Trump signals he will use executive privilege to block Bolton testimony in Senate

[Adolf_Twitler]

I think you are confused continually and a low IQ dimwit. Why does Trump need to get out of jail dimwit? Has he been charged with any crimes?

Hey Idiot! Do you even listen to people? It was Mueller that said, "We did not investigate Donald Trump for any crimes he may, or may not have committed". He said, he had no choice because The Justice Department has a rule that you cannot indict a sitting president.

When Donald Trump is either removed from office through impeachment- OR VOTED OUT IN 2020- He will be facing indictments and charges.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Nope. The act of impeachment never occurred. The House just voted on it. Queen Nancy never actually impeached.

 

[PoliTalker]

"Trump signals he will use executive privilege to block Bolton testimony in Senate"

Then he signals his own guilt.

 

[Getin the ring]

Hey Idiot! Do you even listen to people? It was Mueller that said, "We did not investigate Donald Trump for any crimes he may, or may not have committed". He said, he had no choice because The Justice Department has a rule that you cannot indict a sitting president.

When Donald Trump is either removed from office through impeachment- OR VOTED OUT IN 2020- He will be facing indictments and charges.

still talking about Mueller?

 

[Getin the ring]

"Trump signals he will use executive privilege to block Bolton testimony in Senate"

Then he signals his own guilt.

to who , you?

the house had their turn, now watch the big boy section bitch Slap Nancy back to San Francisco

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Southern Chicken,

Up to the courts to determine legally. Impeachment is a political tool not judicial authority .

Impeachment is an unintendedly political form of justice, the method by which it is ensured that even the President is not above the law. The President cannot be allowed to have the power to quash impeachment, or impeachment is powerless. Impeachment was not included in the Constitution to be meaningless.

For impeachment to function as intended, the elected officials of the Congress must honor their oaths of office, something the Republicans have, to date, failed to do. Republicans never even once considered that Trump might be guilty. Instead, they assumed he was innocent, and came to his defense, refused to consider the evidence. Their Constitutional duty is not to defend the President. That was pure partisanship. It is the Republicans who are treating this as a partisan political function, and the Democrats who are fulfilling their oaths of office, doing their sworn duty.

 

[Getin the ring]

Hello Southern Chicken,



Impeachment is an unintendedly political form of justice, the method by which it is ensured that even the President is not above the law. The President cannot be allowed to have the power to quash impeachment, or impeachment is powerless. Impeachment was not included in the Constitution to be meaningless.

For impeachment to function as intended, the elected officials of the Congress must honor their oaths of office, something the Republicans have, to date, failed to do. Republicans never even once considered that Trump might be guilty. Instead, they assumed he was innocent, and came to his defense, refused to consider the evidence. Their Constitutional duty is not to defend the President. That was pure partisanship. It is the Republicans who are treating this as a partisan political function, and the Democrats who are fulfilling their oaths of office, doing their sworn duty.

do you do standup on the side?

you have got to be the goofiest poster on the forum, hands down

 

[Truth Detector]

Hey Idiot! Do you even listen to people? It was Mueller that said, "We did not investigate Donald Trump for any crimes he may, or may not have committed". He said, he had no choice because The Justice Department has a rule that you cannot indict a sitting president.

You willful idiot; if it wasn't about criminality, you don't need a Special Council. This is why I hate arguing with low IQ, uneducated morons like you. You have to be educated first. Moron.

When Donald Trump is either removed from office through impeachment- OR VOTED OUT IN 2020- He will be facing indictments and charges.

That's not going to happen. YOU know it isn't which is why you are too big of a pussy to take my 2020 bet. Apparently, you're seriously stuck on moron with a severe case of TDS.

 

[Truth Detector]

"Trump signals he will use executive privilege to block Bolton testimony in Senate"
Then he signals his own guilt.

That's a moronic standard that NO ONE will be held to.

 

[Into the Night]

Not according to the U. S. Constitution.

Yes. According to the Constitution.

Where does it say anything about the "act of filing" or actions required by the speaker?

The Senate cannot act unless it has the impeachment articles delivered by the House.

According to the rules and procedures of the House: "The respondent in an impeachment proceeding is impeached by the adoption of the House of articles of impeachment."

They can't change what an impeachment is.

Chapter 27 on impeachment also has a good discussion of impeachable offenses.

What crime has Trump committed?

