Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 112

Thread: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

  1. #71
    Horrible Bastard Hamish Howl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Tucson
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    3,359

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus1124 View Post
    Really? When did Republicans launch unprecedently lopsided impeachment proceedings for Obama's various scandals and Executive abuse of power (more unanimous...meaning not even his own appointees ruled for his administration) than his predecessors.

    Hell, by the standards Trump is held to by the pathologically deranged left, Obama should have been hung for treason for aiding Holder's willful refusal to comply with Congressional subpoena in the Operation Fast and Furious scandal.
    Two words: Merrick Garland.

    Quit whining, this is what you demanded.
    Giraffes can't enjoy coffee because it's cold by the time it reaches their stomach. But you never think about that, because you only think about yourself.

  2. #72
    Advisor The AntiDonald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    N. Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    521

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony60 View Post
    When I refer to "his people", I'm talking about the top level, not everyone. His inner circle, so to speak. Completely privileged and protected by the Constitution. That's what they are trying to violate.
    Not if the discussions involved the commission of a crime. That would also be for a judge to figure out. This could take along time. I also get the impression that the courts are reaching their limits with Trump and his bull sh** cases. He is loosing 95% of them. That speaks really badly for Bill Barr and his DOJ.

  3. #73
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:59 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,538

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by JacksinPA View Post
    Ex-White House lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    WASHINGTON (AP) ó A federal judge has ordered former White House counsel Donald McGahn to appear before Congress in a setback to President Donald Trumpís effort to keep his top aides from testifying.

    Full Coverage: Trump impeachment inquiry
    The outcome could lead to renewed efforts by House Democrats to compel testimony from other high-ranking officials, including former national security adviser John Bolton.
    ================================================== ======
    It will be interesting to see what it is that these guys are trying to hide.
    Bombshell, smoking gun, noose tightening, walls closing in, drip drip drip etc.

  4. #74
    Guru
    slick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Nassau County, Long Island
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,832

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony60 View Post
    I guess this judge has decided to erase separation of powers from the Constitution. That would make the Executive Branch inferior to the Legislative branch. So, there would be no one that the President could speak to for advice, without knowing that Congress could force that person to testify about it before Congress. Obviously, the President can't invade Congress's privileged communications. Of course, this will be appealed. But it's kind of scary that there is a federal judge out there (Obama appointee, of course) that would even consider a ruling like this.
    The intellectually inferior crowd is all excited now because an Obama judge ruled the White House attorney has to testify
    about obstruction of justice during the investigation of .... wait for it.... RUSSIAN COLLUSION..

    No, I'm not joking, this is meaningful in libtardville

    So let's think about this a little

    Obama appointment = political hack who's decision will be reversed by higher courts. This is the type of game only
    morons play

    I hope this just keeps going and going, because the mental midgets are too sluggish to know they're absolutely killing
    themselves in the political arena

  5. #75
    Sage
    TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    19,419

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by JacksinPA View Post
    Ex-White House lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    WASHINGTON (AP) ó A federal judge has ordered former White House counsel Donald McGahn to appear before Congress in a setback to President Donald Trumpís effort to keep his top aides from testifying.

    Full Coverage: Trump impeachment inquiry
    The outcome could lead to renewed efforts by House Democrats to compel testimony from other high-ranking officials, including former national security adviser John Bolton.
    ================================================== ======
    It will be interesting to see what it is that these guys are trying to hide.
    There are many reasons other than "hiding" something that the people would want to have the cover of "judicial compulsion" to protect them when they testify.

    However, you aren't likely to hear what "these guys are trying to hide" until AFTER the US Supreme Court rules on the matter.

    "Claque Trump" is going to have a somewhat uphill battle to convince the US Supreme court that the
    [indent]
    However busy or essential a presidential aide might be, and whatever their proximity to sensitive domestic and national-security projects, the President does not have the power to excuse him or her from taking an action that the law requires. Stated simply, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that Presidents are not Kings
    {emphasis added}
    [indent]

    bit is judicially flawed.
    I was told that the best things for me were to eat healthy foods, walk up hills, stop smoking cigars, and cut out drinking Scotch.
    With my record, I don't _DESERVE_ the best. What's second best?
    (Retirement Dinner remarks)



  6. #76
    Guru

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,151

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by slick View Post
    The intellectually inferior crowd is all excited now because an Obama judge ruled the White House attorney has to testify
    about obstruction of justice during the investigation of .... wait for it.... RUSSIAN COLLUSION..

