OK, so what can be done to make them comply? Donât think this can go on endlessly.
Under what reasoning is the White House âorderingâ a private citizen, Don McGahn, to not testify?
âThese employees and their personal attorneys should think very carefully about their own legal interests rather than being swept up in the obstruction schemes of the Trump Administration.â
Because you stupid Motherfuckers , Trump wonât be there forever to protect your ass . When he goes , the charges will follow.
Remember youâre just a little guy taking the fall for the Mob Boss .
You work there FFS You know heâs crooked
âThese employees and their personal attorneys should think very carefully about their own legal interests rather than being swept up in the obstruction schemes of the Trump Administration.â
Good that he used the word.
Better if he had also hinted at (or spelled out) what the consequences are that heâs willing to inflict on those who do Trumpâs bidding and ignore his subpoenas. Their lawyers have some idea whatâs possible, but they need to think about what the Democrats are specifically prepared to do.
Â
Arguably, a president, even a former president, can claim executive privilege to prevent an aide, even a former aide, from testifying. Itâs not a slam-dunk argument, not by any means, provided it gets a fair hearing from a reasonable judge.
But they already waved such privilege when he talked to Mueller.
âThe administration has now urged several officials to ignore subpoenas from House committees, with President Trump arguing that his aides shouldnât have to cooperate with âpartisanâ committee probes.â
âWho do you think I am â Secretary Clinton?!â
WellllllâŚI seem to remember a previous Republican administration that broke quite a few laws. When Dems took back the White House, they decided to âmove forwardâ and not âdwell on the past.â Every Republican in the country knows that there are no repercussions for bad acts once Dems are in power.
And when he doesnât show up is all thatâs gonna happen to him is more strong words from Dems?
Or maybe Gore will pull a Mnuchin and say heâs gonna decide in three weeks wether heâll comply and tie everything up in court as the Dems contemplate wether to âlet the courts decideâ or if the politics are perfect or something.
Youâve got to make it HURT, Chairman Cummings. To get the criminal political elephantâs attention, you must first (metaphorically speaking) hit it between the eyes with a two-by-four.
No, the SCO was part of the Executive branch, so talking to investigators there did not necessarily involve any claim of (or waiver of) executive privilege.
/shrug, either way they always play this game where they say they may or may not claim executive privilege but donât actually do it. It needs to stop.
"âThis is a massive, unprecedented, and growing pattern of obstruction,â Cummings said.
Didnât you hear, Congressman Cummings ⌠Robert Mueller already said Trump is completely and totally exonerated from obstruction forever and ever.
At least, thatâs the lie Iâve heard.
With all due respect to Chairman Cummings did he not see this coming? Clearly he has no answer for this obstruction. Is there one?
Trump
âThere is no reason to go any further, and especially in Congress where itâs very partisan â obviously very partisan,â he told the Post. âI donât want people testifying to a party, because that is what theyâre doing if they do this.â
previously on âThe Donald Trump Showâ
back to listening to this earworm
We have a lawless Senate (McConnell, in particular), a lawless SCOTUS, and a lawless President.
Republicans on the Courts and in Congress should think long and hard about what type of precedents they want to set, not to mention their duty to the Constitution and the country. The next President may well not be Republican.
unless there is a quick and staunch resolution to the ignoring of subpoenas, this could very well be what the beginning of the end of anything remotely considered the rule of law in this country looks like
Dems appear powerless
Republicans appear unconcerned
WWFFD (What Would the Founding Fathers Do?)
Remember, in this specific case, Trump has previously and very publicly already waived executive privilege. How in the world can he legitimately demand a âdo-overâ?
Sorry, itâs not clear to me which specific case youâre referring to.
Chuck it all and buy a shrimp boat in Portugal.