# Does a former President have the right of Executive Privilege?



## Rye Catcher (Oct 30, 2021)

Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM


_Former President Donald Trump is trying to block documents including call logs, drafts of remarks and speeches and handwritten notes from his chief of staff relating to the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection from being released to the committee investigating the riot, the National Archives revealed in a court filing early Saturday.
Trump has sued to prevent the National Archives from transmitting those documents, and thousands more, to the House committee investigating the attack. President Joe Biden declined to assert executive privilege on most of Trump's records after determining that doing so is “not in the best interests of the United States.”_

It seems former President Trump seeks to use this privilege to cover up the events before, during and after the events on Jan 6th, 2021.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Oct 30, 2021)

Was he president at the time?


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

No president or any person should have executive privilege nor should they have immunity from their actions regarding prosecution..


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Since people do have immunity from justice I told my kids they do not have to recite the pledge of allegiance since it was a false aver.


----------



## Orangecat (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> since it was a false aver.


WTF is an "aver"? Sounds like a word a child might make up.


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

The only reason he's claiming EP is because he knows that he along with other Republicans in the House and Senate are not only going to get named as having both arranged and organized the event, but actively strategized that day how the results of a free and fairly held election could be overturned. It won't be a good look. At least to a portion of the people who still support Trump. Enough to bleed away any shot he has at running in 2024 and also to put a giant hole in Republicans plans to take back the House and Senate next year.


----------



## skews13 (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...



No. A President only has EP regarding advice given in confidence that is directly related to national matters, while he was in office. He no longer has that privilege once he is no longer in office, and he didn't have it in office regarding in matters of criminality. 

He is welcome to exercise is right to remain silent when he is arrested, and he has the right not to testify in his own defense at trial.


----------



## White 6 (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...


Nope.  No executive privilege for X-presidents, unrelated to national security, and even that reviewed on approval of current national security.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Orangecat said:


> WTF is an "aver"? Sounds like a word a child might make up.


Ignorance is bliss..


----------



## Orangecat (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> Ignorance is bliss..


That explains your blissful demeanor.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Orangecat said:


> That explains your blissful demeanor.


As you aver you only dig yer hole of ignorance deeper.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> Since people do have immunity from justice I told my kids they do not have to recite the pledge of allegiance since it was a false aver.



It’s more likely you told them that because you hate America.


----------



## Otis Mayfield (Oct 30, 2021)

trump called the Jan 6th rioters "a bunch of retards." And trump doesn't want that to get out to the public.


----------



## my2¢ (Oct 30, 2021)

Throughout his presidency Trump had problem with many who served at the pleasure of the president.  The problem was most profound with those that understood their service was to be directed to their employer, the American government.   Trump's current stance suffers from the same delusion that these folks were his personal servants.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> It’s more likely you told them that because you hate America.


I hate lies and the pledge is a lie to the true condition of the political and social standing as to the fact that their is not liberty and justice for all...


----------



## Donald H (Oct 30, 2021)

It's as good as an admission of guilt by Trump. 
His supporters are well past the point of caring about Trump's criminal activity and so this will make news on Trump and that's what he needs the most.

America is long past anyone caring about lying, cheating, or criminal activity disqualifying a politician.

*When do we use the guns? *


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> I hate lies and the pledge is a lie to the true condition of the political and social standing as to the fact that their is not liberty and justice for all...


 

I agree. Leftism is destroying liberty and Justice.


----------



## whitehall (Oct 30, 2021)

I think Bill Clinton got away with it but he was a democrat so that sheds a different light on the issue. It should be noted that FDR's medical records disappeared from a locked safe shortly after he died. They could have revealed a lot about his mental and physical state but nobody seemed to care at the time including the media.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> I agree. Leftism is destroying liberty and Justice.


You are blind in one eye and can't see out of the other so that makes you a king in the land of the blind. It is both parties that are doing it not a political theory, Jesus, pull yer head out and see the real world for what it is.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Oct 30, 2021)

It is a complete shame that the results of this fake and stolen election was not overturned.  We would not be in the catastrophic position we are in.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

whitehall said:


> I think Bill Clinton got away with it but he was a democrat so that sheds a different light on the issue. It should be noted that FDR's medical records disappeared from a locked safe shortly after he died. They could have revealed a lot about his mental and physical state but nobody seemed to care at the time including the media.


FDR's medical record have what to do with immunity?


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Tipsycatlover said:


> It is a complete shame that the results of this fake and stolen election was not overturned.  We would not be in the catastrophic position we are in.


It wasn't over turned because they have no evidence because there was no stolen election just yer gullibility and grifter at play here hunny...


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 30, 2021)

Executive privilege?

NO.

But how many previous presidents have, or have had, records about their administrations sealed for 10 years or more?


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> It wasn't over turned because they have no evidence because there was no stolen election just yer gullibility and grifter at play here hunny...


But you are a doper.  Nothing you say has any validity.  It's just marijuana smoke.


----------



## DudleySmith (Oct 30, 2021)

We can follow the Democrats' examples and just make up our own rights now.  We can have some 340 million different Constitutions, so nobody will feel oppressed or left out and stuff.


