Info PSA- Public impeachments start today- UPDATE 2/5/2020- Trump wins.

[zzyzxroad]

Breaking news: McGahn must comply with House subpoena

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2019/11/25/former-white-house-counsel-donald-mcgahn-must-comply-with-house-subpoena-court-rules-in-case-that-could-affect-impeachment-inquiry/

White House Council or a coffee boy?

 

[hal2kilo]

White House Council or a coffee boy?

Beat me to it. Now it gets interesting.

 

[esquared]

White House Council or a coffee boy?

pfffttt..
Barely knew the guy.

 

[dank69]

Beat me to it. Now it gets interesting.

If you call waiting for the appeal to SCOTUS interesting.

 

[zzyzxroad]

If you call waiting for the appeal to SCOTUS interesting.

The interesting part is, if he ever testifies he will need to stay consistent with what he told Mueller's team. Speaking of that, if he has already told the Mueller team something, can he still exert privilege?

 

[zinfamous]

pfffttt..
Barely knew the guy.

Good, then they wouldn't bother appealing, right?



right?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Good, then they wouldn't bother appealing, right?



right?

At this point Mcgahn has no legal right to refuse. He might appeal but then that means a stay against Congress and I wonder how that would work.

 

[rommelrommel]

Claim 1: there was no unofficial foreign policy because the President directs foreign policy.

Response: While it is not nearly as unitary as stated, the principle does hold true. What is also true is that a great number of important people were kept out of the loop regarding the pursuit of investigations, this pursuit and actions to incentivize it worked counter to other established foreign policy which workers who were not informed of changes were still pursuing, and the flow of pursuing this policy was a highly unusual channel. The claim is that Trump's pursuit of investigations was for personal gain in the election and unconnected and at odds with national security interests. If that is true, the conduct is illegal regardless of whether he pursued the investigations with the consent and aid of the usual diplomatic apparatus or specifically apart from it.

Claim 2: just because there are debunked conspiracy theories, doesn't mean Ukraine didn't interfere in the election.

Response: no it doesn't. Also Japan could have. And Finland. Etc. There needs to be evidence to support an investigation, and not liking someone is not sufficient evidence. More pertinently, Trump's phone call specifically referred to the CrowdStrike server which is that exact debunked conspiracy theory, and I'm not aware of any other reason Trump specifically was concerned. Even more importantly, the payoff for Ukraine rested in a public CNN statement and not the underlying investigations themselves.

Claim 2: in asserting there was no evidence supporting investigations from the witnesses, they exceeded their expertise because they didn't have access to the underlying facts.

Response: I don't know if any testimony offered exceeded anyone's expertise. Stating where your impression comes from, e.g. underlying intelligence agency opinions, direct personal experience with the parties allegedly involved, etc. is totally fair game. Their testimony needs to be weighed against the testimony of those who provide support for such suspicions. And what is at issue here is what was known by Trump and his foreign policy apparatus at the time and what efforts they took to ensure credibility of such evidence before acting upon it. Thus, for example, Hunter Biden is not a useful witness. He has no awareness of what Trump knew. Problem is, no one with the proper awareness has offered any testimony supporting investigations or what Trump or Rudy or Pompeo etc. may have known that the other officials who testified clearly didn't. The reason for this is defying Congressional subpoena for both records and testimony. Overall, the argument rests on a basic logical error. Saying investigations are justified because you can't definitively prove they aren't is untenable as a defense in absence of suitable justification for which I have seen none.

I haven’t watched a lot but I haven’t heard the argument that Trump can’t direct foreign policy... instead what he can’t do is direct it for his personal political benefit. The evidence of two contrary policy streams is evidence that the “drug deal” foreign policy was not for the countries benefit.

 

[fskimospy]

At this point Mcgahn has no legal right to refuse. He might appeal but then that means a stay against Congress and I wonder how that would work.

All he needs to do is keep appealing until the senate trial is over, so like a month and a half. If he wants to do this he can.

