Intel Dem: No reason for White House to defy subpoena unless Trump is 'guilty'

[Synthaholic]

So, why is 2aguy so ignorant?

 

[Synthaholic]

Or is 2aguy just a gullible useful idiot for the corrupt rightwing?

 

[Synthaholic]

I think it’s both: 2aguy is an ignorant useful idiot for traitors.

 

[justoffal]

What other explanation is there?


Intel Dem: No reason for White House to defy subpoena unless Trump is 'guilty'
.
House Intelligence Committee member Rep. Denny Heck (D-Wash.) said Friday that there is no reason for the White House to defy a congressional subpoena for Ukraine-related documents unless President Trump is "guilty."



Asked what would happen if the White House doesn't comply with the subpoena, Heck told CNN, "Defiance of this act constitutes obstruction of a legitimate congressional inquiry in pursuit of impeachment, and as a consequence of that we will presume or infer that he is not innocent of whatever it is that we're out to verify with the documentation."

"There is no other reason for him to withhold it, to hide it, unless of course he's guilty," he added, referring to Trump.


Intel Dem: No reason for White House to defy subpoena unless Trump is 'guilty'

And there's no reason to object to police coming into your home without a warrant, and searching through all your stuff, unless you have something to hide, right?

A subpoena is the warrant, dumbass.

Um....nope... Not even close

Jo

 

[justoffal]

And there's no reason to object to police coming into your home without a warrant, and searching through all your stuff, unless you have something to hide, right?

A subpoena is the warrant, dumbass.

Right....
The Witch hunting Dems have dragged Trump from DAY ONE through hell from "RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA" to "KAVANAUGH THE RAPIST" to this

So.....now he should just trust those wonderful, trustworthy Dems are ONLY after facts and truth......

Synthaholic = Clueless Imbecile........to put it VERY politely

Trump and the Right MUST stop playing nice. We're past that obviously.[/QUOTE]

The reason he wants the vote is so Kevin McCarthy can have subpoena power also.
Makes perfect sense. No mystery.
The reason Pelosi won't vote is to prevent McCarthy from having that power. No vote
No impeachment....end of story.

Jo

 

[2aguy]

Or is 2aguy just a gullible useful idiot for the corrupt rightwing?

View attachment 284531

Moron....an impeachment is supposed to be conducted through the Judiciary Committee in the open......they are hiding every aspect of this hoax because they know they have nothing......Trump released the Transcript, so there is no need to have closed door sessions in a committee that has no bearing on an impeachment...you twit.

 

[justoffal]

Or is 2aguy just a gullible useful idiot for the corrupt rightwing?

View attachment 284531

Moron....an impeachment is supposed to be conducted through the Judiciary Committee in the open......they are hiding every aspect of this hoax because they know they have nothing......Trump released the Transcript, so there is no need to have closed door sessions in a committee that has no bearing on an impeachment...you twit.

After this fails what will they try next?

Jo

 

[M14 Shooter]

The other side does not have a right to call witnesses until an actual trial starts. The Trial in the Senate does not start until AFTER the House Of Representatives impeaches the President.

- How can the membership of the house determine if they should vote for/against impeachment w/o seeing the evidence and/or hearing from witnesses?
- How can this vote be informed if the only evidence/witnesses the membership of the house sees is that which the leadership of the house wants them to see?
- Why would the leadership of the house want to limit the evidence and witnesses seen by the membership of the house as a whole?

 

[BlindBoo]

The reason he wants the vote is so Kevin McCarthy can have subpoena power also.
Makes perfect sense. No mystery.
The reason Pelosi won't vote is to prevent McCarthy from having that power. No vote
No impeachment....end of story.

Jo

Yeah that's what the Dems wanted in 2015 but guess what? Republicans denied the request and kept the subpoena power all to themselves.

"For a number of panels, rule change would eliminate long-standing requirements that the chairmen either consult or get consent from the minority party before issuing subpoenas for testimony and documents or hold a majority vote. The committees who saw rule changes include panels with oversight into controversial Obama policies like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations law, immigration and Obamacare.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration."

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

 

[justoffal]

The reason he wants the vote is so Kevin McCarthy can have subpoena power also.
Makes perfect sense. No mystery.
The reason Pelosi won't vote is to prevent McCarthy from having that power. No vote
No impeachment....end of story.

Jo

Yeah that's what the Dems wanted in 2015 but guess what? Republicans denied the request and kept the subpoena power all to themselves.

"For a number of panels, rule change would eliminate long-standing requirements that the chairmen either consult or get consent from the minority party before issuing subpoenas for testimony and documents or hold a majority vote. The committees who saw rule changes include panels with oversight into controversial Obama policies like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations law, immigration and Obamacare.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration."

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

Nobody ever said the Republicans had Trump's back.....imo they don't.