----------



## DudleySmith (Oct 30, 2021)

Biden has never done anything in the interest of the United States, just himself.


----------



## Orangecat (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> As you aver you only dig yer hole of ignorance deeper.


Dude, you're a putz and a troll. Everyone here knows it.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 30, 2021)

So Trump could have released everything ever done by ALL previous presidents?

Really?


----------



## White 6 (Oct 30, 2021)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Executive privilege?
> 
> NO.
> 
> But how many previous presidents have, or have had, records about their administrations sealed for 10 years or more?


I wasn't too thrilled with any of that.  Were you?


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Orangecat said:


> Dude, you're a putz and a troll. Everyone here knows it.


Just because you have limited vocabulary and an ability to look up what you do not understand doesn't make me a troll, but it does you because you are only exposing your true nature.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Tipsycatlover said:


> But you are a doper.  Nothing you say has any validity.  It's just marijuana smoke.


Your only friend is found at the bottom of a liquor bottle. Your inability to actually comment on the subject shows a sharp decline in cognitive awareness and control, which is typical of alcoholics.

No immunity for anyone in the govt. or pigs on duty, no one is above the law regarding their actions, no one.


----------



## Orangecat (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> Just because you have limited vocabulary and an ability to look up what you do not understand doesn't make me a troll, but it does you because you are only exposing your true nature.


Would you like a tissue, son?
An aver is a verb, not a noun. So you calling the Pledge of Allegiance a "false aver" only reveals your poor education.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Orangecat said:


> Would you like a tissue, son?


Your aver is to no avail...


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 30, 2021)

White 6 said:


> I wasn't too thrilled with any of that.  Were you?



Not really


but, it does set a precedent.


----------



## Orangecat (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> Your aver is to no avail...


Neither is your illiteracy.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2021)

Orangecat said:


> Neither is your illiteracy.


I am not the one who can't seem to find out what a word means, so you have no immunity to the fact that you are ignorant of such a word, and there is no justice and only some equality in the US if you are wealthy and powerful.


----------



## Meister (Oct 30, 2021)

It really seems that the left is having sincere concerns that Trump will run again in 2024.
They want an early start to the smearing whether it be fact or fiction.  It never made
any difference when he was president if it was fiction.


----------



## Crepitus (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...


It's a moot point since it's already well established that executive privilege can't be used to hide evidence of a crime.


----------



## Orangecat (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> I am not the one who can't seem to find out what a word means,


No, you're the illiterate imbecile that uses verbs as nouns.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> Your only friend is found at the bottom of a liquor bottle. Your inability to actually comment on the subject shows a sharp decline in cognitive awareness and control, which is typical of alcoholics.
> 
> No immunity for anyone in the govt. or pigs on duty, no one is above the law regarding their actions, no one.


I don't drink at all.  You made that up to feel more comfortable in your drug addiction.   I cannot treat you as an ordinary person.  I try.  Then I recall thar you are an admitted addict.  What was I thinking?  It was a momentary lapse.


----------



## Mac1958 (Oct 30, 2021)

Sure looks like they want this stuff kept hidden.

I thought he was saving the country from the commies.  They should be proud of it.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 30, 2021)

Crepitus said:


> It's a moot point since it's already well established that executive privilege can't be used to hide evidence of a crime.





Crepitus said:


> It's a moot point since it's already well established that executive privilege can't be used to hide evidence of a crime.



If they keep it hidden, how do you know if there was a crime?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 30, 2021)

It's like Gerrymandering, removing Executive Privilege will be great - until it's used on Xi's American political Party. Then they'll RUN to SCOTUS to beg for it to be reinstated.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...


A former president has the right to continued executive privilege to communications/document that were created/made while he was president. 

That's all.


----------



## Meister (Oct 30, 2021)

The fact is that they don't have a smoking gun to connect the dots.
They are looking for a smoking gun.  Again, a person has to prove he's innocent
with these people.


----------



## ClaireH (Oct 30, 2021)

my2¢ said:


> Throughout his presidency Trump had problem with many who served at the pleasure of the president.  The problem was most profound with those that understood their service was to be directed to their employer, the American government.   Trump's current stance suffers from the same delusion that these folks were his personal servants.


Hold on here my2cents because it’s good to keep ALL individuals responsible for their own actions, at least that’s the playbook most follow. I might be reading you wrong so I apologize if that’s the case. Are you saying that Trump was responsible for the loyalty of his white house staff and bodyguards? Now, if you’re saying that some Secret Service staff did feel personally connected to Trump *above the country,* evidence is needed to support that claim. I am not claiming that it’s not possible for a person to develop a strong loyalty to a president. I am sure that’s happened with many administrations.


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

2aguy said:


> Wow….how do you dress and feed yourself being as stupid as you are?


Is there a lucid response in that empty alt-right brain of yours Captain Cherry Picker?
Looks like your savior is worried about what might be contained in those communications he's
trying so hard block. Probably with good reason. Unfortunately, for him, he has no right to
EP. He ain't the President anymore.

Hint...he's all done. You can cross your fingers and hope as hard as you'd like.
But it ain't gonna happen.


