Merrick Garland held in contempt of Congress

Apparently Garland had been an okay judge--nominated by Bill Clinton to the U.S. Court of Appeals. So he was nominated for the Supreme Court by Barack Obama but the fact that Obama nominated him strongly suggests Garland holds some Marxist opinions and ideas about things. Then Biden tapped him for Attorney General pretty much underscoring my opinion about that.

If Mitch had not prevented a hearing and vote on Garland's nomination to the high court, he would surely be on the Supreme Court now. We can debate the merits of the situation, but Mitch in my opinion rightfully argued that a lame duck President in the waning months of his administration should not nominate a justice of the Supreme Court but should leave that to the incoming President. (Which of course most at that time, all the polls, even Las Vegas assumed would be Hillary.)
Cocaine Mitch stooped Garland's nomination because he's a fucking hack & an amoral bastard. And he gets away with his shit because you MAGA Trump asseater's are too ignorant to know any better.
 
Well duh. This is what the tRumplings have been concentrating on for weeks. It was a foregone conclusion.

And it doesn't mean anything at all.
Sure it does. If you are in the Biden administration, you are above the law. Ask Bannon and Navarro.
 
Merrick Garland refused to comply with Congress.

Just like that POS Holder.

He refused to hand over Biden communications requested by Congress because he is corrupt.

THANK GOODNESS HE IS NOT ON SCOTUS. SCUMBAG.
yeh. McConnell dosn't look so bad now

:)
 
Merrick Garland refused to comply with Congress.

Just like that POS Holder.

He refused to hand over Biden communications requested by Congress because he is corrupt.

THANK GOODNESS HE IS NOT ON SCOTUS. SCUMBAG.
No worries.

Biden asserted executive privilege on that information so it should only take 4 or 5 years of court delays to get it figured out.

Lol.
 
Garland is a racketeer and needs to face RICO charges like the rest of the Democratic Party hacks appointed to govt. posts, especially at DOJ, CIA, and FBI, and, going by a recent article in the WSJ, the FTC.
 
Your county gets federal assistance I fund. Your county should hold a celebration in my honor to thank me.
So? I don't get that money nor does the company I work for.

County governments only receive federal money for items mandated by federal law.

My employer is not one of them.
 
So what? It's only the GOP led House. They should try to impeach him next.
Republicans are slow to follow the examples of Progressives to the chagrin of their voters. If Progs win the House in November, I guarantee you it will be Hollywood/prog media supported impeacharama and insurrectionist allegations again.
 
Link that law please.
Executive privilege is a doctrine invoked by the President, not a law.

The Wall Street Journal lays out the case fairly well.

“The privilege claim is bogus on two grounds. First, once a President waives a privilege right, it can’t be reclaimed. Mr. Biden conceded that the interview wasn’t privileged, and there’s no legal basis to say that a recording is different from a transcript.

“Even if Mr. Biden had first claimed privilege over the interview, that wouldn’t pass legal muster because the interview subject didn’t concern his presidential duties or White House deliberations. It concerned his handling of documents while in the Senate, as Vice President, or as a private citizen.

“Mr. Siskel’s claim that the goal is to protect the Justice Department’s ‘law enforcement investigations’ also doesn’t work. Such a claim of law-enforcement privilege typically attends to a continuing investigation, but Mr. Hur’s work is complete. He has filed his report and closed up shop.
[…]
“The White House claim of privilege over the recordings isn’t intended to protect executive power. It’s intended to avoid presidential embarrassment. That’s a political goal, not a legitimate legal justification.”

 
Executive privilege is a doctrine invoked by the President, not a law.

The Wall Street Journal lays out the case fairly well.



Thanks for that.

It makes sense but is still opinion.

Regardless, by the time the appeals work their way up to SCOTUS it will be long over.

I know, I have seen this movie before.
 

Forum List

Back
Top