Fact remains that the rule change is untested by court challenges and would most likely not hold up in such a challenge.
Same thing with the do called contempt arrests.... When the capitol police show up to arrest an official and the secret service refuses to let it happen it will end up in court. Ultimately most judges ( even liberal ones ) are not going to favor unilateral actions from a non executive branch.
Once that starts you might as well just have the house appoint the president rather than to have any national elections at all.

Jo

 

[BlindBoo]

The reason he wants the vote is so Kevin McCarthy can have subpoena power also.
Makes perfect sense. No mystery.
The reason Pelosi won't vote is to prevent McCarthy from having that power. No vote
No impeachment....end of story.

Jo

Yeah that's what the Dems wanted in 2015 but guess what? Republicans denied the request and kept the subpoena power all to themselves.

"For a number of panels, rule change would eliminate long-standing requirements that the chairmen either consult or get consent from the minority party before issuing subpoenas for testimony and documents or hold a majority vote. The committees who saw rule changes include panels with oversight into controversial Obama policies like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations law, immigration and Obamacare.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration."

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

Nobody ever said the Republicans had Trump's back.....imo they don't.

Fact remains that the rule change is untested by court challenges and would most likely not hold up in such a challenge.
Same thing with the do called contempt arrests.... When the capitol police show up to arrest an official and the secret service refuses to let it happen it will end up in court. Ultimately most judges ( even liberal ones ) are not going to favor unilateral actions from a non executive branch.
Once that starts you might as well just have the house appoint the president rather than to have any national elections at all.

Jo

The link is from 2015. Those rule changes have been tested, in fact just this year the DOJ was ordered by the courts, to release more inconsequential emails related to the phony F & F investigation into Obama's and Holder's action and knowledge of the operation.

 

[justoffal]

The reason he wants the vote is so Kevin McCarthy can have subpoena power also.
Makes perfect sense. No mystery.
The reason Pelosi won't vote is to prevent McCarthy from having that power. No vote
No impeachment....end of story.

Jo

Yeah that's what the Dems wanted in 2015 but guess what? Republicans denied the request and kept the subpoena power all to themselves.

"For a number of panels, rule change would eliminate long-standing requirements that the chairmen either consult or get consent from the minority party before issuing subpoenas for testimony and documents or hold a majority vote. The committees who saw rule changes include panels with oversight into controversial Obama policies like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations law, immigration and Obamacare.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration."

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

Nobody ever said the Republicans had Trump's back.....imo they don't.

Fact remains that the rule change is untested by court challenges and would most likely not hold up in such a challenge.
Same thing with the do called contempt arrests.... When the capitol police show up to arrest an official and the secret service refuses to let it happen it will end up in court. Ultimately most judges ( even liberal ones ) are not going to favor unilateral actions from a non executive branch.
Once that starts you might as well just have the house appoint the president rather than to have any national elections at all.

Jo

The link is from 2015. Those rule changes have been tested, in fact just this year the DOJ was ordered by the courts, to release more inconsequential emails related to the phony F & F investigation into Obama's and Holder's action and knowledge of the operation.

The arrest actions have not been tested and will almost certainly fail in the absence of full procedural framework. Otherwise, as I have already stated you might as well just have the house appoint the president and forget the national elections. Even a progressive judge will realize the danger in this direction.

Jo

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The OP is such an uniformed crybaby.

 

[BlindBoo]

The reason he wants the vote is so Kevin McCarthy can have subpoena power also.
Makes perfect sense. No mystery.
The reason Pelosi won't vote is to prevent McCarthy from having that power. No vote
No impeachment....end of story.

Jo

Yeah that's what the Dems wanted in 2015 but guess what? Republicans denied the request and kept the subpoena power all to themselves.

"For a number of panels, rule change would eliminate long-standing requirements that the chairmen either consult or get consent from the minority party before issuing subpoenas for testimony and documents or hold a majority vote. The committees who saw rule changes include panels with oversight into controversial Obama policies like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations law, immigration and Obamacare.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration."

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

Nobody ever said the Republicans had Trump's back.....imo they don't.

Fact remains that the rule change is untested by court challenges and would most likely not hold up in such a challenge.
Same thing with the do called contempt arrests.... When the capitol police show up to arrest an official and the secret service refuses to let it happen it will end up in court. Ultimately most judges ( even liberal ones ) are not going to favor unilateral actions from a non executive branch.
Once that starts you might as well just have the house appoint the president rather than to have any national elections at all.

Jo

The link is from 2015. Those rule changes have been tested, in fact just this year the DOJ was ordered by the courts, to release more inconsequential emails related to the phony F & F investigation into Obama's and Holder's action and knowledge of the operation.

The arrest actions have not been tested and will almost certainly fail in the absence of full procedural framework. Otherwise, as I have already stated you might as well just have the house appoint the president and forget the national elections. Even a progressive judge will realize the danger in this direction.

