready to receive Chief of Staff Mulvaney to testify. Trump ordered Mulvaney not to appear to Congress. This is an attempt by Trump to intimidate a witness.

Executive privilege. 

Share this post


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

 

House attained five legal subpoenas.

With 0 judiciary review. Not enforceable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

Reviewing testimony by Ambassador Yovanovitch  stating he was threatened by Trump saying "she will go through some things"

Ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the president. She was recalled. Those were "some things ".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

 

House attained five legal subpoenas.

What judge sanction the enforceable subpoenas??? 

Share this post


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

 

go find out 

None. Lazy Democrats could not be bothered with getting judicial authority. They have no case for obstruction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, NeoConvict said:

Executive privilege. 


He didn’t assert Executive privilege. He chose instead to assert that he was above the law and above congressional,oversight. Theron lies the problem.

Share this post


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


He didn’t assert Executive privilege. He chose instead to assert that he was above the law and above congressional,oversight. Theron lies the problem.

 

Neoconvict has no morals. I don't care for his bullshiit

Share this post


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


He didn’t assert Executive privilege. He chose instead to assert that he was above the law and above congressional,oversight. Theron lies the problem.

He issued a blanket screw off order. One easily pierced if Democrats made the effort to get judicial branch sign off on their requests. They foolishly chose to charge ahead without it. They have no case for obstruction of Congress. 

Share this post


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

 

Neoconvict has no morals. I don't care for his bullshiit

Take your lips off my sphincter then. You give five dollar rimjobs at best.

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...