Senate Impeachment Trial Spills Over To Court Fight Over Mueller Probe | Talking Points Memo

The House’s top lawyer on Thursday used President Donald Trump’s legal arguments against him in two “urgent” court cases that could provide valuable Mueller probe-era evidence for use in the impeachment trial.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

See, your honor, we said we could have our cake and eat it too. So here it is, a steaming pile of poo.


The gears are starting to teethe here, I feel. Momentum.


“Eeny, meeny, miney, mo. Catch a bad president by the…” “Is we in real trouble this time, Spanky?”


Lawyer: “Now that you have been acquitted, will you tell me truly? Did you steal the car?”

Client: “After hearing your amazing argument in court this morning, I’m beginning to think I didn’t.”


The Dems have better, more dedicated lawyers but Trump has the corrupt DoJ under the corrupt Falangist, Barr, and a passel of corrupt or unqualified judges. So the effort must be made, if only for the future under a Democratic administration.


“The Executive Branch cannot have it both ways.”

Seems to have so far.


The Executive Branch cannot have it both ways,” Letter wrote.

This is what my dear Granny called Cross-Talking.


Unfortunately, the panel they drew has Judge Griffith (Bush II), Handerson (Bush I), and Rogers (clinton).

Henderson is a republican hack, and Griffith is a BYU grad with a long conservative bent. I can’t call him, he may do the ethical thing, Henderson will not…

The reality is that some of the Court’s are just political at this point.


George Orwell called it doublespeak or newspeak.

" Doublespeak is saying one thing and meaning another, usually its opposite. In 1984 when BIG BROTHER and the Party say PEACE they mean WAR, when they say LOVE they mean HATE, and when they say FREEDOM they mean SLAVERY."


My Granny was born in 1903 and died in 1990; I remember her words well. She used them on me.


So is this a 3-judge panel? Meaning they can go en banc if they lose (the House, that is). If so, seems to me this argument has traction with the full bench. It has the benefit of being simple, logical and also tracks with jurisprudence.

1 Like

urgent need

It has been known for a long time that the judicial system functions as a business and political weapon.

An upstart business with the potential to take on “the big boys” finds itself buried and bankrupted in legal minutiae. Sexual assault victims find themselves threatened with protracted legal proceedings. Whistleblowers risk life savings against a well-funded institution.

Now, a mob boss has planted himself in the Oval office, obstructing by endlessly challenging every single word in the English language, and all the judicial system can do is take weeks to schedule it, months to decide it, and years to route it to another court.

Change the Senate, change the world.


But the en banc D.C. Circuitc is still majority Dem nominees, and they have quickly gone en banc to reverse some other hackery by Trumpist panels. I’m thinking particularly of the Jane Doe abortion case where then-Judge Kavanaugh wrote a bunch of tendentious bullshit to prevent an imprisoned immigrant from obtaining an abortion. They flipped that decision in about 48 hours, IIRC.

I’m fairly sure the en banc court would want to rehear anything the panel does that departs from the Nixon-era precedents.



Okay, I had to look up “Falangist” and have to say the word is not nearly Aryan enough…

1 Like

So it looks like Mickey still hates everything and everyone. He yelled and cursed at Mary Louise Kelly of NPR. For fucking sake Petty PompousAss you yelled at a woman reporter from NPR in your private living room at Foggy Bottom. Obviously being first in one’s class at West Point did not teach him to treat women, never publicly supporter Marie and went after Mary Louise.


Yes, you get three judges, before asking for en banc. The full DC Cir will certainly uphold the subpeona and rejected Trump’s claims of “absolute immunity”, but if Griffith does not do the right thing (and it’s 2-1 for Trump) it will cause delay.

But it is Catholic enough …

OT but interesting: Young evangelicals are not only increasingly unwilling to accept the hypocrisy of their elders they are unwilling to remain silent about it.

You said to love the lost,
I’m trying to love you now;
You said speak the truth,
so I’m calling you out.
Hymn For The 81%