“Executive privilege” meets “weapons of mass destruction related program activities.”
Hilarity, sadly, does not ensue.
2 Likes
O often that is the case. Yes.
1 Like
I freely acknowledge I may make initial statements lacking the “specificity” I MAY be countered on. I accept that.
At end of day? What I say is true…and being held in criminal contempt was not the issue. He was not held in contempt in way that contempt matters.
As it was Criminal.
Nadler folding means he failed to do what WE thepeople who voted for majority gave Nadler thePOWER to do.
NADLER IS NOT using the power we Voted for him to have.
That’s the problem.
I voted for him to use that power.
Congress failing to use the POWER granted by our votes?
Just begs the question, why GIVe you power if you’re not going to USE it?
Nadler & the Dems are failing to USE their Power…so why even bother to vote…if making you have power yields same outcome as when you didn’t have the power?
Might as well not vote.
2 Likes
Off Topic, but not entirely: Is the reason TPM has nothing about the Jeffrey Epstein story because (a) they are verifying a major scoop on the story, or (b) something else that is weird and troubling. I am voting for (a), for now. But this is a bit strange.
2 Likes
10 Likes
This is a weakness of our Constitution. It was written with the assumption that the President and his Cabinet would be honorable, patriotic citizens, who would have the nation’s interests foremost in their minds as they did their jobs, which their oath of office was going to make these honorable citizens do their jobs. No reason to add sections about what to do if these honorable citizens were not at all honorable, and would under no circumstances even try to put the nation’s interests above their own. So, a foreign enemy, like Russia, can just coast once they get their agent voted in as President. I have no suggestion for how to correct this weakness.
9 Likes
Republicans are so vile. Dems are so supine. They should say “Are you claiming Executive Privilege?” And when she says “no”, inform her that there is no such thing as “constitutionally-based Executive Branch confidentiality interests. Then instruct her to answer the question or be arrested.
6 Likes
Not sure about this, but here’s one possibility. It may be that formally invoking executive privilege must involve an aide or cabinet-official providing advice to the president. But that wouldn’t apply to conversations between Aide A and Aide B.
So, now you have some bafflegab boilerplate to cover that problem. The bafflegab serves two purposes: (1) for Trump fans, the statement seems to claim executive privilege. The Trumpistas nod their heads in agreement: Damn right. President’s conversations are privileged. (2) By claiming a (non-existent) “constitutionally-based Executive Branch confidentiality interest,” this statement cloaks anything and everything in the Executive Branch as confidential and not subject to Congressional inquiry. So much for checks and balances.
8 Likes
Sure, but when Trump claims it’s a nice day outside, you look out the window for yourself, and carry an umbrella.
2 Likes
There’s a thread over in the hive —
1 Like
I wonder what would happen if I flagged discobot…
1 Like
FIFY
Then you are letting the GOP take everything. Your vote is the only voice you have short of pitch forks and bullets.
3 Likes
This Democratic House is an absolute farce. Zero oversight. Zero PR gains. Zero political gains. Zero gains with the Democratic base. Zero electoral gains with swing voters. Since Trump and Pelosi successfully buried the Mueller report, Trump’s approval rating has climbed to 47% among RV, if the Washington Post poll is to be believed.
1 Like
Please don’t darr …
We’d probably be attacked with a barage of outdated news events
over on the Forum Topics Page …
or something like that —
4 Likes
I think the zero day flaw was they didn’t assume an entire political party would go on in for takeover by hostile state.
Cc @castor_troy
6 Likes
Even there, they had an out. The Electoral College was supposed to ensure that that wouldn’t happen, because they’d recognize the threat and eliminate that person from being President…
It really was a well thought-out protection mechanism all around, for the time it was produced.
I am more than 1000000000% positive that they would not create the same system if they were present today.
6 Likes
It’s summer and people are on vacation so Josh’s staff is not at full force and effect?
You be you! You’re not so innocent and un-conniving. At least give a sinister cast to the whole thing, that Josh’s NYC HQ is in one of those seven floors, that they couldn’t post articles which might offend their patron, and that now they’re looking for new digs since the place got raided.
ETA: At least pontificate on the connection between Gawker keeping on going after Epstein after the settlement and the fellow hedge fund operator/mathemetician Thiel taking Gawker down later…
2 Likes
I agree…just my frustration speaking,
But while I get that.
I get out the vote.
I bring people to the polls.
I TELL them …
YOUR vote matters.
They not seeing that with this Congress.
Makes GOTV…that much harder.
3 Likes