General Discussion

hlthe2b

(114,543 posts)

45. That is a civil contempt issue and they would litigate just as they already are on several others.

Thu Oct 31, 2019, 09:15 PM

Oct 2019

In fact the DC court hearing the Don McGahn issue is close to rendering a verdict and it appears it will go strongly against the admin. So that will render a considerable clarification on any "privilege" issues.

Here, the issue is whether or not the Trump attorneys get to take part in the hearings. If they continue to stonewall and obstruct. These are separate issues. The former issues with clarifying what is a lawful privilege for an individual subpoenaed and the extent to which Trump can hide behind it falls to the courts. The blanket issue on non-cooperation and its place in an obstruction article as well as the cooperative agreement to allow participation in the hearing side of impeachment falls to Congress.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

58 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Today's impeachment resolution .. includes a key provision that has potential to become game changer [View all] hlthe2b Oct 2019 OP

A very constitutional approach. I approve. Checks and balances! Nt Ninga Oct 2019 #1

I like this idea! RainCaster Oct 2019 #2

Excellent Mike 03 Oct 2019 #3

This Is a Brutal, Brilliant Fucking Trap! BRAVO PELOSI!! Skraxx Oct 2019 #4

Pelosi safeinOhio Oct 2019 #5

No Deal for You! Skraxx Oct 2019 #6

WHAT??? Actual consequences for bad behavior? Who could have guessed? calimary Nov 2019 #57

... orangecrush Oct 2019 #8

Oh snap! lark Oct 2019 #7

I like the idea of info on ALL CALLS involving Ukraine, BUT there is NO recording of the 7/25 call, napi21 Oct 2019 #11

But the question still remains: luvtheGWN Oct 2019 #15

I believe you're onto something. joost5 Oct 2019 #19

Indict Barr for Obstruction of Justice first. Lock him up. Oct 2019 #9

very smart. you either participate FULLY or NOT AT ALL. your choice. EveHammond13 Oct 2019 #10

Fuckin' A, Bubba! SergeStorms Oct 2019 #12

Whoa! Mme. Defarge Oct 2019 #13

Doesn't sound any different from normal expected, though, just Hortensis Oct 2019 #14

Actually, it HAS added a signficant aspect: His lawyers can NOT participate if they stonewall hlthe2b Oct 2019 #22

Yes, another nail to firm up the procedural structure, plug a rat hole Hortensis Oct 2019 #23

Except they will argue that he is not "unlawfully" refusing... I hope we don't end up in protracted JudyM Oct 2019 #41

Again. this is rules of the impeachment inquiry. Courts will not get involved in arbitrating rules hlthe2b Oct 2019 #42

Ok. We'll find out if it's accepted or fought... they are doing everything possible to slow down JudyM Oct 2019 #46

Kicked and recommended Uncle Joe Oct 2019 #16

Quid pro quo baby! lunatica Oct 2019 #17

Poetic Justice gab13by13 Oct 2019 #18

Welcome to DU. lunatica Oct 2019 #20

Wondering about the word "lawful". Doesn't that pretty much put us in the same place? He says Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2019 #21

There is precedence against global use of Executive Privilege during formal impeachment proeceedings hlthe2b Oct 2019 #24

So you are saying the Dens decide if it's "lawful" or Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2019 #32

They decide if Trump is adhering to the rules. So while they may not determine a "privilege" case hlthe2b Oct 2019 #34

I understand...but still strikes me that a court Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2019 #37

They decide on executive privilege via a suit or appeal if a contempt charge is brought hlthe2b Oct 2019 #38

Let's just simplify this. Corey Lewandowski is called Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2019 #43

That is a civil contempt issue and they would litigate just as they already are on several others. hlthe2b Oct 2019 #45

Thanks for imparting your patience and knowledge Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2019 #49

It is a novel approach that offers both inducement and a big stick. It will go hand in hand with hlthe2b Oct 2019 #50

Its a go. Trump will have to show docs and cooperate or STFU. riversedge Oct 2019 #25

One bit of advice for Trump's lawyers C_U_L8R Oct 2019 #26

DUzy Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2019 #33

traitortrump has already played out the 'witchunt'/kangaroo court stuff, wonder empedocles Oct 2019 #27

Remember he even threw BumRushDaShow Oct 2019 #29

"the White House should not be permitted to participate in the process only on its own terms." BumRushDaShow Oct 2019 #28

K&R Scurrilous Oct 2019 #30

Very clever! Reciprosity! Nitram Oct 2019 #31

It is brilliant malaise Oct 2019 #35

Gen-yee-us. Pure genius Roland99 Oct 2019 #36

Great Proud Liberal Dem Oct 2019 #39

Lock all of them up. warmfeet Oct 2019 #40

Smart helpmenow Oct 2019 #44

I think its ok but doesn't that just play into his strategy, scream and cry about the mean Dems Pepsidog Oct 2019 #47

Pretty much... regnaD kciN Oct 2019 #51

+1 ancianita Nov 2019 #53

It would backfire. gulliver Oct 2019 #48

I like this! Roland99 Nov 2019 #55

Like the way you think.... outside the box! Need Laura PourMeADrink Nov 2019 #56

K&R Cetacea Nov 2019 #52

my initial thought is that it doesn't matter orleans Nov 2019 #54

An interesting take on it.... hlthe2b Nov 2019 #58