----------



## toobfreak (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> *Does a former President have the right of Executive Privilege?*



Stupid question.  The government hides stuff for DECADES based on the very claim of national interest.  Anything that happened while Trump was in office as POTUS he retains executive privilege over.  And if you doubt that, show me ANYTHING which has ever been released about a president from when he was in office over his objections!

Once again, the Left are trying to break the law by claiming Trump is a special case so heinous that it demands special exemption, problem is that they've made that claim against Trump like 500 times now and still, NOT ONE OF THOSE TIMES have their dire claims ever turned out to be true!

---Like Milley's claim he had to usurp executive power from the POTUS going behind his back to warn the Chinese that Trump no longer actually had the authority to launch a nuclear strike against China!  

I can think of about 50 people who should be in prison and all of them are Democrats.


----------



## toobfreak (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Looks like





JackOfNoTrades said:


> Probably with





JackOfNoTrades said:


> cross your fingers





JackOfNoTrades said:


> hope as hard as you'd like.



Another one of Jack's ironclad cases and guarantees.


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

Meister said:


> The fact is that they don't have a smoking gun to connect the dots.
> They are looking for a smoking gun.  Again, a person has to prove he's innocent
> with these people.


Then there should be no issue with giving the documents to the committee. 
End of story.


----------



## airplanemechanic (Oct 30, 2021)

Donald H said:


> It's as good as an admission of guilt by Trump.



Guilt of what, moron?

Democrats should invest in boat companies because they sure do go on a lot of fishing expeditions. "We don't have any proof of anything illegal but if we look and dig enough we're certainly we will find it."

Doesn't work that way you fucking liberals.


----------



## Oldestyle (Oct 30, 2021)

Crepitus said:


> It's a moot point since it's already well established that executive privilege can't be used to hide evidence of a crime.


First of all you have to have evidence that a "crime" has occurred, Crep!  Since the FBI investigated this and found no evidence that the Trump White House was involved in a plot to break into Congress or incite a riot...what "crime" is it that you want executive privilege waived for?  You don't get to waive that to go looking for a crime...that's not the way it works!


----------



## Meister (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Then there should be no issue with giving the documents to the committee.
> End of story.


Bullshit, it doesn't work like that.    A person  is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Not the other way around. Seems your ilk is trying to find a crime where they have no evidence.
 Where did you go wrong, Jack?


----------



## toobfreak (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Then there should be no issue with giving the documents to the committee.



By that reason, then there should be no issue with:

Getting a full account of what was in Hunter's laptop.
Getting a full record of all of Hunter's dealings with foreign countries, the monies paid him, and the relation with the Biden family.
Getting a record of all of foreign monies donated to Hillary's funds while in office after which said countries received special favors from the USA.
Getting total disclosure on all matters relating to why the Ambassador and staff in Benghazi were left to die.
Getting a full disclosure of the content of the 33,000 government emails Hillary destroyed when she discovered her server was going to be looked at.
Getting a full account of just what was Barry Obumma's connections with a convicted terrorist from the Weather Underground.
Just for starters off the top of my head.  I mean, since none of these people have a thing to hide!


----------



## airplanemechanic (Oct 30, 2021)

Meister said:


> Bullshit, it doesn't work like that.    A person  is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
> Not the other way around. Seems your ilk is trying to find a crime where they have no evidence.
> Where did you go wrong, Jack?



Trump wanting to use executive privilege which he legally has a right to do as president throws the left into a tizzy saying "It's proof of a crime." But HIllary, deleting 33,000 emails and beating a hard drive and cell phone with a hammer after their contents were subpoenaed by Congress isn't proof of anything.

It would be funny if it weren't so serious.


----------



## Donald H (Oct 30, 2021)

airplanemechanic said:


> Guilt of what, moron?


Warning of bad behaviour that I will not tolerate.


airplanemechanic said:


> Democrats should invest in boat companies because they sure do go on a lot of fishing expeditions. "We don't have any proof of anything illegal but if we look and dig enough we're certainly we will find it."



Evidence of the alleged criminal behaviour by Trump.


airplanemechanic said:


> Doesn't work that way you fucking liberals.


Final warning!


----------



## airplanemechanic (Oct 30, 2021)

Donald H said:


> Warning of bad behaviour that I will not tolerate.
> 
> 
> Evidence of the alleged criminal behaviour by Trump.
> ...



OK, then lets see Hunters laptop, Let's see what was on Hillary's cell phone and hard drive that she destroyed with a hammer after they were under subpoena. Let's see why the big guy got 10% and why Biden admitted to firing the prosecutor looking into his sons company.

Hey if you want to not tolerate criminal behavior, lets NOT TOLERATE CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR.


----------



## Meister (Oct 30, 2021)

Donald H said:


> Warning of bad behaviour that I will not tolerate.
> 
> 
> Evidence of the alleged criminal behaviour by Trump.
> ...


WTF?  Evidence of what? * ALLEDGED CRIMINAL BEHAVOR????  *
Damn funny, dude.


