Trump's Russian Collusion

[old salt]

You missed this part:

The Obama administration also drew criticism for going after reporter records, including a move to subpoena Associated Press journalists’ phone records and seize records for several Fox News phone lines as part of leak investigations.

Seems like an easy problem to fix for reporters. Stop using email or phones when you obtain leaked classified government intel, you idiots.

Meet in a parking garage. Worked just fine for Woodward.

Just imagine if then Chairman Nunes had subpoenaed private citizen Sidney Blumenthal's ph records, then published them.

[MDlaxfan76]

The only chance she has of getting there is to actually follow through on getting the most direct testimony and documents relevant to proving that Trump himself directly ordered the hold on aid and that he was clear that he wanted the Ukrainians to know that it would not be released until they announced an investigation(s) into his political adversaries. Nixon doesn't go down without the tapes...until you have the tapes or their analogue don't take the vote. Grind it out.

On winning in court, lord help us if these cases aren't won.

You misunderstand what the current cases are about.

The current litigation is just about the ridiculous "absolute immunity" claims being advanced by Trump. Those cases are proceeding and will very likely eventually hold in favor of Congress.

But once those bad faith claims are swept aside, then a whole other round of litigation then commences. Which would be over narrower claims of executive privelege. Those cases have already been litigated and decided. Everyone, including Judge Jackson, agrees that exec privelege does exist in certain appropriate cases. There's no unresolved legal principle involved there. And if exec privelege exists, senior advisors like Bolton, Mulvaney etc. are the types of folks who would likely have it.

So what would remain to be done would be the detailed court slogs about whether this specific document or that specific topic is/is not appropriate for a claim of privelege. That kind of slog would likely drag on through most/all of 2020. And to what end? To get a bunch of evasions and "I don't recalls" from reluctant/hostile witnesses like Bolton or Pompeo? Congress is free to drill those dry holes during a second Trump term if it occurs.

I can see the argument that you might want to let these proceedings marinate a little bit in 2020 to let the public take it in. But there's really no prospect of getting meaningful additional testimony until Q3 of 2020 at the earliest. So you shouldn't choose a slower pace in order to get more info.

Thanks; that's what I was hoping for, a more informed legal argument.

I'd still like to be sure this absolute immunity nonsense gets resolved once and for all...are you confident those cases continue to proceed even beyond the impeachment vote?

On the politics though, I hope I'm wrong that Trump and co will successfully use "acquittal" as a cudgel against the Dems as 'over reach'.

BTW, I think putting Pompeo, Mulvaney, Bolton, and even ole Rudy under oath would be quite revealing, regardless of whether any of them come clean. And I darn sure think there's gold in the documents.

[a fan]

Just imagine if then Chairman Nunes had subpoenaed private citizen Sidney Blumenthal's ph records, then published them.

Why would he do that? To what end?

[old salt]

Just imagine if then Chairman Nunes had subpoenaed private citizen Sidney Blumenthal's ph records, then published them.

Why would he do that? To what end?

To track down Blumenthal's contacts with State Dept officials when Sid was peddling the Steele dossier.
Comparable to what Rudy's doing as a private citizen & political operative.
There'd be howls for an ethics investigation of Nunes.

[njbill]

I'd still like to be sure this absolute immunity nonsense gets resolved once and for all...are you confident those cases continue to proceed even beyond the impeachment vote?


BTW, I think putting Pompeo, Mulvaney, Bolton, and even ole Rudy under oath would be quite revealing, regardless of whether any of them come clean. And I darn sure think there's gold in the documents.

I know this was directed at ggait, but I’ll throw in my two cents.

I think the only absolute immunity case in the works is the
McGahn case. I am confident it will continue even after impeachment concludes. Oral argument is currently set before the D.C. Circuit on Jan. 3. The case actually preceded impeachment and technically isn’t related to the impeachment issues, although if the Dems include obstruction of justice, McGahn would be relevant to that. Regardless, I think this case will proceed to conclusion, even if it goes to the Supreme Court.

Yes, getting those characters under oath would be interesting and great theater, but I am not sure how much substance helpful to the Dems would come out. Bolton and Pompeo are very smart guys and could well do good jobs of effectively evading questions. They may look like jerks on TV, but they could well avoid giving any harmful testimony. Mulvaney does not strike me as particularly intelligent. I think he would have more trouble in a deposition. Rudy was a very good US Attorney, but somewhere along the way after he entered into politics, the screws came loose. Just looking at the way he answers journalists’ questions, you would have to think any testimony from him would be a train wreck. Would it reveal anything helpful of substance? Maybe. But really who knows? And all of these guys would fight privilege issues until the bitter end.

I agree there very likely is gold in them thar documents. That is, if Trump produces the smoking guns. I am skeptical about that. Nixon went to his grave thinking the dumbest thing he ever did was not destroy the tapes. I certainly wouldn’t put it past Trump and his goons to destroy and delete any harmful documents.

[ggait]

I think the only absolute immunity case in the works is the McGahn case. I am confident it will continue even after impeachment concludes.

I think there's a hearing coming up in the Kupperman case too. TBD if that one continues or not. The House (feeling good about Judge Jackson on the McGahn front) has withdrawn the subpoena and is arguing the case is moot. Kupperman's lawyer (who is also Bolton's lawyer) is arguing that the case still should proceed.

You'd think a DC Circuit or SCOTUS decision on McGahn is all that needs to be decided.

[a fan]

To track down Blumenthal's contacts with State Dept officials when Sid was peddling the Steele dossier.
Comparable to what Rudy's doing as a private citizen & political operative.
There'd be howls for an ethics investigation of Nunes.

Howls from whom? Again: don't use your phone. Problem solved. If you're going to dance with the devil (government), don't leave a trail. Pretty basic stuff, if you ask me.

Meanwhile, we have no plausible reason as to why Nunes was calling Parnas on State business.

[kramerica.inc]

Pelosi flies off at reporter over question of her "hating" Trump.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/1 ... /23874868/

Reporter obviously hit a nerve.

[seacoaster]

Pelosi flies off at reporter over question of her "hating" Trump.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/1 ... /23874868/

Reporter obviously hit a nerve.

Seems like she simply shot back at a stupid question. Good for her.

[kramerica.inc]

So this was just Pelosi calling out a bad reporter/journalist?

I found it interesting because a lot of people around here hate when the Trumpster shoots back at reporters he disagrees with and talks to reporters that way.

Carry on.

[foreverlax]

So this was just Pelosi calling out a bad reporter/journalist?

I found it interesting because a lot of people around here hate when the Trumpster shoots back at reporters he disagrees with and talks to reporters that way.

Carry on.

Meadows lashed out at a reporter during his news conference regarding

McCarthy said: “There’s …there’s two people, I think, Putin pays: [California Representative Dana] Rohrabacher and Trump … [laughter] … swear to God.”

Of course he was "joking" and the reporter should be "embarrassed for asking the question."

[njbill]

I think the only absolute immunity case in the works is the McGahn case. I am confident it will continue even after impeachment concludes.

I think there's a hearing coming up in the Kupperman case too. TBD if that one continues or not. The House (feeling good about Judge Jackson on the McGahn front) has withdrawn the subpoena and is arguing the case is moot. Kupperman's lawyer (who is also Bolton's lawyer) is arguing that the case still should proceed.

You'd think a DC Circuit or SCOTUS decision on McGahn is all that needs to be decided.

I forgot about Kupperman. Sure sounds to me like that case is moot and should be dismissed. I would be surprised if it isn’t. Judges love case dispositions in December. Cooperman’s attorney may have an agenda, however. I suspect he likes this judge and thinks he might possibly get a different ruling. I’m not so sure. Two D.C. federal district court judges have now ruled the same way. And their rulings seem obviously correct.

Yeah, I agree. A ruling in McGahn should cover the waterfront.

[LandM]

Kram,
As a practicing Catholic who has endured my fair share of criticism for being such......I am wondering when the elites out here are going to start bashing Nancy for being a practicing Catholic - loves everybody, even little boys? This will be interesting as to who can or will try to defend that comment. Come on elites. Maybe the Gilman smart guy can help us with that argument.

Speaking of little boys, the fact that an educated snot nosed white person, picks on a 12 year old kid..........that is way below the belt man and then some of you out here like the audience applauded....... After, she then states she is so unhinged that she has to walk across the street from a building. Really? Love to see her in a hostile environment and finally when making an apology she cannot even do it graciously. That was the best witness......sad and laughingstock.

BTW, what inner city person names their kid Noah.......this should get fun when the Senate takes over and the IG gets their mitts involved.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Kram,
As a practicing Catholic who has endured my fair share of criticism for being such......I am wondering when the elites out here are going to start bashing Nancy for being a practicing Catholic - loves everybody, even little boys? This will be interesting as to who can or will try to defend that comment. Come on elites. Maybe the Gilman smart guy can help us with that argument.

Speaking of little boys, the fact that an educated snot nosed white person, picks on a 12 year old kid..........that is way below the belt man and then some of you out here like the audience applauded....... After, she then states she is so unhinged that she has to walk across the street from a building. Really? Love to see her in a hostile environment and finally when making an apology she cannot even do it graciously. That was the best witness......sad and laughingstock.

BTW, what inner city person names their kid Noah.......this should get fun when the Senate takes over and the IG gets their mitts involved.

It is not uncommon for folks that are very religious. Noah has a religious connotation. Didn't know it did not apply to poor or inner city folk. Guess they aren't religious...... Here is a list. This does not presume that all these folks naming their kids are from the inner city..... but odds are and it stands to reason that a reasonable percentage are:

https://elev8.hellobeautiful.com/381065 ... aby-names/

[a fan]

Speaking of little boys, the fact that an educated snot nosed white person, picks on a 12 year old kid..........that is way below the belt man and then some of you out here like the audience applauded.......

Case in point when I say libs don't have a corner on the Political Correctness Industry.

She made a play on words (Baron vs Barron). She said nothing negative about the kid. But the right is offended.

See how this works? The right laughs at the lib snowflakes getting offended about everything and anything.....right before they clutch their pearls and get offended by everything and anything.

Pick a lane. Either we should all try and be kind to one another...or stop complaining when the "unkindness happens to you".

Trump fans, as you know, chose rudeness, and make fun of attempts at PC civility.

So guess what? Everything is fair game now. Their choice, not mine.

[3rdPersonPlural]

2 questions. These aren't rhetorical or set-ups, I just trust this group of pasty old white guys (who all love lacrosse and claim to also all love dogs) to offer up some informed answers for me.

I'm thinking about what happens if the R wins the Electoral College with Trump but loses the Senate and doesn't regain the House. Maybe the Senate is 55% Dem......

1. Can Trump get re-impeached? No double Jeopardy?

2. If Trump is re-elected, will any of the financial shenanigans he's liable for prior to his election become un-prosecutable due to the Statute of Limitations?

Thanks

[kramerica.inc]

Kram,
As a practicing Catholic who has endured my fair share of criticism for being such......I am wondering when the elites out here are going to start bashing Nancy for being a practicing Catholic - loves everybody, even little boys? This will be interesting as to who can or will try to defend that comment. Come on elites. Maybe the Gilman smart guy can help us with that argument.

Speaking of little boys, the fact that an educated snot nosed white person, picks on a 12 year old kid..........that is way below the belt man and then some of you out here like the audience applauded....... After, she then states she is so unhinged that she has to walk across the street from a building. Really? Love to see her in a hostile environment and finally when making an apology she cannot even do it graciously. That was the best witness......sad and laughingstock.

BTW, what inner city person names their kid Noah.......this should get fun when the Senate takes over and the IG gets their mitts involved.

Pelosi won't get criticism from her party for being Catholic.
She, the Kennedys and Marty O'Malley are the perfect Catholics:
Catholic in name only, not practice.

[DMac]

Speaking of little boys, the fact that an educated snot nosed white person, picks on a 12 year old kid..........that is way below the belt man and then some of you out here like the audience applauded....... After, she then states she is so unhinged that she has to walk across the street from a building. Really? Love to see her in a hostile environment and finally when making an apology she cannot even do it graciously. That was the best witness......sad and laughingstock.

BTW, what inner city person names their kid Noah.......this should get fun when the Senate takes over and the IG gets their mitts involved.

This is absolute nonsense, LandM, nothing more than making something out of nothing. In our click bait/sound bite driven world a poor choice to use as an anaology in the setting she was in, but no twelve year old kid was picked on.

[CU88]

As a practicing Catholic who has endured

No need to say anything else...

[cradleandshoot]

2 questions. These aren't rhetorical or set-ups, I just trust this group of pasty old white guys (who all love lacrosse and claim to also all love dogs) to offer up some informed answers for me.

I'm thinking about what happens if the R wins the Electoral College with Trump but loses the Senate and doesn't regain the House. Maybe the Senate is 55% Dem......

1. Can Trump get re-impeached? No double Jeopardy?

2. If Trump is re-elected, will any of the financial shenanigans he's liable for prior to his election become un-prosecutable due to the Statute of Limitations?

Thanks
Now this pasty faced old white guy is questioning whether his dog still loves him.