Trumps DOJ says House can impeach over defied subpoenas
- Thread starter Kenneth Griffin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- trad sucks
Former DOJ employee in 3, 2, ....
Interesting argument on the same day as an impeachment trial is going on for the exact same thing.
If the house impeaches again, the democrats will lose every seat they have. I say that because everyone I know is just sick of this shit.
I believe this.
Obtuse twitter person is being obtuse. Probably on purpose. The argument is what to do if an administration ignores a subpoena, the court tells them they have to honor it, and the administration still ignores the subpoena and says that the court has no jurisdiction. In that case, impeachment is a remedy and would be warranted. No contradiction.
Something tells me that in the real world, not many people of democrat or even independent leanings will hang out with you. So, I don't think your opinion here carries any weight.
The people overwhelmingly want more witnesses. They want this to go longer.
Yea, youre right. The public isn't tired of all the partisan rancor and impeachment is really keeping everyone glued to their seats.
So does Congress have any oversite power AT ALL over the executive branch?
I think we can all admit this:
Democrats: want the truth
Republicans: hide the truth
And more people are figuring this out.
It really doesn't matter - what would matter is if the House would not subvert the jurisdiction of the other co-equal branch of government that determines these matters.
Question: If the court rules over the summer that Trump and company must comply with the subpoenas, will the Rs on here agree that Trump must comply or be impeached and removed if he doesn't?
too late you dumb lib! is what they will say because hiding information to own the libs!
We can see how far apart we are as a nation with thinking like like this. Wish both sides would try to look at the opposing side with an open mind. That's something I struggle with but would be willing to try and look more sympathetically at liberal side if they would do the same but if history is a guide and it usually is liberals would just try to take advantage of that and blindside the opposition.
Hey, your hero, Trump, is the grand marshal of the hyper-partisan parade. He has done absolutely nothing to try and unite the nation.Yea, youre right. The public isn't tired of all the partisan rancor and impeachment is really keeping everyone glued to their seats.
Are you trying to say that he’s not a bad person? Can anyone say that with a straight face? Does anybody really think he is a good person? Even people like you don’t think he is a good person do you?
Do you think Adam Schiff is a good person? Chuck Schumer? Nancy Pelosi? I think they are all vipers. Trump is a bully and a BS artist blowhard carnival-barker. Just like a significant number of the most prominent democrats the right has had to deal with for decades. A big part of the reason I think people support Trump so strongly is for the schadenfreude of watching democrats have to look in the mirror that Trump is to them, and their indignant reaction to it (obviously with zero self awareness of the hilarious hypocrisy of their outrage).
I think Trump's honesty ends where his self interest begins...which makes him just like Schiff, Pelosi, Schumer, and the rest. I dont like it, and I wish we could do better, but as the saying goes, dont wrestle with a pig...you will just get dirty and the pig likes it. Republicans finally sent their own pig to get down in the mud with the dems who for decades have unapologetically engaged in the most divisive and base politics - name calling, race-baiting, accusing every republican of wanting to starve children, kill old people, yadda yadda. They tried to make Mitt Romney, the biggest boy scout to run for President in decades, into a vicious bully who put women in binders, was going to put black folks "back in chains", and somehow gave some guys wife cancer. After watching guys like Romney get chewed up by the left, Republicans gravitated to a converted democratic who was comfortable playing their game. The fact that he was coarse and vulgar, didnt let things like accuracy get in the way of his rhetorical attacks, and apparently has no capacity for shame just makes him uniquely capable of competing with the Pelosi's and Schumer's out there.
@codflyer Don't think Trump is coarse and vulgar. DC isn't inhabited by boy scout virgins.
Dims are the lowest of lowlifes and would throw their grandmothers off of a cliff if it meant they could get a vote.
We'll see how classy dims are Wed nite. Most of then have the morals and character of a carnival barker. How people don't see thru them is beyond me. It might be because of that welfare check and food stamps.
Dims are the lowest of lowlifes and would throw their grandmothers off of a cliff if it meant they could get a vote.
We'll see how classy dims are Wed nite. Most of then have the morals and character of a carnival barker. How people don't see thru them is beyond me. It might be because of that welfare check and food stamps.
Nope. Never have said that. Just the opposite. I'm saying that his critics are obsessed with his badness, which makes them look dumb more often than not.
Yeah, it's the people criticizing the bad man who look dumb, not the people who defend him. But then there's the people who just stand by like they're above it all, indulging their moral bankruptcy with a combination of smugness and willful ignorance.
Not defending him in this specific case. Just remarking on how the hatred destroys the thinking processes of some people. Thinking the DOJ citation is somehow damning is a good example.
Yes, a president could be impeached for ignoring a subpoena. Trump didn't do that.
hawkeyetraveler
HB Heisman
The first step to bridging any divide is not waiting for the other side to start.
The second step is to act and speak like you want to be treated. Yet you are on here constantly trolling libs with tired, used terms such as lieberals and dims. These are not clever and no one actually cares. But, they don’t bridge the division in this country. By all means keep using them if they make you feel like a bigger alpha male. Just don’t decry the divisiveness on the left - all that makes you is a hypocrite.
Hmmm... So I'm supposed to be the adult in this group of 3rd graders? Ok will stop using the words lieberals and dims for awhile and see if I see any positive return from the other side. What are odds against that? Will go for a month without posting that and will wait patiently for other side to stop some of the name calling and hatred. Hope you pay attention. I am very cynical about any positive feedback.
A voluntary moratorium.
A strange question. A verbal trap?
Posted earlier in a thread that the constitution doesn't mean what it says. It means what the SCOTUS says it means.
LOL...co-equal? Congress has Constitutionally granted oversight authority. They have Constitutionally granted, legally enforceable subpoena power. The idea of "executive authority"? Show it to me in the Constitution.
Better than the Democrats talking the ballot away from the people and install only the candidates Democrats prefer.
Here's a thought...don't want your choice impeached...don't vote for a f'n moronic criminal.
Go to your safe space. We will call you in 5 years when Mike Pence or Alan West is president.
We just want to know which parts of the constitution and any other laws are no longer applicable. Obviously Article 2 of the constitution is not no longer followed , emoluments clause also.
Ummm...your Trump DOJ has argued - in court - that Congress can't go to the courts to enforce subpoenas.
The Trump administration told a federal judge on Thursday that Congress cannot sue the executive branch, attempting to fight off a House committee's subpoena for documents related to aborted efforts to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.
James Burnham, an attorney with the Justice Department, argued that Congress cannot use the courts to enforce its subpoenas. It can only use the legislative tools it has at its disposal, he said.
"If [Congressional subpoenas] are enforceable in the courts that would be a revolution in the history of the relationship between the branches," Burnham said. "These cases would multiply like rabbits."
According to Justice, these are "the legislative tools [Congress] has at its disposal":
“The point we made in court is simply that Congress has numerous political tools it can use in battles with the Executive Branch — appropriations, legislation, nominations, and potentially in some circumstances even impeachment. For example, it can hold up funding for the President’s preferred programs, pass legislation he opposes, or refuse to confirm his nominees.”
Right there in black and white - the courts are not an option but impeachment is. Spin away.
