What the hell is Cheney doing criticiziing Obama?

[Peejay]

Cheney refused a Federal Subpoena to testify before congress. He is in contempt, as we speak, never punished, which makes him a fugative from justice. The fact that no one had the balls to punish him doesn't erase the crime.

 

[JimH52]

When Cheney ought to be tried on corruption and war crimes charges?

You do realize that Mr Obama is the first person ever elected to the Presidency by criticizing and campaigning against a person that wasn't even running for the office, don't you?

Do you realize that you voted for the mental midget twice, which enabled Obama to be elected. You want to blame someone for Obama, look in the mirror.

 

[Gunny]

Cheney refused a Federal Subpoena to testify before congress. He is in contempt, as we speak, never punished, which makes him a fugative from justice. The fact that no one had the balls to punish him doesn't erase the crime.

Except that he claimed executive immunity; which, means he was not in contempt.

Not to mention that if he was, Congress can subpoena, but it has no judicial authority.

Besides, Congress is in contempt of the Constitution and the citizens of the US on a daily basis. They aren't in jail.

 

[alan1]

When Cheney ought to be tried on corruption and war crimes charges?

You do realize that Mr Obama is the first person ever elected to the Presidency by criticizing and campaigning against a person that wasn't even running for the office, don't you?

Do you realize that you voted for the mental midget twice, which enabled Obama to be elected. You want to blame someone for Obama, look in the mirror.

Well, didn't you just make a leap of judgment about me (and others)?
Guess again.

 

[WillowTree]

Next time you complain about Cheney speaking his mind, look up at the flag. This is America. Dont like it? You know where the door is!

lol don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya..

 

[Peejay]

Cheney refused a Federal Subpoena to testify before congress. He is in contempt, as we speak, never punished, which makes him a fugative from justice. The fact that no one had the balls to punish him doesn't erase the crime.

Except that he claimed executive immunity; which, means he was not in contempt.

Not to mention that if he was, Congress can subpoena, but it has no judicial authority.

Besides, Congress is in contempt of the Constitution and the citizens of the US on a daily basis. They aren't in jail.

I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.

By your logic, and Cheney's, impeachent is now avoidable by claiming a non existant immunity. There is no such immunity. Well.....there shouldn't be. I'm just waiting for the next democrat to use this wonder of expanded executive power and then we'll talk again. maybe Obama will be summoned for impeachment and claim immunity from subpoena.

And it is the Justice Department who has the responsibilty to enforce these subpoenas. To claim that congress is void of the authority to enforce subpoenas is ridiculous. I guess you and I don't have to show either if we get one ? Being they can't do anything about it ? I would love to see you try.

 

[Gunny]

Cheney refused a Federal Subpoena to testify before congress. He is in contempt, as we speak, never punished, which makes him a fugative from justice. The fact that no one had the balls to punish him doesn't erase the crime.

Except that he claimed executive immunity; which, means he was not in contempt.

Not to mention that if he was, Congress can subpoena, but it has no judicial authority.

Besides, Congress is in contempt of the Constitution and the citizens of the US on a daily basis. They aren't in jail.

I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.

By your logic, and Cheney's, impeachent is now avoidable by claiming a non existant immunity. There is no such immunity. Well.....there shouldn't be. I'm just waiting for the next democrat to use this wonder of expanded executive power and then we'll talk again. maybe Obama will be summoned for impeachment and claim immunity from subpoena.

And it is the Justice Department who has the responsibilty to enforce these subpoenas. To claim that congress is void of the authority to enforce subpoenas is ridiculous. I guess you and I don't have to show either if we get one ? Being they can't do anything about it ? I would love to see you try.

You are incorrect.

In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government. The concept of executive privilege is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine, and/or derived from the supremacy of executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[1]

The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns.

Executive privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clinton wasn't subpoenaed over any matter of national security. He WAS in fact, subpoenaed by a special investigative committee that was given its authority to investigate his indiscretions by then-Attorney General, Janet Reno.

This isn't "my logic." It's fact.

It is not the Justice Department's responsibility to enforce Congressional subpoenas.

The Congressional Subpoena Power: How It Is Enforced - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime

You are talking about two different things here. Law, and your politically-biased opinion. What you'd "like to see" is irrelevant to anything I said.

And no, you wouldn't "love to see me try it" if I decided I wasn't going.

