Top Bolton Aide Uses Courts To At Least Temporarily Delay Testifying

voreason · October 28, 2019, 2:26pm

Well, this is going to the D.C. Federal district court, which has not generally been a Trump pushover.

heart · October 28, 2019, 2:28pm

And wasn’t Barr involved in those wholesale pardons?

misterneutron · October 28, 2019, 2:28pm

“Executive privilege,” while not laid out in the Constitution or in any statute, is one of those inventions that makes some logical sense, until it gets used to conceal criminal activity or impeachable offenses.

ETA: It’s like the OLC “opinion” that a sitting President can’t be charged with a crime. Legal process could, in fact, be used as a political weapon, and could consume so much of a President’s time and attention, it could interfere with his Constitutional duty to execute the laws of the nation. But if there’s a dead body with a bullet hole in his head, slumped over a sofa in the Oval Office, it’s time to hang up the OLC “opinion.”

paul_lukasiak · October 28, 2019, 2:30pm

and in other court news, (expected)

The DoJ has requested a stay, pending an appeal, in the Mueller Grand Jury Materials case…

the_loan_arranger · October 28, 2019, 2:30pm

You have a good memory.

edgarant · October 28, 2019, 2:30pm

That was then, this is now. And precedents inconvenient to current Republican interests fall like autumn leaves.

justruss · October 28, 2019, 2:31pm

Depending on the side of the aisle, lately oaths are pretty much just mouthing of some words and you do whatever you please. Look at Trump, oath of office, marriage vows? Not much action there on honoring them.

Kupperman looks like a trial balloon. But it seems to me that to permit this, breaks that authority completely. Then it is anarchy.

Taking it right up the edge but not over. But then they break the spirit of the law. And again, anarchy.

horathb · October 28, 2019, 2:41pm

My little brother used to get his way if, after receiving a directive, he’d whine “do I haaaave to?” to the other parent. How is this any different? Are they checking to see if the judge knows what “subpoena” means?

mushr00m1e · October 28, 2019, 2:43pm

Yes, the highly principled “I’d like to reveal the details of the president’s wrongdoing that I disapprove of, but I’d like to preserve the mechanism by which presidents conceal wrongdoing in case one day I have to conceal wrongdoing I’m in favor of”

ghost · October 28, 2019, 2:43pm

True. And they’re not just claiming executive privilege, they’re claiming absolute immunity from having to testify. That’s a much bigger ask, because it essentially negates congressional oversight authority with respect to anyone inside the White House or whom the president identifies as an advisor.

paulw · October 28, 2019, 2:46pm

And at the same time the republicans are complaining about the impeachment investigation not being wrapped up by thanksgiving.

I think that only question here is whether the court slaps down both questions or simply throws the case out because it’s not in the business of issuing advisory opinions on such obvious material. And then of course the endless appeals.

birdford · October 28, 2019, 2:47pm

whether Kupperman is covered under White House lawyer Pat Cipollone’s assertion that he is “absolutely immune from compelled congressional testimony with respect to matters related to his service as senior adviser to the President.”

Are they referring to the insane all-encompassing screed that Cippolone sent out a few weeks ago? It is my understanding that most lawyers think that entire thing was a travesty. Have I got my insane screeds mixed up?

paul_lukasiak · October 28, 2019, 2:50pm

This reeks of a set-up by team Trump

according to the complaint, Kupperman’s lawyer (cooper) was not served with the subpoena until 4:14 PM on Friday 0CT 25, although it had been issued on Oct 21. It should be noted, however, that there was public reporting that Kupperman was scheduled to testify on Wed, Oct 23rd (a fact that went unmentioned in the filing)
by 7:13 PM (when David Jolly tweeting about it), the NY Times had published an article on the complaint filed in federal court
Based on the complaint, that means that between 4:14 PM, and 7:13 PM, Cooper contacted the White House Council (Cippolone) about the subpoena, who contacted the DoJ (Engel), who then wrote a 2 1/2 page letter (saying that Kupperman had absolute immunity) and sent it to Cippolone. Cippolone in turn, wrote a 1 1/2 page cover letter saying the President instructed Kupperman not to testify, and sent it to Cooper. Cooperman then wrote a 17 page legal complaint, and filed it with the DC District court. Again, this all happened in a three hour span of time.
While ostensibly neutral, the arguments presented by Cooper on behalf of Kupperman are have DoJ/White House framing
Kupperman does not challenge what should be the central issue in his case – the authority of a President to “instruct” a private citizen about anything. There is no statutory basis for this authority, nor is there any legal precedent suggesting a President has such authority.

ronbyers · October 28, 2019, 2:51pm

I recognize what Team Trump has been claiming from the beginning. This absolute immunity argument is really an Alice in Wonderland argument. I have been re-reading the case law on executive privilege and can find no judicial authority for an absolute immunity from having to testify before Congress. In fact all of the precedents run the other direction.

If you want to research this issue yourself start with United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974.)

ralph_vonholst · October 28, 2019, 2:53pm

RoJo is a very naughty boy.

thunderclapnewman · October 28, 2019, 2:53pm

It is the very nature of modern conservatism to commit treason in pursuit of absolute power.

tomanthony · October 28, 2019, 2:53pm

For all he has done for our country, Donald Trump is fully deserving of the glorious ignominy of being the first president to ever be removed from office by the impeachment process.
Are you as eager as I am?

Bri2k · October 28, 2019, 2:54pm

Let it stall. Enough stalling and this lands in moscow mitch’s lap just in time to brand the traitors for what they are right before election day 2020.

thunderclapnewman · October 28, 2019, 2:55pm

I assume that you refer to the extra-legal nonsense that Trump dictated (at least in part) and had sent to Schiff.

glblank · October 28, 2019, 2:56pm

I wouldn’t trust a word Bolton said. He will look to burnish his own reputation, period. It all depends on the judge. Kavanaugh isn’t the only leaker wearing a robe.