Politics And Current Events

[Trip McNeely]

Throw his ass in jail.

Trump just tweeted that he ordered the ambassador not to appear.

Again, I’m curious what the defenders think about this now. I’m sure it all just falls under executive privilege like everything else right?

[Troy Loney]

Throw his ass in jail.

Trump just tweeted that he ordered the ambassador not to appear.

Again, I’m curious what the defenders think about this now. I’m sure it all just falls under executive privilege like everything else right?

Something, something, Eric Holder did it too.

[Morkle]

What a turd.

[Viva la Ben]

Sondland was scheduled to appear for over a week right?
Cancelling the morning of reeks of desperation and a coverup.

[DigitalGypsy66]

Is he calling a US House committee a kangaroo court? Really?

[DigitalGypsy66]

Uh, DJT is in trouble with Daddy Vladdy:

[grunthy]

Throw his ass in jail.

Trump just tweeted that he ordered the ambassador not to appear.

Again, I’m curious what the defenders think about this now. I’m sure it all just falls under executive privilege like everything else right?

Subpoena the ambassador, and then actually enforce it. Otherwise calling it obstruction of justice is just a BS excuse for having no balls to actually hold them accountable.

[Morkle]

Who enforces the Subpeona though?

[Trip McNeely]

Throw his ass in jail.

Trump just tweeted that he ordered the ambassador not to appear.

Again, I’m curious what the defenders think about this now. I’m sure it all just falls under executive privilege like everything else right?

Subpoena the ambassador, and then actually enforce it. Otherwise calling it obstruction of justice is just a BS excuse for having no balls to actually hold them accountable.

Ahh yes. Dems fault. Got it

[grunthy]

Throw his ass in jail.

Trump just tweeted that he ordered the ambassador not to appear.

Again, I’m curious what the defenders think about this now. I’m sure it all just falls under executive privilege like everything else right?

Subpoena the ambassador, and then actually enforce it. Otherwise calling it obstruction of justice is just a BS excuse for having no balls to actually hold them accountable.

Ahh yes. Dems fault. Got it

Figured that lazy response would happen.

[grunthy]

Who enforces the Subpeona though?

Congress can.

[Trip McNeely]

Throw his ass in jail.

Trump just tweeted that he ordered the ambassador not to appear.

Again, I’m curious what the defenders think about this now. I’m sure it all just falls under executive privilege like everything else right?

Subpoena the ambassador, and then actually enforce it. Otherwise calling it obstruction of justice is just a BS excuse for having no balls to actually hold them accountable.

Ahh yes. Dems fault. Got it

Figured that lazy response would happen.

For the benefit of everyone that comes in contact with you, I truly hope you don’t act like this in your non message board life

[Viva la Ben]

“Great and Unmatched wisdom” on display

[grunthy]

Trump just tweeted that he ordered the ambassador not to appear.

Again, I’m curious what the defenders think about this now. I’m sure it all just falls under executive privilege like everything else right?

Subpoena the ambassador, and then actually enforce it. Otherwise calling it obstruction of justice is just a BS excuse for having no balls to actually hold them accountable.

Ahh yes. Dems fault. Got it

Figured that lazy response would happen.

For the benefit of everyone that comes in contact with you, I truly hope you don’t act like this in your non message board life

I know you have to act all tough and mighty to your message board “friends” when responding to me, but Seriously just stop with the BS. My answer to your post in no way says I’m saying it is the Dems fault. I’m saying ACTUALLY enforce the damn thing. This administration won’t do anything unless you actually start enforcing ****.

[eddy]

I agree with nobody. classic Ds playbook. They need to stop talking about it.

[Troy Loney]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress

Subpoenas Edit
Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas.

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States,[7] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber; second, the investigation must pursue "a valid legislative purpose" but does not need to involve legislation and does not need to specify the ultimate intent of Congress; and third, the specific inquiries must be pertinent to the subject matter area that has been authorized for investigation.

The Court held in Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund[8] that Congressional subpoenas are within the scope of the Speech and Debate clause which provides "an absolute bar to judicial interference" once it is determined that Members are acting within the "legitimate legislative sphere" with such compulsory process. Under that ruling, courts generally do not hear motions to quash Congressional subpoenas; even when executive branch officials refuse to comply, courts tend to rule that such matters are "political questions" unsuitable for judicial remedy. In fact, many legal rights usually associated with a judicial subpoena do not apply to a Congressional subpoena. For example, attorney-client privilege and information that is normally protected under the Trade Secrets Act do not need to be recognized.[9]

[Troy Loney]

They need to start holding people in contempt.

[Trip McNeely]

Subpoena the ambassador, and then actually enforce it. Otherwise calling it obstruction of justice is just a BS excuse for having no balls to actually hold them accountable.

Ahh yes. Dems fault. Got it

Figured that lazy response would happen.

For the benefit of everyone that comes in contact with you, I truly hope you don’t act like this in your non message board life

I know you have to act all tough and mighty to your message board “friends” when responding to me, but Seriously just stop with the BS. My answer to your post in no way says I’m saying it is the Dems fault. I’m saying ACTUALLY enforce the damn thing. This administration won’t do anything unless you actually start enforcing ****.

Honest question, how do you enforce it? Wouldn’t the DOJ be required to follow through ?

[Troy Loney]

Inherent contempt
Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subjected to punishment as the chamber may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment, imprisonment for coercion, or release from the contempt citation).[10]

[grunthy]

Ahh yes. Dems fault. Got it

Figured that lazy response would happen.

For the benefit of everyone that comes in contact with you, I truly hope you don’t act like this in your non message board life

I know you have to act all tough and mighty to your message board “friends” when responding to me, but Seriously just stop with the BS. My answer to your post in no way says I’m saying it is the Dems fault. I’m saying ACTUALLY enforce the damn thing. This administration won’t do anything unless you actually start enforcing ****.

Honest question, how do you enforce it? Wouldn’t the DOJ be required to follow through ?

TL is answering you.

[Kane]

bUt HeR eMaIlS

[Trip McNeely]

Ok, well yea the Democrats need to start doing this.

[Troy Loney]

bUt HeR eMaIlS

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/book ... ewart.html

The F.B.I. agents investigating Clinton’s use of a personal email account realized early on that they would never have a prosecutable case. While Clinton had violated laws pertaining to the handling of classified material, she had apparently done so out of a combination of technical ineptitude and convenience, and the government had never charged an offender without establishing nefarious motives. As a result, the bureau concluded it didn’t “have much on the intent side.”

You might think this decision made life easier for the F.B.I., which would be spared the ordeal of having to insert itself into a presidential campaign. Instead, it made life harder. The reason for this: The bureau contained what some Department of Justice officials considered “hotbeds of anti-Clinton hostility,” especially in the Little Rock and New York offices. Stewart describes how F.B.I. officials encouraged colleagues investigating the Democratic nominee with messages like “You have to get her” and “You guys are finally going to get that dodint.” James Comey, the F.B.I. director during the Clinton email probe, went so far as to tell Attorney General Loretta Lynch, “It’s clear to me that there is a cadre of senior people in New York who have a deep and visceral hatred of Secretary Clinton.” Those agents leaked regularly to right-wing media sources that the bureau was turning a blind eye to what they saw as Clinton’s criminality.

[eddy]

lol

[Morkle]

I agree with nobody. classic Ds playbook. They need to stop talking about it.

same. I didn't find any blaming at all. Dems haven't done anything even close to enforcement yet. They talk a big game, and honestly just stop with the politics and do it if you're gonna talk about it.