The political strategy of waiting for a judge to make a decision.

[kentuck]

Kupperman, Bolton, and Mulvaney have taken their case to a judge. They want someone to decide for them if they should respond to a request or a subpoena to appear before the Congress. Their president is telling them not to appear.

The Committee is refusing to get in a court battle with Donald Trump. What's to say if the judge tells them they have a duty to respond to the Congressional subpoena but they decide to appeal to the Appeals Court?

It would be nothing but a delay. Democrats may be finished with Articles of Impeachment by December 10th, whatever the judge might rule.

Both Parties are strategizing around this date, in my opinion.

[lark]

1. Problem is not 12/10, it's the appeals afterwards that would tie this up in court.

I heard an estimate today that it would take a year for this to wend it's way to SCOTUS, and can we trust them one bit anyway? Think we should go with what we've got. Do think they should subpoena the true transcript, not the phonied up version with over half of the conversation missing.

[kentuck]

2. Exactly right!

The Committee cannot play the "delay" game with Trump. They will go with what they have.

If, for some reason, the case was not appealed to a higher court, the Democrats would like the opportunity to question any of the three before Articles were filed with the US Senate. December 10th could still be a very important date.

[lark]

4. Yeah, another circled date on the calendar.

[UniteFightBack]

3. They are using it as cover. nt

[not_the_one]

5. yes, this is nothing but posturing

They know that the impeachment will be over with before a court ruling, and sent to the senate where nothing will happen.

They can then take credit for stepping forward (yet actually doing NOTHING), while offering themselves as legitimate, reasonable compromises for leading the so-called NEW republican party.

I question why the judges approached refuse to fast track these cases. They KNOW more and more damage is being done every day this goes on.

[Xolodno]

6. I think they are comfortable telling Congress where the dead bodies are...

...just not being implicated that they were the snitch.

Executive Privilege vs. Congressional Oversight has never been a question answered. Congress worries that they could be ruled against and the Executive worries they could be ruled against.....and I bet the Judiciary doesn't want to rule either way because a blanket answer either way allows for destabilization for the losing branch and blanket corruption for the winner. So the other option is to rule on a case by case basis...which then politicizes the courts which has had the tradition, albeit with failures and successes of being unbiased.

So, reveal info and let aide's who weren't personally involved with the President testify. While running to the courts on testifying, which they know would rather run out the clock on this question.

[crickets]

7. +1