If Mueller subpoenas Trump to testify, fight would go to Supreme Court: Trump lawyer
- Thread starter Darkman00
- Start date
nat4900
Diamond Member
- Mar 3, 2015
- 42,021
- 5,978
- 1,870
- Banned
- #22
MORON....(and Trump ass-dweller)........Were your orange clown refuse to answer a subpoena......then he WILL be impeached even by the spineless republicans in the senate................
Once impeached, and as a private commoner, want to know what would happen to him about refusing to answer a subpoena?..............
Fun days ahead......................LOL
Edgetho
Diamond Member
- Mar 27, 2012
- 22,805
- 16,013
- 2,405
I think dimocrap scum, the lowest form of life to ever exist on the Planet's surface, would Impeach Trump any time they thought they could get the votes for it.
ANY time.
There have only been two President's Impeached in our history.
And both were dimocraps.
Suck on it, frat-boy. It ain't gonna happen. dimocrap scum don't have the balls.
And maybe if you had payed attention in school instead of making posters for protests at the ROTC building, you would have learned about the Separation of Powers.
The Judicial can't step on the Executive with a ******* subpoena, shit-for-brains.
Congress can during the Impeachment process but that's as far as it goes.
moronic douche. Stop bringing your STUPID ******* Talking Points in here from DailyKooks
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 100,075
- 106,477
- 3,615
Dear Sock,
I think Trump ought to subpoena Mueller to testify on his many conflicts of interest first.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 100,075
- 106,477
- 3,615
You can always tell, the closer and more to the point a person is, the more Nate lets loose with the empty, puerile, ad hominem attacks.
Fun days ahead? You mean like 2010, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018?
You keep predicting fun days right around the corner, but they NEVER SHOW UP (for you).
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 161,779
- 88,340
- 2,645
Thanks Jake for showing Mueller CANNOT subpoena Trump
Dan Stubbs
FORGET ---- HELL
- Banned
- #27
J D watch reports:
Judicial Watch Investigates Leftist Attacks on Israel
President Barack Obama’s prejudice against Israel is still reverberating in the halls of power in Washington. We’re trying to expose one aspect of that with a Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of State, and the U.S. Department of Defense.
We want all records of communications regarding anti-Israel group Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions’ (BDS) efforts to lobby the Obama administration to adopt policies to harm companies doing business with Israel (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:18-cv-01721)).
We sued after all three agencies failed to respond to nearly identical April 23, 2018, FOIA requests seeking:
All emails to or from current or former officials in the [DOD, DHS, or State] Office of the Secretary containing the phrase “boycott divestment and sanctions.”
All emails to or from current or former officials in the [DOD, DHS, or State] Office of the Secretary containing both the terms “BDS” and “Israel.”
Here is the background. In February 2016 President Obama signed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 into law. It compels U.S. trade partners to cut ties to the BDS movement and protects Israel territories from illegal discrimination. But Obama announced:
Certain provisions of this Act, by conflating Israel and “Israeli-controlled territories,” are contrary to longstanding bipartisan United States policy, including with regard to the treatment of settlements. Moreover, consistent with longstanding constitutional practice, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions in the Act that purport to direct the Executive to seek to negotiate and enter into particular international agreements (section 414(a)(1)) or to take certain positions in international negotiations with respect to international agreements with foreign countries not qualifying for trade authorities procedures (sections 108(b), 414(a)(2), 415, and 909(c)) in a manner that does not interfere with my constitutional authority to conduct diplomacy.
Shortly after Obama signed the act, the Customs and Border Protection Bureau restated the West Bank Country of Origin Marking Requirement rules requiring labeling of goods as being from the “West Bank,” despite the fact that it is not a sovereign country. The Jerusalem Post later reported the restated rules were a result of several complaints filed by activists wanting the United States to follow policy guidelines distinguishing goods produced from Israel and the West Bank.
Proponents of the West Bank country-of-origin marking requirements claim it stems from “longstanding bipartisan U.S. policy” toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. First put in place in 1995 under the Clinton administration, the rule is to preserve the distinction between the goods produced in State of Israel and the good produced in the territories it controls over the Green Line.
The BDS movement is endorsed by the PLO and other anti-Israel groups encouraging an economic and cultural boycott of Israel. It has gained the support of radical leftwing groups here in the United States.
Americans deserve to know if the Obama-era agenda of supporting anti-Israel radicals in subverting U.S. law is ongoing. These entrenched bureaucrats of the Deep State clearly require lawsuits to compel observance of FOIA law.
Until next week…
C_Clayton_Jones
Diamond Member
Not very – and Trump won’t like the outcome.
If for one second Mueller had any evidence warranting a subpoena he would have already moved forward.
Request for a interview should not be confused with a subpoena, one has to first identify the scope of a subpoena, the interview process is a back door tactic used to broaden the scope of acquiring incriminating evidence or inconsistent response to questions outside the scope of the investigation.
So why has Mueller not interviewed Clinton and Obama personnel who were directly responsible for the FISA warrant? Why has Mueller's team not prosecuted those that knowingly lied and mislead the FISA court?
Why has Mueller's team not subpoenaed the sources responsible for the investigative report presented to the FISA court?
Request for a interview should not be confused with a subpoena, one has to first identify the scope of a subpoena, the interview process is a back door tactic used to broaden the scope of acquiring incriminating evidence or inconsistent response to questions outside the scope of the investigation.
So why has Mueller not interviewed Clinton and Obama personnel who were directly responsible for the FISA warrant? Why has Mueller's team not prosecuted those that knowingly lied and mislead the FISA court?
Why has Mueller's team not subpoenaed the sources responsible for the investigative report presented to the FISA court?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
"palestine" Islamists hail anti-Islam supremacist Konrad Berkowicz [some say his parents were real Nazis]- Started by Pastelli
- Replies: 1
-
Israel is losing US support – even among Republicans- Started by Andrew_Jackson_FTW
- Replies: 5
-
Problem With a Particle Being an Excitation in a Field- Started by talanum1
- Replies: 0
-
Is the Guru Going All-In on Energy? Breaking Down the Mohnish Pabrai 13F for Q4 2025- Started by BellaJones
- Replies: 0