----------



## Oldestyle (Oct 30, 2021)

I'd think long and hard on this one if I were the Democrats!  You've got a President who by all appearances is being "managed" by aides.  Normally all give and take between Biden and those aides would be protected by Executive Privilege and the public would have no insight into who was really calling the shots in this administration.  Strip Trump of his Executive Privilege and you put Biden in the same situation in the future especially if the GOP wins back control of Congress.  So let Adam Schiff have his fun, Kiddies but just remember...what goes around...comes around!


----------



## dudmuck (Oct 30, 2021)

Meister said:


> Bullshit, it doesn't work like that.    A person  is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
> Not the other way around. Seems your ilk is trying to find a crime where they have no evidence.
> Where did you go wrong, Jack?


the purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence.


----------



## airplanemechanic (Oct 30, 2021)

dudmuck said:


> the purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence.



10% for the big guy.


----------



## toobfreak (Oct 30, 2021)

Meister said:


> A person  is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around.


Not in Jack's world.  His ilk of Marxists thinks that might makes right and that Trump is guilty of everything, innocent of nothing, and so by their decree, forfeits all rights and due process, and should stand trial for all crimes and charges they dream up, which once charged, they will then proceed to look for the evidence of to support their charges!

Funny that while claiming Trump was a friend of dictators, another baseless charge they've never proven, that it is indeed the Leftist Democrats who ACT JUST LIKE NAZIS, COMMUNISTS, DICTATORS like Red China or the Soviet Union!   

But then, the Left really aren't after a conviction.  Jack and his communist friends just want to drag Trump's name through the mud long enough to print endless ugly lies and rumors in the media hoping to destroy his chances of running again and getting reelected by further souring his name in the minds of voters!---  another insidious form of election fraud.

If they ever actually got a real conviction against Trump, maybe for a parking ticket, that would just be icing on the cake.


----------



## Meister (Oct 30, 2021)

dudmuck said:


> the purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence.


Trouble is, dud, there is no evidence that connects Trump to a crime.
You don't get to go fishing until you find one.  Unless you live in a communist nation,
which you are probably very comfortable with.


----------



## Meister (Oct 30, 2021)

toobfreak said:


> Not in Jack's world.  His ilk of Marxists thinks that might makes right and that Trump is guilty of everything, innocent of nothing, and so by their decree, forfeits all rights and due process, and should stand trial for all crimes and charges they dream up, which once charged, they will then proceed to look for the evidence of to support their charges!
> 
> Funny that while claiming Trump was a friend of dictators, another baseless charge they've never proven, that it is indeed the Leftist Democrats who ACT JUST LIKE NAZIS, COMMUNISTS, DICTATORS like Red China or the Soviet Union!
> 
> ...


Exactly


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

toobfreak said:


> By that reason, then there should be no issue with:
> 
> Getting a full account of what was in Hunter's laptop.
> Getting a full record of all of Hunter's dealings with foreign countries, the monies paid him, and the relation with the Biden family.
> ...


1) Hunter is not President of the United States.
2) Hunter is not President of the United States.
3) Hillary is not President of the United States.
4) Hillary answered that...twice.
5) Same type of server that Trump kept. Hey how'd those emails get into Wikileaks hands so that they could meet about acquiring them at Trump Tower?
6) Who cares??? Obama isn't President of the United States.

The top of your head is an empty, lonely wasteland.
Trump and his EP is the issue. And he's got no standing.
The committee is going to see those records...and it won't paint a pretty picture.


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

toobfreak said:


> Not in Jack's world.  His ilk of Marxists thinks that might makes right and that Trump is guilty of everything, innocent of nothing, and so by their decree, forfeits all rights and due process, and should stand trial for all crimes and charges they dream up, which once charged, they will then proceed to look for the evidence of to support their charges!
> 
> Funny that while claiming Trump was a friend of dictators, another baseless charge they've never proven, that it is indeed the Leftist Democrats who ACT JUST LIKE NAZIS, COMMUNISTS, DICTATORS like Red China or the Soviet Union!
> 
> ...


Nazis and Communists, and Dictators..oh my!
Big words. All of which you haven't the slightest clue of their meaning.
Trump doesn't need to be drug through the mud by anyone. He did that all by himself.

And I love the fact he lost and there is NOTHING you can do about it...except be the whiny little cuck bitch you are. 
Hey, Biden wants you to hold his beer!


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Nazis and Communists, and Dictators..oh my!
> Big words. All of which you haven't the slightest clue of their meaning.
> Trump doesn't need to be drug through the mud by anyone. He did that all by himself.
> 
> ...





JackOfNoTrades said:


> Hey, Biden wants you to hold his beer!



Someone should.

He's too feeble to hold it himself.


----------



## toobfreak (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> 1) Hunter is not President of the United States.
> 2) Hunter is not President of the United States.
> 3) Hillary is not President of the United States.
> 4) Hillary answered that...twice.
> ...


All lies, evasions and irrelevancies!  



JackOfNoTrades said:


> The top of your head is an empty, lonely wasteland.


The top of my head is not the issue nor is it President of the United States.



JackOfNoTrades said:


> Trump and his EP is the issue.


Trump is not the President of the United States.



JackOfNoTrades said:


> And he's got no standing.


