The Justice Department on Wednesday asked an appeals court to prepare to halt a district judge’s ruling ordering that Don McGahn comply with a House subpoena for his testimony.
Desperately trying to patch the growing cracks in the dam as they spread.
Of course they don’t want McGahn to testify. Or anyone, come to that. People who have testified corroborate what’s already been stated by others, that the criminal ooze that is the Trump administration permeates every nook and cranny he can leverage for his personal benefit.
Is the language about having time to appeal to their picked supremes in case the appeals court doesn’t take the case standard?
So if Trump says he wants these people to testify, but that he’s only defending the principle for future presidents, why does he need a stay?
Hazarding a guess, the previous judge gave them the finger?
I have a question for the lawyers here. If this case is accepted by the SCOTUS and results in a ruling supporting McGahn not testifying, how bad a ruling would that be? Would it be as bad as Bush v Gore? Would it be time to riot? I have heard a lot of knowledgeable people here in the community in different threads saying that Judge Brown Jackson’s ruling is good enough that it should not go any farther.
I guess I am asking what could happen to make us realize that the SCOTUS is hopelessly compromised beyond just extreme conservatism?
…and SOMEHOW we are not supposed to look at this and think that Barr is TOTALLY trying to cover Trump’s a$$ instead of protecting the country? REALLY?
There is an alternate universe in which court rulings matter, and the Constitution is still relevant to our national political life. However, it feels as if we are in a mirror universe where the judiciary has almost been completely sidelined by continuous delays, stays, and appeals. I hope that we can find the wormhole that takes us to the “rule of law” universe before it completely degrades, and we are trapped here for eternity.
How can WH/DOJ (joined at the hip) argue for an extension when they knew that a ruling for McGahn to testify was a distinct possibility? Essentially, they are saying we are shocked! and surprised! the ruling went against us, so, poor us, we need more time- yet they had months to prepare.
It appears the impeachment clock the House argues is the better argument, at least from a non-legal view.
More evidence that we are the Mirror Universe
Trump proposes use of Agony Booth to verify loyalty of White House staff.
use the part of the law that works in your favor, ignore the rest
gotcha
why isn’t a large part of out discourse asking how ANY of this is good for the nation?
Boy these people sure act innocent.
getting tougher by the day for the crime boss
soon, the day of reckoning is coming.
Why is the DOJ involved in this at all? I can see Office of WH Counsel but that’s not in the DOJ bailiwick - is this simply Barr do Trump’s bidding and won’t a federal judge question the standing of the DOJ?
More legal skullduggery from “the most transparent Admin. in history.”
If McGahn was worth a damn, and he wanted to protect his future career, he would just show up.
Quit hiding the truth.
If you have nothing to hide, why are YOU hiding?
BINGO!!! We have a winner!
That’s actually an interesting question. Trump said just yesterday that he has no problem with these officials testifying, so (asked a reporter) why not lift Cippolone’s order prohibiting them? Not really a satisfactory response from the Donald.
The other interesting question is why a stay is necessary: stays are usually granted if the injury is irreparable. But that’s not the case here: Trump can still instruct McGahn to invoke executive privilege regarding certain areas of questioning. What’s the harm? This is different than Trump’s tax returns, because once they’re out, he’s doomed.
