Appeals court rules for U.S. House over subpoena for ex-White House lawyer

So you adhere to this new principle which will also apply to a Biden presidency that if a say Ted Cruz wants to know what he and his top advisers are discussing behind closed doors, even his legal counsel, he can simply call them before Congress and force them to disclose those conversations.

 

Ask the same question, you'll get the same answer (from me anyway)

 

If the legal counsel tells a prosecutor or Congress that the president asked him to do illegal things??

Sure...

 

Probably true. In the future presidents will have to listen to advisors, ask questions and make no comments. If it isn't for public consumption, the president won't be able to say it. Next step is the supreme court, I guess.

 

That would be for a Special Prosecutor who already made no charges it occurred. What crime are you alledging occurred or the House alledges occurred and be specific.

 

The fishies are not biting at your strawmen today.... sorry... try again Monday...

 

just more of the dems not accepting the mueller report.

look at the billions they wasted

 

this is it! somehow he will tell Adam Shifty something he didn’t tell Mueller!

but this is it!

 

That's a fact, try addressing and not waiting to do so. It's the Special Prosecutor who did the criminal investigation and brought no criminal charges. Congress is not law enforcement, they are a co-equal branch of government with the President. Can the President call in the Speaker of the House's legal counsels and close advisors and demand they tell them what they have been discussing in their private meetings and threaten them with a crime if they do not answer and do so truthfully?

What crime are you alleging occurred or the House alleges occurred and be specific.

 

Why not... Sounds like this is the full list of Articles of Impeachment that were out there, that they decided not to pursue..

SNIP
They would have charged the president with colluding with Russia even though the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III reported that he did not find enough evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy, reasoning that Mr. Trump knowingly benefited from Moscow’s intervention in the 2016 election and that proving a statutory violation was not necessary for impeachment.

They also would have charged Mr. Trump with obstructing Mr. Mueller’s investigation, obstructing congressional investigations, engaging in the hush money scheme carried out by Mr. Cohen, dangling pardons to keep potential witnesses against him quiet, usurping the power of Congress both by spending money on his border wall and by imposing tariffs without authorization, targeting his adversaries with the power of his office and violating the emoluments clause.
ENDSNIP

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/22/us/politics/trump-impeachment.html

McGahn could likely only speak to the ones in bold, but we won't know until he's asked.

Quite the list of accomplishments there...

Very eager to read Eisen's book, when it hits my library...

 

It's a nothin burger.

For all the overwrought Fake News media coverage about how the Court has ordered that McGahn “must testify to Congress,” all that has been ordered is that McGahn must physically show up in the Capitol Hill hearing room. So Fat Jerry can force McGahn to physically show up in the Judiciary Committee hearing room, but, as Counsel, he will not violate executive and attorney-client privilege.

 

Trump wins this one/America loses

McGahn should have been made to appear within 2 weeks of the subpoena or face immediate fines and imprisonment...

Time to reverse the downward directing AND plug all these holes in our systems...

Too bad Biden is an honorable man, or he could really do some damage... I'll certainly be laughing if he does.

 

This time they have Trump for reals!

 

Why? Should your city counsel be allowed to force your attorney to testify about your dealings with him?

What is the purpose of his appearance before the House? What is he to testify to and be specific?

 

Mueller brought no criminal charges and the DOJ and OLC agreed there was no evidence to charge Trump or anyone with a crime. He had a DUTY to report to the AG ANY crimes that should have been charged. He brought NONE. There is no criminal investigation in process. The House already held their hearings and did not impeach based on the Mueller report or anything he reported.

So would you also support the President calling in the legal counsels and close advisors of Pelosi and Schumer to the WH where he would question them on the discussions they have with their bosses?