You have no standing.  But Biddum IS the acting president of the USA even if he completely cannot do his job, and so that makes everything related to him, from Hunter to Obumma, RELEVANT.  But nice to know that you are OK with criminals covering up their crimes just because they are not POTUS, just RAN for POTUS or are no longer POTUS!

Except Trump.  Trump s your faux exception to every rule.  The man has you idiots scared to death.


----------



## airplanemechanic (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> 1) Hunter is not President of the United States.
> 2) Hunter is not President of the United States.
> 3) Hillary is not President of the United States.
> 4) Hillary answered that...twice.
> ...



1) Hunter has ties to the president, his father. 
2) Hunter has ties to the president, his father.
3) HIllary was SECSTATE and wife of a POTUS. She was also the presidential nominee of the democrat party in 2016. 
4) Hillary didn't answer anything. 
5,) Trump wasn't SECSTATE when he had his private server. Trump also didn't disclose classified information like Hillary did.
6) Too funny, Trump isn't president of the United States. So why doesn't your honky lookin' ass leave him the fuck alone? So the left can go after former presidents but the right can't?


----------



## Rye Catcher (Oct 30, 2021)

Tipsycatlover said:


> Was he president at the time?


Yep.  Is a sitting President above the law?


----------



## airplanemechanic (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Yep.  Is a sitting President above the law?



No hes not, so why is Biden breaking laws left and right with total immunity from the left?


----------



## toobfreak (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Yep.  Is a sitting President above the law?



Joe Biddum sure hopes so.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Is there a lucid response in that empty alt-right brain of yours Captain Cherry Picker?
> Looks like your savior is worried about what might be contained in those communications he's
> trying so hard block. Probably with good reason. Unfortunately, for him, he has no right to
> EP. He ain't the President anymore.
> ...



No, shithead, there is a principle involved……..if Presidents can’t make decisions that are protected from witch hunts after they leave office you damage future President’s ability to do their fucking job……you moron.

This is nothing more than another fishing expedition by the left to try to find something, anything, to keep him from winning in 2024


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 30, 2021)

dudmuck said:


> the purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence.



How do you think they were going to shoot people when they didn’t bring guns.  You moron….


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

airplanemechanic said:


> 1) Hunter has ties to the president, his father.
> 2) Hunter has ties to the president, his father.
> 3) HIllary was SECSTATE and wife of a POTUS. She was also the presidential nominee of the democrat party in 2016.
> 4) Hillary didn't answer anything.
> ...


1) So? Trump's children had ties to their dad. Still didn't make a difference. They weren't President.
2) See Point #1.
3) She testified before a Congressional committee..for about 8 hours as I remembered..and answered every question they put to her. How many Benghazi hearings did Trey convene? 
    And BTW, that was more than I saw ANY member of Trump's administration do when they were called before Congress. They pussied out in large part.
4) She answered everything. Trey and his crew didn't like the answers. Tough shit.
5) I don't give a shit if he was the White House dog catcher. Good for one. Good for all.
6) Sorry, you don't get to claim that. And as a long as he continues to open his trap, we'll continue to kick him around.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 30, 2021)

Oldestyle said:


> I'd think long and hard on this one if I were the Democrats!  You've got a President who by all appearances is being "managed" by aides.  Normally all give and take between Biden and those aides would be protected by Executive Privilege and the public would have no insight into who was really calling the shots in this administration.  Strip Trump of his Executive Privilege and you put Biden in the same situation in the future especially if the GOP wins back control of Congress.  So let Adam Schiff have his fun, Kiddies but just remember...what goes around...comes around!



Yep……..they are really stupid……..President Trump or Desantis will use that precedent to go after President poopy pant’s handlers….


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

2aguy said:


> No, shithead, there is a principle involved……..if Presidents can’t make decisions that are protected from witch hunts after they leave office you damage future President’s ability to do their fucking job……you moron.
> 
> This is nothing more than another fishing expedition by the left to try to find something, anything, to keep him from winning in 2024


The documents in question have nothing to do with national security, Jim. He doesn't want them looked at because they'll paint a bad picture of him. Denting Republican chances in 2022 and
all but sinking his chances to run again in 2024. If this were just a fishing expedition, he wouldn't be making a ton of shit about this request. He'd be shrugging his shoulders and saying "go for it!".


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> The documents in question have nothing to do with national security, Jim. He doesn't want them looked at because they'll paint a bad picture of him. Denting Republican chances in 2022 and
> all but sinking his chances to run again in 2024. If this were just a fishing expedition, he wouldn't be making a ton shit about this request. He'd be shrugging his shoulders and saying "go for it!".



It doesn’t matter you Moron…….Presidents need to be protected from post office witch hunts you idiot……leftist regimes use witch hunts like that, not representative republics….


----------



## JackOfNoTrades (Oct 30, 2021)

2aguy said:


> It doesn’t matter you Moron…….Presidents need to be protected from post office witch hunts you idiot……leftist regimes use witch hunts like that, not representative republics….


