So when the Obama Administration refused to let Eric Holder testify about Fast & Furious...did "we the people" have a right to know what was going on in our own government? Or not so much?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Donald McGahn MUST TESTIFY the Ex- White House counsel . MORE PELOSI WINNING! Poor MAGA team.
- Thread starter Baz Ares
- Start date
So when the Obama Administration refused to let Eric Holder testify about Fast & Furious...did "we the people" have a right to know what was going on in our own government? Or not so much?
he's not being charged with anything, he can't plead the 5th... also, he already confessed all to Mueller on Trump's Obstruction attempts... 30 hours of grand jury testimony...Katyal: Bolton testimony would be like gravy. Helpful, but you don't need itYes, and it doesn't exist with McGhan.Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
Who told you that?
Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
McGahn hasn't been forced to do a dam thing, except file an appeal.
Even if the courts eventually rule that he has to appear, he can plead the 5th.
he wouldn't need to testify at all before congress, if the proper oversight committees could get his grand jury testimony...
Do you know why Grand Jury testimony is and should be kept confidential, Care?
Billiejeens
Diamond Member
- Jun 27, 2019
- 36,439
- 24,015
- 1,845
DO YOU know what the separations of power are...?What is not understood?Good day for the survival of the USA and the rule of law!! Whew! Thank the good Lord for the courts still being for we the people!
The likely appeal will not ever make it to the SC.... this case is a no brainer....
You dont understand the rule of law.
Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
DO YOU know why the founders created three equal branches of gvt..?
Do you know what oversight on the executive is for...?
Do you know what executive Privilege actually is...?
Do you know that in our near 250 years there has never been anything called, ''BLANKET IMMUNITY'' for the executive branch... before Trump's illegal use of it?
DO YOU know what a subpoena is...?
DO YOU KNOW we the people have a right to know what is going on in our own gvt?
I laugh at you.
A president must be able to have legal advice without Congress interfering, whether it’s an impeachment proceeding or any other proceeding.
Otherwise, there’s no balance of power, because the House of Representatives is not subject to any subpoenas
(other than a bonafide criminal case in an actual courtroom)
they’re not subject to FOIA because they don’t apply it to themselves, and they have all the legal counsel they want — privileged.”
So what she’s doing is tilting the balance of power far away from the president to the Congress, changing the structure of our government and the ability of the chief executive to function.
Spoiler Alert - She does not have the constitutional power to do that, and will be overturned.
HereWeGoAgain
Diamond Member
FYI. Can't wait for DEc. %th.
View attachment 291668
This needs to fail. If it does not, seems anyone can block legal investigations into tax fraud.
What tax fraud?
You should already know it. They were cleared.Justice department Fast and Furious investigation clears Eric Holder Stick to the OP.DO YOU know what the separations of power are...?What is not understood?Good day for the survival of the USA and the rule of law!! Whew! Thank the good Lord for the courts still being for we the people!
The likely appeal will not ever make it to the SC.... this case is a no brainer....
You dont understand the rule of law.
Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
DO YOU know why the founders created three equal branches of gvt..?
Do you know what oversight on the executive is for...?
Do you know what executive Privilege actually is...?
Do you know that in our near 250 years there has never been anything called, ''BLANKET IMMUNITY'' for the executive branch... before Trump's illegal use of it?
DO YOU know what a subpoena is...?
DO YOU KNOW we the people have a right to know what is going on in our own gvt?
So when the Obama Administration refused to let Eric Holder testify about Fast & Furious...did "we the people" have a right to know what was going on in our own government? Or not so much?
Billiejeens
Diamond Member
- Jun 27, 2019
- 36,439
- 24,015
- 1,845
No, I'm basing everything on a court case with Harriett Myers that the judge ruled on. A Republican judge by the way. She had to testify, therefore why shouldn't McGhan? There is no such thing as absolute immunity in a criminal investigation. It wont go to the SC because it'Katyal: Bolton testimony would be like gravy. Helpful, but you don't need itYes, and it doesn't exist with McGhan.Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
Who told you that?
Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
You are basing your legal proclamations on what talking heads that appear on MSNBC tell you?
s an open and shut case.Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
Which case?
Negative! A Republican judge ruled on this with Harriett Myers during the Bush presidency. If it had been an issue, where were Republicans then? Your argument is too little too late.DO YOU know what the separations of power are...?What is not understood?Good day for the survival of the USA and the rule of law!! Whew! Thank the good Lord for the courts still being for we the people!
