Jump to content
modestobulldog

Game Thread: Impeachment

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, THEUniversityofNevada said:

Turley's argument would hold more water if the Executive Branch were fighting subpoenas in court, but they have made it very clear, in their opinion, the Executive Branch is now completely free from any kind of Congressional oversight. 

The courts haven’t issued any subpoenas for them to fight in court. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

The courts haven’t issued any subpoenas for them to fight in court. 

Has congress issued any official subpoenas yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, retrofade said:

 

Grandpa Ranty requested it earlier today. So here we go. 

That being said, I thought his angry rallying cry was "Drain the Swamp", and not "Clean the Swamp".

I'm not sure he is aware that there are alternatives to doubling down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mugtang said:

Has congress issued any official subpoenas yet?

What do you mean by official? They’ve made requests for documents and people to testify, but they haven’t got the courts to order people to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

What do you mean by official? They’ve made requests for documents and people to testify, but they haven’t got the courts to order people to do so.

I don’t think Congress needs to go to the courts to issue subpoenas. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, retrofade said:

Here are Pelosi's remarks.

 

Long live the kings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, THEUniversityofNevada said:

Turley's argument would hold more water if the Executive Branch were fighting subpoenas in court, but they have made it very clear, in their opinion, the Executive Branch is now completely free from any kind of Congressional oversight. 

True but Turley’s correct in that it’s the courts role to decide when an appropriate use of Executive Privilege is being used.  I do agree in today’s electronic age the courts timeframes are too slow and the process needs to be accelerated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mugtang said:

I don’t think Congress needs to go to the courts to issue subpoenas. 

Not a congressional subpoena that’s for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Has congress issued any official subpoenas yet?

Timothy Morrison (Oct. 31) 
Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson (Oct. 30)
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman (Oct. 29)
Former Deputy National Security Adviser Charles Kupperman (Oct. 28)*
Acting Assistant Secretary of State Philip Reeker (Oct. 26)
Deputy Assistant Secretary Laura Cooper (Oct. 23)
Ambassador William Taylor (Oct. 22) 
Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent (Oct. 15) 
Fiona Hill (Oct. 14)
Former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch (Oct. 11)
Energy Secretary Rick Perry (Oct. 10)*
Giuliani associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman (Oct. 10)
European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland (Oct. 8)
Defense Secretary Mark Esper/The Pentagon (Oct. 7) 
Acting Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought (Oct. 7)*
Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney/The White House (Oct. 4) *
Vice President Mike Pence (Oct. 4) *
Rudy Giuliani (Sept. 30)*
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (Sept. 27)*
OMB's Associate Director of National Security Programs Michael Duffey (Nov. 5)*
State Department Counselor Ulrich Brechbuhl (Nov. 6)*
Secretary of Defense Mark Esper (Oct. 7)*

* Refusing to comply

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mugtang said:

I don’t think Congress needs to go to the courts to issue subpoenas. 

They do if they want the legal authority to enforce it.

Otherwise you have a separation of powers dispute like we have here. Congress says show up or else, the executive branch says no. Then Congress says well you’re in contempt and has to refer the matter to...the executive branch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mugtang said:

I don’t think Congress needs to go to the courts to issue subpoenas. 

They don’t.  But they have to go to court to get the Executive Branch to obey them.  The problem is the judicial branch is too slow and allows the Executive Branch to run out the clock.  Oversight is stymied by the glacial pace of the court system.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

They do if they want the legal authority to enforce it.

Otherwise you have a separation of powers dispute like we have here. Congress says show up or else, the executive branch says no. Then Congress says well you’re in contempt and has to refer the matter to...the executive branch. 

This isn’t a court proceeding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

They don’t.  But they have to go to court to get the Executive Branch to obey them.  The problem is the judicial branch is too slow and allows the Executive Branch to run out the clock.  Oversight is stymied by the glacial pace of the court system.

the executive told them not to comply. The senate will decide the guilt of the executive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, toonkee said:

the executive told them not to comply. The senate will decide the guilt of the executive.

McConnell is playing the long game.  Watch him remove Trump for Pence because Pence is much easier to control. Cocaine Mitch is literally the most powerful person in the country right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s continue down the congressional subpoena thought exercise. Congress subpoenas Pence. Pence and Trump say no. Congress goes to court. Court tells Pence and Trump to comply. Pence and Trump say no. Who’s enforcing now? 

End scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Let’s continue down the congressional subpoena thought exercise. Congress subpoenas Pence. Pence and Trump say no. Congress goes to court. Court tells Pence and Trump to comply. Pence and Trump say no. Who’s enforcing now? 

End scene.

Well at least then we’d have a crime and better argument for removal.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mugtang said:

McConnell is playing the long game.  Watch him remove Trump for Pence because Pence is much easier to control. Cocaine Mitch is literally the most powerful person in the country right now. 

He’s a deft player, but McConnell is not a wizard. Like it or not, Trump is his best hand to play. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Akkula said:

This thread is getting to lame.   It is like trying to fit and entire football season of games into one thread. 

Are the facts lame or the make believe statements like, "there was no crime" nonsense?

Per Pelosi

"The facts are uncontested," she said. "The president abused his power for his own personal political benefit at the expense of our national security by withholding military aid and a crucial Oval Office meeting in exchange for an announcement of an investigation into his political rival." "His wrongdoing strikes at the very heart of our constitution," she added. "Our democracy is what is at stake. The president leaves us no choice but to act." "If we allow a president to be above the law, we do so at the peril of our republic," she said.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mugtang said:

You guys can split it off if you’d like.  I can lock this one. 

Boo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×