 

[Peejay]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

 

[DiveCon]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

you are expecting it, eh?

 

[alan1]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

you are expecting it, eh?

You aren't?

 

[Peejay]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

you are expecting it, eh?

Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.

Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.

 

[Alpha1]

Peethepants...you're a funny guy...entertaining....

Sip on a glass or two of Koolade and come back with your best shot...then we'll all see if we can guess your IQ....
We'll pick a # between 60 and 90...that should cover it....

Do you want to be a lawyer when you grow up ?

 

[DiveCon]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

you are expecting it, eh?

Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.

Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.

LOL

wow

there was no precedent set
you are delusional now

 

[Peejay]

Peethepants...you're a funny guy...entertaining....

Sip on a glass or two of Koolade and come back with your best shot...then we'll all see if we can guess your IQ....
We'll pick a # between 60 and 90...that should cover it....

He he......you know, my parents got sick of being called into school everytime there was some test.....teachers didn't know what to do with me. The Navy had to send in a special recruiter to deal with a perfect ASVAB score.

Testing doesn't mean jack shit though. My IQ gets me perpetual invitations to MENSA but I don't know what the hell I would talk to those people about. You see, I have quite the impressive IQ but not much education to go along with it. What a waste.

But.......I get by. I'll take ten minutes against you in a room of random objects and see who assembles the most effective weapon.

 

[Peejay]

you are expecting it, eh?

Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.

Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.

LOL

wow

there was no precedent set
you are delusional now

Legal precedent ? No.

Precedent as in an action that is used to justify future actions ? You betcha.

 

[Gunny]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

The duty falls on the AG of the District of Columbia, who has little power outside his jurisdiction, as my second link above states.

Congress's recourse is to obtain counsel and take it to court, as my second link above also states.

The weight of history falls on the side of the executive branch tossing a few crumbs Congress's way to mollify their ruffled feathers.

While you aren't forgetting, don't forget that it would depend on what Congress wanted; which, is a horse of a different color than a special investigator appointed by the AG of the US. Let's don't mix apples and oranges here.

And just to respond your little implication in your last statement, I don't and have never liked Darth Cheney. In response to your Clinton comments, I did not support going after him. Might want to toss those two facts into your assumption machine where I am concerned and see where they come out.

 

[Avatar4321]

I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.

Are you honestly suggesting that abusing authority to get blow jobs is somehow privileged information and national security information isnt? What is the separation of powers issue in purjury/blow jobs?

 

[Gunny]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

you are expecting it, eh?

Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.

Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.

Again, no precedent was set. The precedent of executive privilege was set by George Washington in 1796.

Using the Clinton deal as an example has no bearing on executive privilege. Kenneth Starr was a Special Prosecutor of the US Attorney General, and he had the power to subpoena and enforce them.

 

[Peejay]

You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.

But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.

Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.

At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.

The duty falls on the AG of the District of Columbia, who has little power outside his jurisdiction, as my second link above states.

Congress's recourse is to obtain counsel and take it to court, as my second link above also states.

The weight of history falls on the side of the executive branch tossing a few crumbs Congress's way to mollify their ruffled feathers.

While you aren't forgetting, don't forget that it would depend on what Congress wanted; which, is a horse of a different color than a special investigator appointed by the AG of the US. Let's don't mix apples and oranges here.

And just to respond your little implication in your last statement, I don't and have never liked Darth Cheney. In response to your Clinton comments, I did not support going after him. Might want to toss those two facts into your assumption machine where I am concerned and see where they come out.

I'm not assuming any position you may have on Cheney or Clinton.

From my meager, uneducated view, when a subpoena is issued, you respond. It's easy enough to take the fifth. We aren't talking about subpoena of documents here. Again, from my meager little brain, it just seems that you, despite your huff and puff, would not make it very far if you chose to ignore a subpoena. The men with guns and badges would come for you. I just like to see my elected officials held to the same law as I.

 

[Gunny]

I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.

Are you honestly suggesting that abusing authority to get blow jobs is somehow privileged information and national security information isnt? What is the separation of powers issue in purjury/blow jobs?

I think if Hillary Clinton had a problem with Bill getting a hummer she could have filed an adultery charge with the DC court. It was a civil matter.

The fact is, the investigative body in that case was not Congress, and Cheney has set no precedent by refusing to comply with a Congressional subpoena.