Simply put our system is not capable of dealing with a lawless executive. If you commit a crime it’s usually with a federal agency so order everyone not to comply with the investigation.

In district court drag out the proceedings as long as possible.

If you fail, appeal you the circuit court.

If you fail, ask it be heard en banc.

If you fail, appeal to the Supreme Court.

All this can take years and get this, if at any time the house of Congress gets controlled by your party they simply drop the lawsuit and the process starts allllll over.

The courts will not save us.

 

[TheVrolok]

All he needs to do is keep appealing until the senate trial is over, so like a month and a half. If he wants to do this he can.

Simply put our system is not capable of dealing with a lawless executive. If you commit a crime it’s usually with a federal agency so order everyone not to comply with the investigation.

In district court drag out the proceedings as long as possible.

If you fail, appeal you the circuit court.

If you fail, ask it be heard en banc.

If you fail, appeal to the Supreme Court.

All this can take years and get this, if at any time the house of Congress gets controlled by your party they simply drop the lawsuit and the process starts allllll over.

The courts will not save us.

The Trump administration has called "the system's" bluff. It wasn't designed for this level of disregard for the law.

 

[Maxima1]

All he needs to do is keep appealing until the senate trial is over, so like a month and a half. If he wants to do this he can.

Simply put our system is not capable of dealing with a lawless executive. If you commit a crime it’s usually with a federal agency so order everyone not to comply with the investigation.

So why doesn't the House use inherent contempt?

 

[emperus]

The Trump administration has called "the system's" bluff. It wasn't designed for this level of disregard for the law.

I agree. Been saying this for a while. I hope this is one of the defining benefits of Trump. That we entrench all our "traditions" by law. We can't rely on our leaders having a semblance of decency.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

All he needs to do is keep appealing until the senate trial is over, so like a month and a half. If he wants to do this he can.

Simply put our system is not capable of dealing with a lawless executive. If you commit a crime it’s usually with a federal agency so order everyone not to comply with the investigation.

In district court drag out the proceedings as long as possible.

If you fail, appeal you the circuit court.

If you fail, ask it be heard en banc.

If you fail, appeal to the Supreme Court.

All this can take years and get this, if at any time the house of Congress gets controlled by your party they simply drop the lawsuit and the process starts allllll over.

The courts will not save us.

For something less important the SCOTUS will likely say whether they will hear the tax case in just a few weeks. So maybe you are right, but considering the import of impeachment this may go through much faster assuming McGahn fights it. In any case others have cover to testify.

 

[Maxima1]

For something less important the SCOTUS will likely say whether they will hear the tax case in just a few weeks. So maybe you are right, but considering the import of impeachment this may go through much faster assuming McGahn fights it. In any case others have cover to testify.

Use inherent contempt, and the burden of seeking judicial relief will be on these corrupt SOBs. Enough of this crap already.

 

[Jhhnn]

All he needs to do is keep appealing until the senate trial is over, so like a month and a half. If he wants to do this he can.

Simply put our system is not capable of dealing with a lawless executive. If you commit a crime it’s usually with a federal agency so order everyone not to comply with the investigation.

In district court drag out the proceedings as long as possible.

If you fail, appeal you the circuit court.

If you fail, ask it be heard en banc.

If you fail, appeal to the Supreme Court.

All this can take years and get this, if at any time the house of Congress gets controlled by your party they simply drop the lawsuit and the process starts allllll over.

The courts will not save us.

It all comes back around to elections. That's why we need to make them as fair, honest & unassailable as possible.

Dems will likely hold the HOR, as well, with legal resolution highly likely before 2023. That's 3 full years from now. It's not like we'll quit if we win the presidential election, either. Justice must be served. The crimes of this Admin are too great to think otherwise.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Before that subpoena everyone again if needs must and include this ruling. Bolton MAY respond now. People mention that he doesn't want to do that because of a book. I think they are wrong. On the cover, "The man who brought down a criminal in Office". His testimony will push his fortunes higher than they would otherwise.

