What the hell is Cheney doing criticiziing Obama?

[Peejay]

I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.

Are you honestly suggesting that abusing authority to get blow jobs is somehow privileged information and national security information isnt? What is the separation of powers issue in purjury/blow jobs?

No, just suggesting that a subpoena is a subpoena. You show up. Claim your executive priviledge, take the fifth. Thumbing your nose should not be an option.

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm not assuming any position you may have on Cheney or Clinton.

From my meager, uneducated view, when a subpoena is issued, you respond. It's easy enough to take the fifth. We aren't talking about subpoena of documents here. Again, from my meager little brain, it just seems that you, despite your huff and puff, would not make it very far if you chose to ignore a subpoena. The men with guns and badges would come for you. I just like to see my elected officials held to the same law as I.

they did respond. They invoked the executive privilege. Which states that because of the separation of powers, Congress exceeded their authority

 

[Avatar4321]

No, just suggesting that a subpoena is a subpoena. You show up. Claim your executive priviledge, take the fifth. Thumbing your nose should not be an option.

Why should you show up for an illegal subpoena? Why give Congress power they dont have?

 

[Peejay]

I'm not assuming any position you may have on Cheney or Clinton.

From my meager, uneducated view, when a subpoena is issued, you respond. It's easy enough to take the fifth. We aren't talking about subpoena of documents here. Again, from my meager little brain, it just seems that you, despite your huff and puff, would not make it very far if you chose to ignore a subpoena. The men with guns and badges would come for you. I just like to see my elected officials held to the same law as I.

they did respond. They invoked the executive privilege. Which states that because of the separation of powers, Congress exceeded their authority

So it seems.

 

[Peejay]

No, just suggesting that a subpoena is a subpoena. You show up. Claim your executive priviledge, take the fifth. Thumbing your nose should not be an option.

Why should you show up for an illegal subpoena? Why give Congress power they dont have?

Illegal subpoenas ? Has anyone been held accountable for these illegal documents issued under colour of law ?

 

[Gunny]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

The duty falls on the AG of the District of Columbia, who has little power outside his jurisdiction, as my second link above states.

Congress's recourse is to obtain counsel and take it to court, as my second link above also states.

The weight of history falls on the side of the executive branch tossing a few crumbs Congress's way to mollify their ruffled feathers.

While you aren't forgetting, don't forget that it would depend on what Congress wanted; which, is a horse of a different color than a special investigator appointed by the AG of the US. Let's don't mix apples and oranges here.

And just to respond your little implication in your last statement, I don't and have never liked Darth Cheney. In response to your Clinton comments, I did not support going after him. Might want to toss those two facts into your assumption machine where I am concerned and see where they come out.

I'm not assuming any position you may have on Cheney or Clinton.

From my meager, uneducated view, when a subpoena is issued, you respond. It's easy enough to take the fifth. We aren't talking about subpoena of documents here. Again, from my meager little brain, it just seems that you, despite your huff and puff, would not make it very far if you chose to ignore a subpoena. The men with guns and badges would come for you. I just like to see my elected officials held to the same law as I.

Maybe the men with guns and badges keep you in your place. Don't project your subservience onto me, please. History again, would not be on your side.

 

[DiveCon]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

The duty falls on the AG of the District of Columbia, who has little power outside his jurisdiction, as my second link above states.

Congress's recourse is to obtain counsel and take it to court, as my second link above also states.

The weight of history falls on the side of the executive branch tossing a few crumbs Congress's way to mollify their ruffled feathers.

While you aren't forgetting, don't forget that it would depend on what Congress wanted; which, is a horse of a different color than a special investigator appointed by the AG of the US. Let's don't mix apples and oranges here.

And just to respond your little implication in your last statement, I don't and have never liked Darth Cheney. In response to your Clinton comments, I did not support going after him. Might want to toss those two facts into your assumption machine where I am concerned and see where they come out.

i liked Cheney for about the same reasons i like Rumsfeld

he made the liberal MSN talking heads explode

and i love that Cheney can still do that now that he is out of office

 

[Gunny]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

you are expecting it, eh?

Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.

Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.

I'm interested to know why you think this given Congress is currently controlled by Democrats.

 

[Peejay]

The duty falls on the AG of the District of Columbia, who has little power outside his jurisdiction, as my second link above states.

Congress's recourse is to obtain counsel and take it to court, as my second link above also states.

The weight of history falls on the side of the executive branch tossing a few crumbs Congress's way to mollify their ruffled feathers.

While you aren't forgetting, don't forget that it would depend on what Congress wanted; which, is a horse of a different color than a special investigator appointed by the AG of the US. Let's don't mix apples and oranges here.

And just to respond your little implication in your last statement, I don't and have never liked Darth Cheney. In response to your Clinton comments, I did not support going after him. Might want to toss those two facts into your assumption machine where I am concerned and see where they come out.

I'm not assuming any position you may have on Cheney or Clinton.

From my meager, uneducated view, when a subpoena is issued, you respond. It's easy enough to take the fifth. We aren't talking about subpoena of documents here. Again, from my meager little brain, it just seems that you, despite your huff and puff, would not make it very far if you chose to ignore a subpoena. The men with guns and badges would come for you. I just like to see my elected officials held to the same law as I.

