A hearing Thursday in the lawsuit brought by the House to enforce its subpoena of ex-White House Counsel Don McGahn kicked off with a discussion over whether the court could wade into the dispute at all.
I hope that the judge starting the discussion over whether she has authority to intervene is a strong signal that she believes that she does. Because if she does not, we’re in for a civil war between the House and the White House.
So does the vote today change anything? Sounds like not.
Let’s NOT forget that McGahn ushered Kavbeernaugh to the SC!
Addendum:
“ Even if there was a legitimate legal claim on executive privilege,” Epstein asserted, “it does not extend to obstruction of justice or her role in potential illegal behavior.”
It seems that the exception in Executive Privilege = Obstruction of Congress/Justice and Illegal Behavior should also apply to Absolute Immunity!
Absolute immunity? Not here in 'Murka, bucko!
I’d like to know for real whether McGahn is reluctant to testify under oath and is using DOJ for cover, or if he has a shred of integrity and would like to be honest in the furtherance of justice. I can’t tell which it is.
Gentlemen, we have found the face of our Hemorrhoids While Constipated ad campaign!
-Don Draper, 1964
It was simply the logical place to start.
“Absolute immunity" is a delusional, and clearly unconstitutional concept. If upheld, it would make the President completely unaccountable for anything he/she does. In effect, that would change the presidency into and absolute monarchy, a dictatorship, a tyrant, which of course, is exactly what Trump and Barr want.
“Absolute immunity" must be completely shut down, absolutely.
Zoe is tweeting out in near real time
GOP’s wet dream comes true.
United Banana States of America.
In my experience, that is often not a guiding factor for judges.
Fair enough!
But it makes sense here so I’m not complaining – or reading more into it than that.
OT. Morrison is being a very coy boy. Can’t jeopardize that wignut welfare.
ETA Furthermore:
Narrator: But Trump was no longer his boss.
If the Courts don’t enforce the subpoena the war between the House and White House might not be all that civil. Actually in an impeachment inquiry Executive Privilege is at its weakest. The law is pretty clear on this one. The House will win unless this Judge wants to move into unknown country.
“…if he has a shred of integrity…”???
You are right on that one.
It is well understood that some communications within the executive branch are privileged, but the Congress has oversight authority. That creates a tension between the Executive and the Congress. The privilege is never absolute. There is a need for cooperation between the two branches, absent that the courts will figure out how ensure the Congress gets what it needs without jeopardizing legitimate Executive concerns. Impeachable or illegal activities aren’t shielded by Executive Privilege.
I would not read anything into that. it is a threshold question. She needed to address it first. Judge Brown is right, she has authority to address the dispute.
What I don’t understand is why this took so long. Why did the Judiciary Committee wait till August to Sue? Why is it only getting a hearing to compel now? Schiff seems to have more get up and go than does Fat Jerry, which is a good reason why the impeachment investigation is in House Intelligence Commitee, not in Judiciary.
And on the merits, I find it hard to believe the subpeona will not be enforced by Judge Brown. Hopefully she does it quickly, and with a good opinion.
You may recall George Carlin on the oddities of the English language, one part of which was “They say a civil war is terrible, but wouldn’t it be nice if we could have one.”