 

[Jhhnn]

The Trump administration has called "the system's" bluff. It wasn't designed for this level of disregard for the law.

No system is perfect. And while Trump has subverted the institutions of Democracy he has not destroyed them. Deep State, Man! We'll be glad we have it before Trump gets done with us.

 

[Jhhnn]

Before that subpoena everyone again if needs must and include this ruling. Bolton MAY respond now. People mention that he doesn't want to do that because of a book. I think they are wrong. On the cover, "The man who brought down a criminal in Office". His testimony will push his fortunes higher than they would otherwise.

Bolton needs to speak up or shut up. The window of meaningful opportunity is closing rapidly. Speak the truth or be damned.

 

[Ajay]

I wouldn't say insane but they are inattentive to the needs of millenials for sure

The issues facing millennials stems from a system we built that used to work, but tragically failed them. We need more of a solution than to simply pay off their debt and make college free. Like healthcare, comprehensive, well conceived reform is needed and stable, sustainable financial systems need to be put in place. Honestly, it totally sucks. I have no idea how we are going to find the money for a national healthcare, tuition support and global warming initiatives. Well, I do know - we can’t do them all.

 

[kage69]

I was hoping his refusal to do Trump's firing before might translate into a willingness to stand up for the law again in some measure later. Oh well. I think odds are we'll see a lot of "I do not recall" type responses and 5th amendment claims. I hope what Trump is doing to Lev and maybe now Rudy has him considering more options.

It's easier to believe in the cult when you aren't involved in the investigations.

 

[rommelrommel]

The issues facing millennials stems from a system we built that used to work, but tragically failed them. We need more of a solution than to simply pay off their debt and make college free. Like healthcare, comprehensive, well conceived reform is needed and stable, sustainable financial systems need to be put in place. Honestly, it totally sucks. I have no idea how we are going to find the money for a national healthcare, tuition support and global warming initiatives. Well, I do know - we can’t do them all.

Well, you totally can. If there was money to invade and occupy Iraq...

Health care will actually pay for itself anyways. Tuition support will be painful up front but will be a profit in the end, same as addressing global warming.

 

[Ajay]

Well, you totally can. If there was money to invade and occupy Iraq...

Health care will actually pay for itself anyways. Tuition support will be painful up front but will be a profit in the end, same as addressing global warming.

The upfront costs will be enormous, I suppose we can add another $20T to the debt. That’s the way we paid for our wars in the Middle East.

 

[zzyzxroad]

The upfront costs will be enormous, I suppose we can add another $20T to the debt. That’s the way we paid for our wars in the Middle East.

We are already paying the bill. Consolidating the how to leverage your position on the cost seems logical no? Government bureaucracy bogging down the process and cost is a legitimate concern. Is that the real fear? If so let's have a real conversation about that instead of pretending the private insurance model is functional.

And what does this have to do with the impeachment again?

 

[dank69]

The issues facing millennials stems from a system we built that used to work, but tragically failed them. We need more of a solution than to simply pay off their debt and make college free. Like healthcare, comprehensive, well conceived reform is needed and stable, sustainable financial systems need to be put in place. Honestly, it totally sucks. I have no idea how we are going to find the money for a national healthcare, tuition support and global warming initiatives. Well, I do know - we can’t do them all.

We can do them all if we stop bending over for billionaires and corporations.

 

[Bitek]

Bernie/Warren are going to lose the primary because they split the progressive vote. Free college, practically speaking, is DOA. If the dems win the senate - some sort of national health policy will be implemented. Calling centris Democrats insane is ridiculous.

I wouldn't call it doa, but full scale free college is not going to happen. Plenty of room for something to get done if framed right.

There are many younger voters who are being crushed under student loan debt, and plenty of parents trying to save, but are freaked out by the $50k a year it will cost and looking for relief.