Jo

I don't believe those were among the rules were changed. The SC ruled long ago that Congress does have that power to enforce it's legal subpoena's

 

[justoffal]

The reason he wants the vote is so Kevin McCarthy can have subpoena power also.
Makes perfect sense. No mystery.
The reason Pelosi won't vote is to prevent McCarthy from having that power. No vote
No impeachment....end of story.

Jo

Yeah that's what the Dems wanted in 2015 but guess what? Republicans denied the request and kept the subpoena power all to themselves.

"For a number of panels, rule change would eliminate long-standing requirements that the chairmen either consult or get consent from the minority party before issuing subpoenas for testimony and documents or hold a majority vote. The committees who saw rule changes include panels with oversight into controversial Obama policies like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations law, immigration and Obamacare.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration."

Dems blast House GOP subpoena rules change

Nobody ever said the Republicans had Trump's back.....imo they don't.

Fact remains that the rule change is untested by court challenges and would most likely not hold up in such a challenge.
Same thing with the do called contempt arrests.... When the capitol police show up to arrest an official and the secret service refuses to let it happen it will end up in court. Ultimately most judges ( even liberal ones ) are not going to favor unilateral actions from a non executive branch.
Once that starts you might as well just have the house appoint the president rather than to have any national elections at all.

Jo

The link is from 2015. Those rule changes have been tested, in fact just this year the DOJ was ordered by the courts, to release more inconsequential emails related to the phony F & F investigation into Obama's and Holder's action and knowledge of the operation.

The arrest actions have not been tested and will almost certainly fail in the absence of full procedural framework. Otherwise, as I have already stated you might as well just have the house appoint the president and forget the national elections. Even a progressive judge will realize the danger in this direction.

Jo

I don't believe those were among the rules were changed. The SC ruled long ago that Congress does have that power to enforce it's legal subpoena's

And each time it was done a judge had to be consulted first....

Jo

 

[anotherlife]

The House hasn't issued valid subpeonas as they haven't voted on the Impeachment Inquiry. All we are seeing now is their Kabuki Impeachment-like Theater. It's all bogus.

Congressional subpoenas are valid regardless.

No, they are not. Subpoenas are only valid when related to legislative issues or for a formal inquiry process, which this is not.

The Bluffpeachment is just a political process, and the Bluffpoenas are just Kabuki Theater props.

You’re still a fucking idiot.

Susan McDougall was jailed for 18 months for contempt of Congress for refusing to testify in the Whitewater investigation. It wasn’t even an impeachment yet. The House can and should start arresting people.

The House should arrest people? I didn't know that the House was the executive branch now? But again, this wasn't a problem for the gestapo either. HEHEHE

 

[Lesh]

The House should arrest people? I didn't know that the House was the executive branch now? But again, this wasn't a problem for the gestapo either. HEHEHE

The House can refer contempt cases to the DOJ for enforcement.

The DOJ however is currently run by Billy the Bagman so the House simply adds those instances of Obstruction to the Impeachment articles

 

[justoffal]

The House hasn't issued valid subpeonas as they haven't voted on the Impeachment Inquiry. All we are seeing now is their Kabuki Impeachment-like Theater. It's all bogus.

Congressional subpoenas are valid regardless.

No, they are not. Subpoenas are only valid when related to legislative issues or for a formal inquiry process, which this is not.

The Bluffpeachment is just a political process, and the Bluffpoenas are just Kabuki Theater props.

You’re still a fucking idiot.

Susan McDougall was jailed for 18 months for contempt of Congress for refusing to testify in the Whitewater investigation. It wasn’t even an impeachment yet. The House can and should start arresting people.

The House should arrest people? I didn't know that the House was the executive branch now? But again, this wasn't a problem for the gestapo either. HEHEHE

It's only been used two or three times in the entire history of the Congress. It's never been done without a judge's permission.

Nowadays it would most likely result in a standoff between the Seargent at arm's and the secret service detail... For obvious reasons my money is on the secret service. At that point Congress would have to sue the executive branch for the right to arrest. Even a progressive judge is going to hesitate to grant them that authority without a full vote. Progressive judges can be morons but they are not complete idiots.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

The House should arrest people? I didn't know that the House was the executive branch now? But again, this wasn't a problem for the gestapo either. HEHEHE

The House can refer contempt cases to the DOJ for enforcement.

The DOJ however is currently run by Billy the Bagman so the House simply adds those instances of Obstruction to the Impeachment articles

AAAAAAANNNNNND THE DOJ THEN GOES TO THE FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM FOR THE PAPERWORK. THEY MAY GET IT OR THEY MAY NOT GET IT.

JO

 

[anotherlife]

The House should arrest people? I didn't know that the House was the executive branch now? But again, this wasn't a problem for the gestapo either. HEHEHE

The House can refer contempt cases to the DOJ for enforcement.

The DOJ however is currently run by Billy the Bagman so the House simply adds those instances of Obstruction to the Impeachment articles

Okay, so the House plays not only a little executive but also a little DOJ too? Barb Wire comes to mind?