The likely appeal will not ever make it to the SC.... this case is a no brainer....
You dont understand the rule of law.
Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
DO YOU know why the founders created three equal branches of gvt..?
Do you know what oversight on the executive is for...?
Do you know what executive Privilege actually is...?
Do you know that in our near 250 years there has never been anything called, ''BLANKET IMMUNITY'' for the executive branch... before Trump's illegal use of it?
DO YOU know what a subpoena is...?
DO YOU KNOW we the people have a right to know what is going on in our own gvt?
I laugh at you.
A president must be able to have legal advice without Congress interfering, whether it’s an impeachment proceeding or any other proceeding.
Otherwise, there’s no balance of power, because the House of Representatives is not subject to any subpoenas
(other than a bonafide criminal case in an actual courtroom)
they’re not subject to FOIA because they don’t apply it to themselves, and they have all the legal counsel they want — privileged.”
So what she’s doing is tilting the balance of power far away from the president to the Congress, changing the structure of our government and the ability of the chief executive to function.
Spoiler Alert - She does not have the constitutional power to do that, and will be overturned.
Get a CLUE; Federal judge rules against Miers, White House on subpoenasNo, I'm basing everything on a court case with Harriett Myers that the judge ruled on. A Republican judge by the way. She had to testify, therefore why shouldn't McGhan? There is no such thing as absolute immunity in a criminal investigation. It wont go to the SC because it'
You are basing your legal proclamations on what talking heads that appear on MSNBC tell you?
s an open and shut case.Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
Which case?
The House Judiciary Committee wanted to question Miers about the firing of nine former U.S. attorneys and review White House paperwork related to their dismissal. The Bush administration argued that the documents and the former aide were protected under separation of powers and refused to allow Miers or Bolten to respond to the subpoenas. Bolten, as White House chief of staff, was subpoenaed by the panel for documents.
Billiejeens
Diamond Member
- Jun 27, 2019
- 36,439
- 24,015
- 1,845
Negative! A Republican judge ruled on this with Harriett Myers during the Bush presidency. If it had been an issue, where were Republicans then? Your argument is too little too late.DO YOU know what the separations of power are...?What is not understood?You dont understand the rule of law.
Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
DO YOU know why the founders created three equal branches of gvt..?
Do you know what oversight on the executive is for...?
Do you know what executive Privilege actually is...?
Do you know that in our near 250 years there has never been anything called, ''BLANKET IMMUNITY'' for the executive branch... before Trump's illegal use of it?
DO YOU know what a subpoena is...?
DO YOU KNOW we the people have a right to know what is going on in our own gvt?
I laugh at you.
A president must be able to have legal advice without Congress interfering, whether it’s an impeachment proceeding or any other proceeding.
Otherwise, there’s no balance of power, because the House of Representatives is not subject to any subpoenas
(other than a bonafide criminal case in an actual courtroom)
they’re not subject to FOIA because they don’t apply it to themselves, and they have all the legal counsel they want — privileged.”
So what she’s doing is tilting the balance of power far away from the president to the Congress, changing the structure of our government and the ability of the chief executive to function.
Spoiler Alert - She does not have the constitutional power to do that, and will be overturned.
Which case?
the Roger Stone trial, exposed otherwiseyeah, just like he would love to release his taxes, but they are under audit...https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...fect-impeachment-inquiry/?tidr=a_breakingnews
View attachment 291651
LOL! WHEEE! Will the POS Appeal ruling?
President Trump has already said he will be appealing.
In actuality, he has pointed out that he would LOVE to have Mr. McGahn testify. However, to protect future Presidents from this kind of pointless witchhunt, he has no alternative but to appeal. He doesn't want to screw Ivanka, Don Jr. , Jared or anyone else who might succeed him in office.
and he would love to testify before Mueller, but refused and only relied to questions in writing of which him falsely claimed, 'he could not recall' over 30 times...
when is enough, enough, with you? How many times are you going to believe his bull crap before you realize you might/are actually being played a fool, by him?
If President Trump said he could not recall, he could not recall.
He signed the interrogatory under oath, you know.
If the libs could prove he lied, they would have.