The point is now moot. Queen Nancy finally impeached the President yesterday. It is now in the hands of the Senate.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, the House has the power to subpoena.

No, they don't. They must go through the courts.

One of the many mentions of the House subpoena power in the Guide to the Rules, Precedents, and Procedures of the House says:

The House cannot change the Constitution.

"To carry out its duties, each committee and each subcommittee is authorized by clause 2(m) of rule XI to hold hearings and to subpoena witnesses or compel the production of documents."

The House does not have authority to change the Constitution.

The Supreme Court did not subpoena documents from Nixon, it ruled Nixon had to turn over the subpoenaed documents to the federal district court that had been subpoenaed by Jaworski.

Nixon was never impeached, dumbass.

 

[Into the Night]

Correct, if the person is being charged under criminal law. But since this is not a criminal case but a political impeachment it is the function of the House to determine if the president's actions constituted an impeachable offense and it did so by a majority vote.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that it has no role in the impeachment process.

"The majority opinion, by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, held that the courts may not review the impeachment and trial of a federal officer because the Constitution reserves that function to a coordinate political branch. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution gives the Senate the "sole power to try all impeachments." Because of the word sole it is clear that the judicial branch was not to be included. Furthermore, because the word try was originally understood to include factfinding committees, there was a textually demonstrable commitment to give broad discretion to the Senate in impeachments.

Furthermore the Framers believed that representatives of the people should try impeachments, and the Court was too small to justly try impeachments. Also, the judicial branch is "checked" by impeachments, so judicial involvement in impeachments might violate the doctrine of the separation of powers."

Since it is not a criminal case, there is nothing to impeach with. See Article II, $4 of the Constitution of the United States. You are only admitting that no crime was committed by Trump.

 

[Into the Night]

A veto is a constitutional power as part of the legislative process. They did not prevent the law from being passed or prevent the president from vetoing it.

A veto is obstructing Congress.

 

[Into the Night]

The law is much broader than holding a vote or conducting business.

It includes influences, obstructs, impedes the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress.

Refusing to give subpoenaed documents impedes the progress of that investigation.

However, this is all moot since the House already voted to impeach and determined the charges were impeachable offenses. They have the sole power to make this decision.

The House does not have power of subpoena. They must use the courts for that.
The impeachment did not occur until yesterday.

 

[Into the Night]

Hey Idiot! Do you even listen to people? It was Mueller that said, "We did not investigate Donald Trump for any crimes he may, or may not have committed". He said, he had no choice because The Justice Department has a rule that you cannot indict a sitting president.

Impeachment IS an indictment, dumbass.

When Donald Trump is either removed from office through impeachment-

Impeachment does not remove the President from office. Only the Senate can do that, and only if articles of impeachment are actually filed with the Senate (that was finally done yesterday).

OR VOTED OUT IN 2020-

Not likely.

He will be facing indictments and charges.

Impeachment IS indictment and charges, dumbass.

 

[Flash]

they can.
but the point is it's not any offense like "Obstruction of Congress" for POTUS to appeal to the courts over a subpoena

Appealing is not an offense, refusing to turn documents over is the offense. The courts do not even have to hear the case. The Senate can continue with the trial with available evidence.

 

[anatta]

Appealing is not an offense, refusing to turn documents over is the offense. The courts do not even have to hear the case. The Senate can continue with the trial with available evidence.

ridiculous. you don't answer a subpoena by 'turning over documents' while contesting the subpoena thru the courts

 

[Flash]

Since it is not a criminal case, there is nothing to impeach with. See Article II, $4 of the Constitution of the United States. You are only admitting that no crime was committed by Trump.

They obviously had enough to impeach since it already occurred.

I couldn't find anything in the Constitution that required a "filing" before the impeachment occurred. It only requires a majority vote as does the House rules and procedures.

 

[Flash]

A veto is obstructing Congress.

But not against the law since it is obviously constitutional. A veto does not "obstruct" Congress in any manner. Both houses would have conducted their legislative business and passed the bill. Nothing says that bill has to become law.

This is a big stretch to claim obstruction.

 

[Flash]

ridiculous. you don't answer a subpoena by 'turning over documents' while contesting the subpoena thru the courts

The Supreme Court appeal is for the president's financial records, not government documents/witnesses. The subpoena for McGahn was appealed but it was from the House which is now moot.