More news of the not-so-good variety.
2 Likes
That’s flout. Spell checkers ain’t necessarily literate.
1 Like
I could have missed something, but it didn’t look like a rebuke to me. It looked like he was saying that a formal resolution with a statement on the legislative purpose probably wasn’t given because the requested docs were understood to be within the committee’s purview.
2 Likes
Democrats will come up with unlimited excuses as to why Trump wins in 2020. They will never, ever blame themselves for being feckless, ineffective, waffling pantie-waists. The GOP only fears/respects brute power, a kick in the nads. When Trump wins in 2020, it will be months of Dem finger-pointing, circular firing squads and denials…until the next time it happens.
“I fart in your general direction.”
2 Likes
I understand everyone’s arguments pro and con. But the democrats have a big problem communicating to us people via their ineffective messaging. Yes, someone needs to have public TV forums on the details of the Mueller report. Yes, we have to see and feel that something effective is being done to stop the lawlessness. But until the “rule of law” shows itself to be fair and just, how can anyone not be fearful and demoralized by this sluggish intellectual process? The Republican faction has propagada, read emotional, subconscious messaging, down. Nobody can tell me that the Democrats are missing experts who can effectively combat this with equal language.
3 Likes
There won’t be a “next time” if/when that happens.
2 Likes
Monty Python has a quote for every situation. Especially for the surreal situations such as we currently find ourselves in.
That’s definitely the message I’m getting.
Either that, or they don’t want the stenographers to be mean to them.
Time to shyte or get off the pot…
Trump reasoning 101
McGahn cannot respond to a subpoena (even tho a former WH lawyer) so moron can create a precedent.
Umm, no donnie, sorry. Precedents cannot be founded on crimes.
1 Like
Every time I go to sit down I look… getting prodded at my age ain’t the best of feelings.
Seriously you are correct. A whole lot of folks live day to day unaware of their eroding country and its traditions. They may need to see in stark relief what trump is hiding. And for him to freak over the tiniest of reveals speaks to something that is off the charts horrible. I believe for starters he is eyeball deep in money laundering on an epic scale, monumental incompetence with a dash of revealing intelligence on TV to appear “tough”. But the really bad part is his betrayal of our country and becoming the lap dog of Putin.
3 Likes
So it is. Yeah, it was the spell checker. Sure, that’s the ticket… (I am reminded of Little Feat’s Old Folks’ Boogie: "You know you’re over the hill when your mind makes a promise that your body can’t fill.)
1 Like
A couple of days at this point is not any time this week or next. They recess for the Memorial Day Holiday tomorrow or Thursday. won’t be back until the week after.
Dems need to grow some teeth, gum jobs aren’t good enough.
1 Like
The Trumparrot isn’t dead yet, unfortunately.
1 Like
This part time gig of Congress works to trump’s distinct advantage. Members have baked in so damn much time off they ought to be cut to half pay and even then they make more than I did.
Edit
House takes
A week in February
A week in March
2 weeks in April
A week in May
2 weeks in July
All of August
A week in September
2 weeks in October
2 weeks in November
And 2 weeks in December
The rest of the year they average 4 days a week in session voting on bills.
2 Likes
So far, Mr. Nadler, they are indeed optional.
I’m not a lawyer so, don’t get caught up on my choice of words. Maybe “direction” would have been a better thing to say. The quote read to me like the judge was kind of saying, “C’mon Cummings, you can do better than this.”
I would love to hear from McGahn and see him respond to questions left unanswered by the Mueller report, but I think it’s not that simple. I think there is a legitimate issue of executive immunity here and McGahn has to let the process play out. That immunity does not extend to conversations with the President which constituted a crime or solicitation to commit a crime, and I expect any court that reviews this matter will so conclude. Much more difficult will be deciding what other matters are or are not protected by executive privilege and/or immunity. The privilege issue seems mostly or completely waived at this point, but not the immunity. McGahn could decide to come forward and testify without the issue of executive immunity being decided by a court, but I would think he could face professional discipline by the Bar for violating his ethical duties. He is in a tough spot but, of course, he has no one but himself to blame for that.
that’s not what Mehta was saying.
The passage of resolutions of this type is an anachronism — it dates back to the days when there were few standing committees and most did not have general subpoena power. Investigations were launched, and subpoena powers were authorized, through resolutions by the House that identified the scope and purpose when it assigned a specific investigation to a committee.
I do think you are right – that Cummings was being admonished – but only because the House did not come prepared to the hearing with a definitive statement of legislative purpose. Because of that, Mehta himself had to rummage around the record, finding bits and pieces in various letters that gave him the thin veneer of “legislative purpose” he needed to say that the subpoena met that particular test.
(he went even further, and provided two other “justifications” that made the subpoena enforceable – the emoluments thing (which involves a separate and distinct part of the constitution from "legislative powers) and the reference to impeachment. )