Maybe the men with guns and badges keep you in your place. Don't project your subservience onto me, please. History again, would not be on your side.

Sure Gunny.

I'll watch the compound burn on TV.

 

[Gunny]

I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.

Are you honestly suggesting that abusing authority to get blow jobs is somehow privileged information and national security information isnt? What is the separation of powers issue in purjury/blow jobs?

No, just suggesting that a subpoena is a subpoena. You show up. Claim your executive priviledge, take the fifth. Thumbing your nose should not be an option.

Claiming executive privilege is not thumbing your nose, nor have I seen anywhere that states one must show up and claim it.

 

[Peejay]

you are expecting it, eh?

Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.

Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.

I'm interested to know why you think this given Congress is currently controlled by Democrats.

I couldn't offer more than election results.

 

[Gunny]

No, just suggesting that a subpoena is a subpoena. You show up. Claim your executive priviledge, take the fifth. Thumbing your nose should not be an option.

Why should you show up for an illegal subpoena? Why give Congress power they dont have?

Illegal subpoenas ? Has anyone been held accountable for these illegal documents issued under colour of law ?

Congress can issue subpoenas. They are not in and of themselves illegal.

 

[xotoxi]

When Cheney ought to be tried on corruption and war crimes charges?

Exercising his right of free speech?

Cheney exercising?

I don't believe it.

 

[DiveCon]

No, just suggesting that a subpoena is a subpoena. You show up. Claim your executive priviledge, take the fifth. Thumbing your nose should not be an option.

Why should you show up for an illegal subpoena? Why give Congress power they dont have?

Illegal subpoenas ? Has anyone been held accountable for these illegal documents issued under colour of law ?

quick, what is the penalty for an illegal subpoena?

 

[Gunny]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

The duty falls on the AG of the District of Columbia, who has little power outside his jurisdiction, as my second link above states.

Congress's recourse is to obtain counsel and take it to court, as my second link above also states.

The weight of history falls on the side of the executive branch tossing a few crumbs Congress's way to mollify their ruffled feathers.

While you aren't forgetting, don't forget that it would depend on what Congress wanted; which, is a horse of a different color than a special investigator appointed by the AG of the US. Let's don't mix apples and oranges here.

And just to respond your little implication in your last statement, I don't and have never liked Darth Cheney. In response to your Clinton comments, I did not support going after him. Might want to toss those two facts into your assumption machine where I am concerned and see where they come out.

i liked Cheney for about the same reasons i like Rumsfeld

he made the liberal MSN talking heads explode

and i love that Cheney can still do that now that he is out of office

I never have liked Cheney.

 

[DiveCon]

When Cheney ought to be tried on corruption and war crimes charges?

Exercising his right of free speech?

Cheney exercising?

I don't believe it.

 

[Peejay]

Why should you show up for an illegal subpoena? Why give Congress power they dont have?

Illegal subpoenas ? Has anyone been held accountable for these illegal documents issued under colour of law ?

quick, what is the penalty for an illegal subpoena?

90 days in mandatory conversation with you ?

 

[Gunny]

I'm not assuming any position you may have on Cheney or Clinton.

From my meager, uneducated view, when a subpoena is issued, you respond. It's easy enough to take the fifth. We aren't talking about subpoena of documents here. Again, from my meager little brain, it just seems that you, despite your huff and puff, would not make it very far if you chose to ignore a subpoena. The men with guns and badges would come for you. I just like to see my elected officials held to the same law as I.

Maybe the men with guns and badges keep you in your place. Don't project your subservience onto me, please. History again, would not be on your side.

Sure Gunny.

I'll watch the compound burn on TV.

Get over it huh? I'm not laying down for you nor anyone else. Simple as that. This whole line of argument is ridiculous. No one wants to subpoena me. End of story.

 

[Gunny]

Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.

Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.

I'm interested to know why you think this given Congress is currently controlled by Democrats.

I couldn't offer more than election results.

Election results? I don't get that, unless you're going on the historical fact that a President loses Congress in his second term. If that's the case, you're way ahead of the game, IMO. Obama's only 60 days into his first term and if he doesn't turn some things around, he's going to be toast.

But yes, it "could" happen. If it happens, as I said, it will depend on the reason. Your argument however assumes I am going to take a partisan line. As I said, it will depend on the reason whether or not I agree with it.

 

[Peejay]

Maybe the men with guns and badges keep you in your place. Don't project your subservience onto me, please. History again, would not be on your side.

Sure Gunny.

I'll watch the compound burn on TV.

Get over it huh? I'm not laying down for you nor anyone else. Simple as that. This whole line of argument is ridiculous. No one wants to subpoena me. End of story.

Gunny, unless you qualify for this executive priviledge, you have to show for a subpoena or show cause. You could contest a subpoena issued by a party to civil litigation. Other than that, you can show or you can run. I don't doubt that you can run but it really sounds like you're blowing a lot of smoke. Randy Weaver didn't want to appear either. He eventually did. Hope you can run and hide farther and better than he.