Actually, it does. This isn't a witch hunt. If it were, he'd already be burned at the stake. He's on camera firing up the crowd at the Ellipse. His words are record.
If he has nothing to hide in those documents (which you and I both know he does), he has nothing to fear.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 30, 2021)

Meister said:


> WTF?  Evidence of what? * ALLEDGED CRIMINAL BEHAVOR???? *
> Damn funny, dude.


Show me the man, I'll show you the crime -- famous Progressive leader


----------



## whitehall (Oct 30, 2021)

Moonglow said:


> FDR's medical record have what to do with immunity?


FDR's medical records would shed historical light on his mental capacity when it was alleged that he suffered a series of strokes while in office. Democrats have a record for covering up this stuff when they were able to portray Woodie Wilson as healthy when he was a drooling wheel chair bound virtual corpse.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 30, 2021)

Is the Presidents signature on a Bill still valid after he leaves office?


----------



## Crepitus (Oct 30, 2021)

WillHaftawaite said:


> If they keep it hidden, how do you know if there was a crime?


There is supporting evidence.  Smoking guns are rare.  Most cases are made up not fragments garnered with difficulty and painstakingly reassembled.

Surely you knew this?


----------



## Crepitus (Oct 30, 2021)

Oldestyle said:


> First of all you have to have evidence that a "crime" has occurred, Crep


We do.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...


NO!
Prosecute Obama!


----------



## Tumblin Tumbleweed (Oct 30, 2021)

DudleySmith said:


> Biden has never done anything in the interest of the United States, just himself.


So you're telling is, he's Mr. Trump.


----------



## Oldestyle (Oct 30, 2021)

Crepitus said:


> We do.


Interesting...so the FBI didn't find evidence that took place...but you DO have it?  Please share, Crep!  I'm dying to see what you've got!


----------



## DudleySmith (Oct 30, 2021)

Tumblin Tumbleweed said:


> So you're telling is, he's Mr. Trump.



You stoners should avoid trying to be 'witty'.


----------



## DudleySmith (Oct 30, 2021)

Weatherman2020 said:


> NO!
> Prosecute Obama!



The FBI has been busy fabricating documents and info on Trump while destroying the years of evidence on Obama, Hillary, Kerry, Pelosi, and Biden. The latter requires by far the most people and their best, so don't expect the quality of the fakes they're creating for the Trump 'investigation' to be very convincing, unless you're a tard.


----------



## Tumblin Tumbleweed (Oct 30, 2021)

DudleySmith said:


> You stoners should avoid trying to be 'witty'.


Or what?


----------



## DudleySmith (Oct 30, 2021)

Tumblin Tumbleweed said:


> Or what?


Or what what?


----------



## theHawk (Oct 30, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...


Pertaining to the time he was President, of course.


----------



## Tumblin Tumbleweed (Oct 30, 2021)

DudleySmith said:


> Or what what?


You going to freak out if I smoke legal weed? What the fuck business is it of yours what I do?


----------



## DudleySmith (Oct 30, 2021)

Tumblin Tumbleweed said:


> You going to freak out if I smoke legal weed? What the fuck business is it of yours what I do?



What? You're smoking meth, not weed, and it's making you stupid.


----------



## Tumblin Tumbleweed (Oct 30, 2021)

DudleySmith said:


> What? You're smoking meth, not weed, and it's making you stupid.


I actually don't smoke _anything_, magaturd. This shit is how I evaluate your level of magaturd-ness. Please, *expound some more* for us.


----------



## Lesh (Oct 30, 2021)

Executive privilege exists to allow Presidents to make future decisions based on "privileged communication and advice"

Obviously that does not apply to LOSER Presidents


----------



## Oldestyle (Oct 30, 2021)

Lesh said:


> Executive privilege exists to allow Presidents to make future decisions based on "privileged communication and advice"
> 
> Obviously that does not apply to LOSER Presidents


If it applies to Trump then it will also apply to Biden...it will be amusing to watch that dawn on you liberals.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 30, 2021)

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Actually, it does. This isn't a witch hunt. If it were, he'd already be burned at the stake. He's on camera firing up the crowd at the Ellipse. His words are record.
> If he has nothing to hide in those documents (which you and I both know he does), he has nothing to fear.



Yeah….his words……go and peacefully let your voices be heard…..


----------



## Dana7360 (Oct 31, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...





Only existing presidents can claim executive privilege.

The courts will throw this case out like they did with all his election fraud cases.


----------



## justoffal (Oct 31, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...


Any current president who doesn't respect a former president's privilege should expect the very same from his successor....so yes it should remain privileged.

JO


----------



## Rye Catcher (Oct 31, 2021)

justoffal said:


> Any current president who doesn't respect a former president's privilege should expect the very same from his successor....so yes it should remain privileged.
> 
> JO


So you believe former President's are above the law?  Do you also believe Trump's subordinates can ignore Congressional Subpoenas?


----------



## Rye Catcher (Oct 31, 2021)

Weatherman2020 said:


> NO!
> Prosecute Obama!


Really, prosecute President Obama?  For what, being colored?


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Oct 31, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Really, prosecute President Obama?  For what, being colored?


Obama is white.


----------



## justoffal (Oct 31, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> So you believe former President's are above the law?  Do you also believe Trump's subordinates can ignore Congressional Subpoenas?