    No, I'm not joking, this is meaningful in libtardville

    So let's think about this a little

    Obama appointment = political hack who's decision will be reversed by higher courts. This is the type of game only
    morons play

    I hope this just keeps going and going, because the mental midgets are too sluggish to know they're absolutely killing
    themselves in the political arena
    For clarification, the judge ruled that McGann had to appear before congress in response to the subpoena - not that he had to testify. He can still claim executive privilege - he just has to do it in response to specific questions from the committee. This isn't exactly a win for Democrats.

    There's a good chance that this will be overturned on appeal.

  7. #77
    Sage
    TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    19,419

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Nope, they can "question his people" (which is what the judge just allowed), but they must accept claims of executive privilege on certain matters (individual questions/topics can remain off limits).
    Make that "... but they must accept claims of executive privilege on certain matters UNTIL such time as a court rules that that claim does not properly apply ..." and you have a deal.
    I was told that the best things for me were to eat healthy foods, walk up hills, stop smoking cigars, and cut out drinking Scotch.
    With my record, I don't _DESERVE_ the best. What's second best?
    (Retirement Dinner remarks)



  8. #78
    Sage
    TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    19,419

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Appeals court stays ruling that McGahn must comply with House subpoena

    The court wrote that the fight involving former White House counsel Donald McGahn poses great consequences for the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches.

    There is a difference between "staying" and order and "striking down" an order.

    An appeals court will "strike down" an order that is patently wrong, but will only "stay" the order if the Appellant can make out a plausible case that it MIGHT be wrong AND if "irreversible harm" will occur if the order is not "stayed".

    If the Appellant does NOT make their case at the full hearing, then the "stay" is lifted and the order, once again, has full force and effect.

    Indeed, the issue DOES pose "great consequences for the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches" - because if the Legislative Branch has no investigatory powers over the actions of the Executive Branch in any matter that the Executive Branch doesn't want them to investigate then the Executive Branch becomes 100% immune to any scrutiny whatsoever and is allowed to do whatever it feels like doing regardless of what the laws of the country are.

    Would you like to bet that the courts are going to hand down a ruling that the Legislative Branch has no investigatory powers over the actions of the Executive Branch then the Executive Branch in any matter that the Executive Branch doesn't want it to investigate?
    I was told that the best things for me were to eat healthy foods, walk up hills, stop smoking cigars, and cut out drinking Scotch.
    With my record, I don't _DESERVE_ the best. What's second best?
    (Retirement Dinner remarks)



  9. #79
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    82,914
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by TU Curmudgeon View Post
    There is a difference between "staying" and order and "striking down" an order.

    An appeals court will "strike down" an order that is patently wrong, but will only "stay" the order if the Appellant can make out a plausible case that it MIGHT be wrong AND if "irreversible harm" will occur if the order is not "stayed".

    If the Appellant does NOT make their case at the full hearing, then the "stay" is lifted and the order, once again, has full force and effect.

    Indeed, the issue DOES pose "great consequences for the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches" - because if the Legislative Branch has no investigatory powers over the actions of the Executive Branch in any matter that the Executive Branch doesn't want them to investigate then the Executive Branch becomes 100% immune to any scrutiny whatsoever and is allowed to do whatever it feels like doing regardless of what the laws of the country are.

    Would you like to bet that the courts are going to hand down a ruling that the Legislative Branch has no investigatory powers over the actions of the Executive Branch then the Executive Branch in any matter that the Executive Branch doesn't want it to investigate?
    Yes, and . . . ?
    I never predict court rulings.
    "Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one." --Marcus Aurelius

  10. #80
    Sage
    TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    19,419

    Re: Ex-WH lawyer McGahn ordered to comply with subpoena

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    We shall see.

    ". . . The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted an administrative stay while it considers a longer-term order, and fast-tracked oral arguments in the case for a hearing Jan. 3. . . . "
    Did you manage to read as far as the

    Correction: An earlier version of this report misstated that the appeals court issued a seven-day stay. It was U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson of Washington who issued a seven-day stay on Wednesday on her own ruling.

    and

    Jackson also approved a similar seven-day stay on Wednesday. The House did not oppose either order as a courtesy to the Department of Justice.

    bits?

    Do you know how difficult it is to obtain a court order staying another court order when no one opposed your application?

    In cases like that the "burden of proof" is "Are you asking the court to do something that the court has the power to do and does anyone object to the court doing it?". Answer the first half with a "Yes." and the second half with a "No." and you have your court order.
    I was told that the best things for me were to eat healthy foods, walk up hills, stop smoking cigars, and cut out drinking Scotch.
    With my record, I don't _DESERVE_ the best. What's second best?
    (Retirement Dinner remarks)



Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •