WATCH LIVE | Impeachment trial of President Trump continues in Senate (Day 3)

Turley pretty much said that yes.

 

And in the meantime, the clock is running. Which is why Congress put all their eggs in the earliest court case out there (McGahn) instead of going to court separately for all the Ukrainian witnesses like Mulvaney and Bolton.

The ruling should be binding to all.. I've seen some of Bolton's lawyers arguments that a Bolton ruling would need to be separate from a McGahn ruling, because he had a different job.

What bullshit... That argument indicates you need to go to court for every single witness, because nobody has the same job.

Subpoenaed witnesses need to appear to Congress. Every time, regardless of purpose or job.. What they do after that can then be discussed on a question by question basis...

 

Who cares what Trump is arguing, that's where the courts step in and they are the final say. You guys keep harping on what Trump is arguing, ofcourse that's what he's doing it's his opinion, the court is third branch to decide. The house didn't waste their time going to the court, probably because they knew the would lose the case but either way they didn't exercise their rights but Trump still get's to exercise his. Obstruction is a joke due to this and exactly why the impeachment is beyond dumb.

 

The reason why people care what Trump is arguing is because Trump only has to be deemed correct a total of two times (technically three if they appeal to the en banc of the appellate) court before the courts will NEVER have a place in these types of disputes.

And again, the house is FACTUALLY "wasting their time to the court" right now.

 

They didn't waste their time because it's a waste of time.. the SCOTUS should have been asked to rule on McGahn last summer/fall....

 

That judge said go to testify and invoke Executive Privilege, just like everyone that keeps up knows will happen. I know you guys only like Executive Privilege when a dem is a President but it also applies to Trump, sorry.

 

Again the court is the final say, you and the dems should actually use it sometimes. Prosecutors and defendants always argue their case and even use the media to do it, which is exactly what Trump has done.

 

No one is pissed at the prospect of Trump asserting Executive Privilege in response to specific questions and then fighting over whether it applies given the limitations imposed by previous Supreme Court rulings.

People ARE pissed at the prospect of Trump asserting Absolute Immunity and claiming that he can order all current and former employees to just keep their mouth shut and refuse to even show up for the testimony.

 

Once again, if the Trump administration is deemed correct a total of two times, then it is the Executive Branch that will forever have the final say.

 

But instead the dems pulled the subpoena because they decided on this stupid obstruction article. What a deal you were on the normal legal path, stopped it to create a BS article without going through the third branch. Your party thinks people are dumb and won't understand and lord know the MSM will tell the lefties BS conspiracy.

 

Who cares what Trump says take it to COURT like your supposed too. Good grief a defendant and a prosecutor can say anything they want, NOBODY CARES there is a procedure and you should understand this as much as anyone, if you're a lawyer.

 

*******n, I don't know how many times I have to say this.

The COURT is literally two decisions away from never being permitted to rule on these types of decisions. And it is solely because that is the argument being asserted by TRUMP.

 

The most advanced, and thus the most controlling, judicial ruling on the Trump's assertion that he can order all current and former employees to keep their mouth shut was issued in December of 2019.

 

So the courts would've decided that as well and the dems didn't pursue it, why????

 

So you dont believe in Separation of Powers got you.

 

LOL so what do you not agree the courts would've decided it? Jesus I've never seen so many people especially a lawyer, basically saying because the defendant said something it means the court doesn't matter.

 

Correct so if the court said they can go invoke executive privilege then how can it be obstruction of congress. Pencil neck could have appealed but but but....

 

We are objectively saying that Trump's arguments to the courts will, if agreed to by the courts, mean that the final decider on these types of issues will solely be the executive branch.

 

Have they invoked executive privilege?

No. That's why.

 

November 25th, actually...

Here's what I think should have happened here.. This process obviously doesn't exist, but it should.

When McGahn refused to appear for his subpoena in May, the Congress (and the Executive as well) should have a new power to activate the case DIRECTLY to the SCOTUS. Any disputes of this level between the Exec and the Leg branches should have this power.

Upon activation, much like the Senate must take up impeachment immediately, the SCOTUS must drop whatever they are doing (or come into session if they are on break) and hear oral arguments on the issue at hand, and make a binding ruling within 1 week (or some short time frame). The ruling must be broad enough to cover most foreseeable similar rulings. In this case, a McGahn ruling would have covered that Mulvaney and Bolton et al must APPEAR for a Congressional Subpoena.

This "power" could also be implemented on any impeachment claims of Executive Privilege which are sure to follow. In my opinion, the SCOTUS should be "oncall" right now, ready to hear any issues that requires a court decision that arise from this impeachment trial.

None of this opposes anything in the Constitution.... But you cannot pursue constitutional remedies at the pace the McGahn process has occurred. Simply not possible.

 

While I agree that such an expedited process would have been nice, there is little reason to believe that the Supreme Court would have granted such a request. They tend to want to let the "record develop" (i.e. allow the parties to argue and then respond to each other and the lower court rulings).

But you remind me of something I was reading about the difficulty associated with Trump theoretically asserting Executive Privilege over John Bolton during the Impeachment Proceeding. My understanding - based on some reporting I saw in during the Washington Post Live Stream yesterday - is that Judge Roberts would be able to rule on that issue immediately.

 

Now we're getting somewhere, does Trump's Doj not have a right to pursue their stance? Do you think it only works that way for Republican Presidents? At the end of the day either you win or lose but it sets the precedence and I guess I can conclude the House decided they would lose therefore they stopped pursuing it and charged obstruction of congress instead of letting the court decide. It's laughable but hey the dems are betting most half brained will not understand it and your media will avoid it so they might win perception. We'll see but anybody with a brain arguing for this article is just ignorant.

 

I heard Judge Joe Brown has gotten a really nice bump the last few days.

 

Oversight, like all other functions, must serve a purpose. You can't just ask for "document Z" and call that oversight. You have to show justification for requesting document Z, and that justification cannot be that they said so, but that there's merit in the request. I know Adam Schiff likes to think of himself as higher then he is, but he's not the President. Or another way to put it is that every item that so much as breaches the WH is considered classified information and covered under executive privilege doctrine.

The Court fundamentally has never ruled on executive privilege, it only ruled specifically with relation to the Nixon Tapes. And the proof of misconduct is far inferior to that of Watergate. Hence, there's no criminality in it for the Courts to intervene.

Either the Court grants itself political privilege that it hereto hadn't granted itself, or the House is stuck.

 

Not a bad idea and see here's where you get a beef out of Republicans, they went to the courts and waited on Holder and others from the previous administration. Sometimes just censoring because it was a lost cause. They never ever even thought about impeaching because an Obama official wouldn't testify. That's happened in Every Administration and Pencil Neck used for a sham impeachment.. It's absurd.