House investigating whether Trump lied to Mueller, lawyer tells court
House investigating whether Trump lied to Robert Mueller - CNNPolitics
Trump, a Pathological Liar, May Have Lied to Mueller
Last edited:
Crixus
Gold Member
he's not being charged with anything, he can't plead the 5th... also, he already confessed all to Mueller on Trump's Obstruction attempts... 30 hours of grand jury testimony...Katyal: Bolton testimony would be like gravy. Helpful, but you don't need itYes, and it doesn't exist with McGhan.Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
Who told you that?
Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
McGahn hasn't been forced to do a dam thing, except file an appeal.
Even if the courts eventually rule that he has to appear, he can plead the 5th.
he wouldn't need to testify at all before congress, if the proper oversight committees could get his grand jury testimony...
That's just not true. Obstruction is against the law, and would be impeachable. Had a charge of obstruction been in the report this Ukrain stupidity wouldn't be going on now.
Nostra, funny faces are for cowards. You are a coward.There is a wide net of criminality with Trump's RICO organization. 'Hard evidence': Feds subpoena Giuliani business as indicted associate hands over secret tapes
It will be put in. They haven't drawn the articles of impeachment yet.he's not being charged with anything, he can't plead the 5th... also, he already confessed all to Mueller on Trump's Obstruction attempts... 30 hours of grand jury testimony...
McGahn hasn't been forced to do a dam thing, except file an appeal.
Even if the courts eventually rule that he has to appear, he can plead the 5th.
he wouldn't need to testify at all before congress, if the proper oversight committees could get his grand jury testimony...
That's just not true. Obstruction is against the law, and would be impeachable. Had a charge of obstruction been in the report this Ukrain stupidity wouldn't be going on now.
Billiejeens
Diamond Member
- Jun 27, 2019
- 36,439
- 24,015
- 1,845
Get a CLUE; Federal judge rules against Miers, White House on subpoenasNo, I'm basing everything on a court case with Harriett Myers that the judge ruled on. A Republican judge by the way. She had to testify, therefore why shouldn't McGhan? There is no such thing as absolute immunity in a criminal investigation. It wont go to the SC because it'
You are basing your legal proclamations on what talking heads that appear on MSNBC tell you?
s an open and shut case.Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
Which case?
The House Judiciary Committee wanted to question Miers about the firing of nine former U.S. attorneys and review White House paperwork related to their dismissal. The Bush administration argued that the documents and the former aide were protected under separation of powers and refused to allow Miers or Bolten to respond to the subpoenas. Bolten, as White House chief of staff, was subpoenaed by the panel for documents.
It is really not even a challenge to deal with you.-
From your own link. -
But U.S. District Judge John Bates disagreed with the White House argument, ruling that Miers must appear before Congress in order to assert an assert executive privilege claim.
Bates added: "The court holds only that Ms. Miers (and other senior presidential advisers) do not have absolute immunity from compelled congressional process in the context of this particular subpoena dispute. There may be some instances where absolute (or qualified) immunity is appropriate for such advisers, but this is not one of them."
Crixus
Gold Member
Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment Trump made absurd claims that his officials were immune to testimony. They are not.Trump put a gag order on all of his officials. By law, that gag order doesn't exist. If Congress decides to call all these folks in, by law they have to. What is Trump hiding?If he shows up and says nothing, then there is something to hide.Um, all he has to do is show up and say nothing. This is nothing but a peanut your masters tossed you dumb monkeys to keep you interested.
Lol, they always do. Just ask Erick Holder what he said when they asked him about all those guns he and token half negro sold to Mexico drug dealers. Mr. M will do the same. By the way, this case your talking about is in relation th the Muller thing.
A gag order? Explain please.
Oh but they are. Plenty excample of it to. There are also plenty of examples of these committees being clowned by whitnesses. Lewindowsky comes to mind, him and hat Whitiker cat. These guys clowned Naddler pretty bad. So yeah, judge said they have to go, be sworn in and asked questions. That's it.
Crixus
Gold Member
Get a CLUE; Federal judge rules against Miers, White House on subpoenasNo, I'm basing everything on a court case with Harriett Myers that the judge ruled on. A Republican judge by the way. She had to testify, therefore why shouldn't McGhan? There is no such thing as absolute immunity in a criminal investigation. It wont go to the SC because it'
You are basing your legal proclamations on what talking heads that appear on MSNBC tell you?
s an open and shut case.Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
Which case?
The House Judiciary Committee wanted to question Miers about the firing of nine former U.S. attorneys and review White House paperwork related to their dismissal. The Bush administration argued that the documents and the former aide were protected under separation of powers and refused to allow Miers or Bolten to respond to the subpoenas. Bolten, as White House chief of staff, was subpoenaed by the panel for documents.
