An appeals court considering whether the House can access special counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury material wants to hear arguments on whether the House can even sue to obtain the documents.
Why does this article not name the judges on the panel or even the lawyers referenced? WTF?
Well, the great experiment in democracy was nice while it lasted.
Is there a Constitutional Cliff Notes we could forward?
Judge Neomi Rao . . . questioned whether it would be impermissible for the court to get involved since the dispute was ostensibly related to the House impeachment proceedings.
So according to Rao, if the House is investigating whether Trump has committed high crimes or misdemeanors and seeks documents from the Executive Branch in conjunction with its investigations the White House can deny access to the documents and the House has no recourse. The House then presents its case based on whatever it can cobble together from third parties, which the GOP counters as hearsay and proclaims that the Democrats have failed to prove their case. The GOP then says, by the way, you cannot even investigate a sitting president much less indict him for his crimes. Ergo, he is president for so long as the electorate is dumb enough to keep him in office. But then, Rao clerked for Clarence Thomas.
the other two, besides Rao, are Judith Rogers and Thomas Griffith – both of whom were on the correct side of the request to hear the Mazar’s case en banc.
my guess is that this is just a shiny object meant to keep Rao distracted while the two real judges write their opinion affirming the lower court decision. Rao can supervise her clerks’ rephrasing of the Team Trump brief for her dissent in the ruling, and everyone will be happy.
Maybe. Maybe not. Doesn’t really matter anymore anyway.
Consensus; Settled Law…WFT are those…does anybody know?
I wouldn’t send this idiot to the grocery store with my list of 2 items (Toilet & Paper).
You really don’t want one of those newfangled 10-15 flush toilets anyway.
Puts me in mind of yesterday’s Onion article headline:
Ha ha.
…and taught at the Antonin Scalia law school.
We will look back on how quaint the Nixon Imperial Presidency days were after Trump burns down the country.
Because I’m easy come, easy go, little high, little low
Any way the wind blows doesn’t really matter to me, to me
So I’m thinking 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse, #1 is Trump, #2 is McConnell, so who is #3 and #4?
Wondering… Is a grand jury member protected by the Whistle Blower Act?
Gaetz and Jordan.
It is sort of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse on the cheap.
IDK Collins in back on a pony, or should he just ride double with Jordan?
And when you say on the cheap I guess all that glitters isn’t gold?
So many things I could say.
Putin must be so proud of Mitch.