I believe that when Biden's successor moves to do the same thing to Biden that the left will be up in arms and the Obama judges will make every effort to uphold presidential privilege.... Unless of course Biden sets the precedent now.


----------



## Rye Catcher (Oct 31, 2021)

justoffal said:


> I believe that when Biden's successor moves to do the same thing to Biden that the left will be up in arms and the Obama judges will make every effort to uphold presidential privilege.... Unless of course Biden sets the precedent now.


Huh?  Trump IS CORRUPT.  Obama and Biden are NOT.   Big Lies and Conspiracy Stories are not evidence, not probative.  They are words which lack substance and credibility among the rational and educated set!


----------



## Rye Catcher (Nov 1, 2021)

justoffal said:


> I believe that when Biden's successor moves to do the same thing to Biden that the left will be up in arms and the Obama judges will make every effort to uphold presidential privilege.... Unless of course Biden sets the precedent now.


What you believe?  A Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy.  Biden has not committed an act of sedition, if the Congress decides Trump has used the influence of the Presidency to incite the riot on Jan 6;  if the mob was attempting to violate the law of our land, aka, The Constitution; and, if the evidence is probative that the documents the President engaged in an insurrection, it is damn well clear that his executive privilege is moot and his guilt or innocence will be decided by the Supreme Court.


----------



## Whodatsaywhodat. (Nov 1, 2021)

White 6 said:


> Nope.  No executive privilege for X-presidents, unrelated to national security, and even that reviewed on approval of current national security.


Unless of course your a democrat.


----------



## justoffal (Nov 1, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> What you believe?  A Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy.  Biden has not committed an act of sedition, if the Congress decides Trump has used the influence of the Presidency to incite the riot on Jan 6;  if the mob was attempting to violate the law of our land, aka, The Constitution; and, if the evidence is probative that the documents the President engaged in an insurrection, it is damn well clear that his executive privilege is moot and his guilt or innocence will be decided by the Supreme Court.


Biden has indeed committed Sedition, Bribery, Misuse of Government funds, Abuse of Power......so on and so forth. It's all there to see....and the transcripts are all protected by POTUS exec privilege at this point.  Don't fucking talk to me about what I believe....the slippery slope began with Trump's phony impeachment and has not stopped to this day ..... that's fine.... he's adapting and making a comeback and will most likely run in 24. When he does get back into the white house I fully expect him to return the favor ding bat...Of course I realize that the idea of all of this is to make it impossible for him to run again.  Don't hold your breath on that one.  After all the insults and threats the current administration has thrown at SCOTUS you can forget cooperation from them even if they do try to pack the court.

JO


----------



## justoffal (Nov 1, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Huh?  Trump IS CORRUPT.  Obama and Biden are NOT.   Big Lies and Conspiracy Stories are not evidence, not probative.  They are words which lack substance and credibility among the rational and educated set!


Obama and Biden are Hugely corrupt ..... wtf are you talking about jackass?  Biden's personal pedophile history is all over the net and all over his daughter's autobiography.....  POT= KETTLE that simple. The Difference was we knew what Trump's personal history was before he was elected....we didn't vote for the POPE.....Biden ain't no pope either btw and neither was that Bisexual mulatto faggot.  Trump want's a Strong America..... Biden et al want a weak America.
Why?  ( Hint....the answer comes in yuan denominations)

JO


----------



## meaner gene (Nov 15, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> What you believe?  A Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy.  Biden has not committed an act of sedition, if the Congress decides Trump has used the influence of the Presidency to incite the riot on Jan 6;  if the mob was attempting to violate the law of our land, aka, The Constitution; and, if the evidence is probative that the documents the President engaged in an insurrection, it is damn well clear that his executive privilege is moot and his guilt or innocence will be decided by the Supreme Court.


Bumping the thread, instead of starting a new one.

But you're right about it being to the supreme court.  But they already answered a similar situation in the impeachment inquirery of Richard M. Nixon, where they rejected the claim of executive privilege for the white house tapes, because of the need for congress to determine what the president knew and when he knew it.


----------



## meaner gene (Nov 15, 2021)

Looking back: The Supreme Court decision that ended Nixon’s presidency | Constitution Center
					

It was on this day in 1974 that the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a fatal blow to President Richard Nixon’s presidency, in a decision that led to the release of the Watergate tapes.



					constitutioncenter.org
				




It was on this day in 1974 that the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a fatal blow to President Richard Nixon’s presidency, in a decision that led to the release of the Watergate tapes.

The case of United States v. Nixon reached the Court on July 8, 1974, after it had concluded its prior term. The Justices found themselves in new territory as the Court had to deal with an executive privilege claim filed by President Nixon’s attorneys.

Nixon argued that  the concept of executive privilege gave him the power to withhold sensitive information, such as the tapes, from other government branches in order to maintain confidential communications within the executive branch and to secure the national interest.

On July 24, 1974, a unanimous Court (with Justice Rehnquist not taking part due to a prior role in the Nixon administration) ruled against the President. Chief Justice Warren Burger said that the President didn’t have an absolute, unqualified privilege to withhold information.

“We conclude that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial,” Burger said.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 15, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...