It is really not even a challenge to deal with you.-
From your own link. -
But U.S. District Judge John Bates disagreed with the White House argument, ruling that Miers must appear before Congress in order to assert an assert executive privilege claim.
Bates added: "The court holds only that Ms. Miers (and other senior presidential advisers) do not have absolute immunity from compelled congressional process in the context of this particular subpoena dispute. There may be some instances where absolute (or qualified) immunity is appropriate for such advisers, but this is not one of them."
Feel like the judge was fair.
Nostra
Diamond Member
- Oct 7, 2019
- 66,035
- 56,850
- 3,615
You do realize this has already been appealed, right?Only a retard fails to counter the argument. The argument that you go to is that your shoes are ugly, therefore you are wrong. That's all you offer. Attack the other side with ad hominem and the obvious is crystal clear. Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachmentWhat is not understood?You dont understand the rule of law.
Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
No they don't because it's not about facts for them, it's about being pissed that red won, not blue. It's sad how they can't just let it go and go do thanks giving or something.
I am aware that the most vocal leftists on this site are either full blown retards or trolls or some combination.
But some of the honest people may actually learn something if given clues as to where to look.
Try to catch up.
Crixus
Gold Member
It will be put in. They haven't drawn the articles of impeachment yet.he's not being charged with anything, he can't plead the 5th... also, he already confessed all to Mueller on Trump's Obstruction attempts... 30 hours of grand jury testimony...
McGahn hasn't been forced to do a dam thing, except file an appeal.
Even if the courts eventually rule that he has to appear, he can plead the 5th.
he wouldn't need to testify at all before congress, if the proper oversight committees could get his grand jury testimony...
That's just not true. Obstruction is against the law, and would be impeachable. Had a charge of obstruction been in the report this Ukrain stupidity wouldn't be going on now.
Lol, no it won't.
And the final ruling is what counts. There is no absolute immunity to criminal cases. It's a no brainer as Neal katyal presents. The SC isn't going to take up a case for the obvious.Get a CLUE; Federal judge rules against Miers, White House on subpoenasNo, I'm basing everything on a court case with Harriett Myers that the judge ruled on. A Republican judge by the way. She had to testify, therefore why shouldn't McGhan? There is no such thing as absolute immunity in a criminal investigation. It wont go to the SC because it'
You are basing your legal proclamations on what talking heads that appear on MSNBC tell you?
s an open and shut case.Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachment
Which case?
The House Judiciary Committee wanted to question Miers about the firing of nine former U.S. attorneys and review White House paperwork related to their dismissal. The Bush administration argued that the documents and the former aide were protected under separation of powers and refused to allow Miers or Bolten to respond to the subpoenas. Bolten, as White House chief of staff, was subpoenaed by the panel for documents.
It is really not even a challenge to deal with you.-
From your own link. -
But U.S. District Judge John Bates disagreed with the White House argument, ruling that Miers must appear before Congress in order to assert an assert executive privilege claim.
Bates added: "The court holds only that Ms. Miers (and other senior presidential advisers) do not have absolute immunity from compelled congressional process in the context of this particular subpoena dispute. There may be some instances where absolute (or qualified) immunity is appropriate for such advisers, but this is not one of them."
Crixus
Gold Member
You do realize this has already been appealed, right?Only a retard fails to counter the argument. The argument that you go to is that your shoes are ugly, therefore you are wrong. That's all you offer. Attack the other side with ad hominem and the obvious is crystal clear. Dems win court fight forcing key Trump aide to testify on impeachmentWhat is not understood?
Do you know what Executive Privilege is?
Do you know what separation of powers is?
Do you know what the Supremacy of each Branch it it's own area of Proper Constitutional Activity means?
No they don't because it's not about facts for them, it's about being pissed that red won, not blue. It's sad how they can't just let it go and go do thanks giving or something.
I am aware that the most vocal leftists on this site are either full blown retards or trolls or some combination.
But some of the honest people may actually learn something if given clues as to where to look.
Try to catch up.
Yup, and that's how it should be. The presidant has presidant business, and congress has congress business.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 8
- Views
- 446
- Replies
- 24
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 320
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 416
- Replies
- 420
- Views
- 22K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 102
- Replies
- 223
- Views
- 751
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8513
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 484
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-