Was this a serious thread or a lame attempt at humor?


----------



## meaner gene (Nov 15, 2021)

The US Supreme Court rejected absolute executive privilege for a sitting president.  So any privilege of an ex-president must be to a far lesser extent.  The documents congress seeks, if from the current president would be immune from an executive privilege claim due to as the USSC said in US v Nixon

_"“We conclude that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law ..."_


----------



## meaner gene (Nov 15, 2021)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Was this a serious thread or a lame attempt at humor?


Serious as a heart attack


----------



## meaner gene (Nov 15, 2021)

This raises a serious question.  Can Jimmy Carter raise "executive privilege" to keep information in the Carter Library or National Archives from being made public?


----------



## DGS49 (Nov 16, 2021)

Executive Privilege is an inferred right of privacy accorded to a President during his term in office.  The President is deemed to have the "privilege" of executing the office of the President without interference or undue scrutiny from any other branch of government.  President Trump was in office until January 20th.  The communications and other materials requested by Congress were ALL generated or created during Trump's presidency.  Hence, to the extent that the privilege exists, it covers this time period and the materials in question.

Congress IS NOT a law enforcement arm of the Federal Government.  That role basically is assigned to the Justice Department.  Congress has no legitimate role in enforcing criminal laws.  It is a political and legislative body, period.  If they intend to impeach him YET AGAIN, the are welcome to try.

Not one person who has been arrested or detained in connection with the events of January 6th has even been charged with a crime even remotely associable with an attempt to overthrow the government or to overturn the election.  They were justifiably pissed off and acted accordingly.

Everyone involved should emulate that Bannon fellow and tell the congressional committee to go fuck off.  He will not be convicted of anything.


----------



## surada (Nov 18, 2021)

Rye Catcher said:


> Trump wants call logs, aide's notes hidden from Jan. 6 panel​ZEKE MILLER
> Sat, October 30, 2021, 4:07 AM
> 
> 
> ...



Nope, but you have to understand Trump is very stupid and can't read.


----------



## surada (Nov 18, 2021)

DGS49 said:


> Executive Privilege is an inferred right of privacy accorded to a President during his term in office.  The President is deemed to have the "privilege" of executing the office of the President without interference or undue scrutiny from any other branch of government.  President Trump was in office until January 20th.  The communications and other materials requested by Congress were ALL generated or created during Trump's presidency.  Hence, to the extent that the privilege exists, it covers this time period and the materials in question.
> 
> Congress IS NOT a law enforcement arm of the Federal Government.  That role basically is assigned to the Justice Department.  Congress has no legitimate role in enforcing criminal laws.  It is a political and legislative body, period.  If they intend to impeach him YET AGAIN, the are welcome to try.
> 
> ...



LOLOL.. take a lesson from Nixon.


----------



## Pellinore (Nov 21, 2021)

The answer is no. 

Anyone can argue that an ex-President _should _have it, but the question of whether he _does _is pretty cut and dried. As of now, he does not. 

The idea behind Executive Privilege is to allow the current President to do his job without fear of having someone peek at his notes, not to prevent others from knowing what he has done after the fact.  That's why the choice of whether or not to invoke it lies with the current, not former, President.  The caveat is that that is the way it is because of the Supreme Court decision back in Nixon's time, so it is theoretically possible that this Supreme Court could reverse that.


----------



## surada (Nov 21, 2021)

Pellinore said:


> The answer is no.
> 
> Anyone can argue that an ex-President _should _have it, but the question of whether he _does _is pretty cut and dried. As of now, he does not.
> 
> The idea behind Executive Privilege is to allow the current President to do his job without fear of having someone peek at his notes, not to prevent others from knowing what he has done after the fact.  That's why the choice of whether or not to invoke it lies with the current, not former, President.  The caveat is that that is the way it is because of the Supreme Court decision back in Nixon's time, so it is theoretically possible that this Supreme Court could reverse that.



Why would a president have executive privilege after he leaves office? His notes and documents are work product and a matter of record.


----------



## dudmuck (Dec 9, 2021)

DGS49 said:


> Executive Privilege is an inferred right of privacy accorded to a President during his term in office.  The President is deemed to have the "privilege" of executing the office of the President without interference or undue scrutiny from any other branch of government.  President Trump was in office until January 20th.  The communications and other materials requested by Congress were ALL generated or created during Trump's presidency.  Hence, to the extent that the privilege exists, it covers this time period and the materials in question.
> 
> Congress IS NOT a law enforcement arm of the Federal Government.  That role basically is assigned to the Justice Department.  Congress has no legitimate role in enforcing criminal laws.  It is a political and legislative body, period.  If they intend to impeach him YET AGAIN, the are welcome to try.
> 
> ...


congress is not the law enforcement arm for regular citizens, but it is for "high crimes" of the 3 branches.  Because if its not addressed, then it'll happen again.

Trump lost this with the appeals court









						Appeals court rules against Trump in documents fight with House Jan. 6 committee
					

A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled Thursday the House panel investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot should get Trump administration documents.



					www.usatoday.com
				




if Trump has no basis with the DC appeals, then also no basis with the supreme court.


----------

