REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Sidebar Sidebar

Bolton book: Trumby directly tied Ukraine aid to investigations into political rivals.

GDaddy

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,238
2,056
113
Carlsbad
Executive privilege doesn't get suspended because there's an impeachment hearing in process, any more than they can just toss our Bill or Rights. POTUS ain't king, but then again neither is the House or Senate.

If the claim is that the House wasn't required to fight it out in the courts then why did they even bother giving their "emergency" excuse?



.
 
everysurfer

everysurfer

Phil Edwards status
Sep 9, 2013
6,713
1,811
113
Santa Barbara County
GDaddy said:
Executive privilege doesn't get suspended because there's an impeachment hearing in process, any more than they can just toss our Bill or Rights. POTUS ain't king, but then again neither is the House or Senate.

If the claim is that the House wasn't required to fight it out in the courts then why did they even bother giving their "emergency" excuse?



.
Click to expand...
Actually it does. In Nixon vs U S , he had to release the tapes, executive privilege or not, because there was a compelling reason.

Again, this is settled law
 
hal9000

hal9000

Duke status
Jan 30, 2016
56,285
16,738
113
Urbana, Illinois
GDaddy said:
Executive privilege doesn't get suspended because there's an impeachment hearing in process, any more than they can just toss our Bill or Rights. POTUS ain't king, but then again neither is the House or Senate.

If the claim is that the House wasn't required to fight it out in the courts then why did they even bother giving their "emergency" excuse?



.
Click to expand...
Trumby waived executive privilege yesterday with his moronic tweet in which he made his conversation with Bolton a matter of public record.
 
hal9000

hal9000

Duke status
Jan 30, 2016
56,285
16,738
113
Urbana, Illinois
Also:

-the Bolton manuscript directly contradicts the claim that Trumby didn’t commit bribery.

-the NSC isn’t (at least so far) stopping Bolton.
 
U

Uberkuque

Gerry Lopez status
Nov 19, 2014
1,104
492
83
GDaddy said:
So because it was an emergency that's why the House had no choice but to bypass their legal remedy and to levy an obstruction allegation for a problem they created for themselves?

Try harder. Because that's not how our legal system works. Motions to dismiss warrants and their proceeds over various errors and technicalities get used every day. Trials over murder allegations usually take place many months and even 2 and 3 years after the arrest as a result of the various legal maneuverings. Running the clock is a perfectly legal play in our legal system, and defendants don't get stacked with obstruction charges as a result of mounting the vigorous defense.

The burden of proof is on the State, not the accused.
Click to expand...
The house created the problem for themselves? No, Trump created it with his bad faith assertion of the nonexistent concept of absolute immunity.

“Legal system” — keep in mind this is not a criminal proceeding. It is an impeachment proceeding. And there is nothing that mandates that subject of an impeachment proceeding is entitled to “run the clock,” especially where, as here, time is of the essence due to the clear and present danger that this president poses to the integrity of our next election.
 
afoaf

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,596
23,200
113
everysurfer said:
Actually it does. In Nixon vs U S , he had to release the tapes, executive privilege or not, because there was a compelling reason.

Again, this is settled law
Click to expand...
DING! DING! DING!

UNITED STATES V. NIXON (1974)

usa.usembassy.de

the allowance of the privilege to withhold evidence that is demonstrably relevant in a criminal trial would cut deeply into the guarantee of due process of law and gravely impair the basic function of the court
Click to expand...
 
M

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,524
2,331
113
hal9000 said:
Trumby waived executive privilege yesterday with his moronic tweet in which he made his conversation with Bolton a matter of public record.
Click to expand...

AGAIN, presidential executive immunity wields no authority which prevents administration officials who want to testify from testifying. Executive privilege protects all executive branch records from subpoena, and shields executive branch people who don't want to testify from being forced to testify.

MANY Trump administration employees testified in the House AFTER Trump invoked executive privilege. If you need, I can name some. Bolton has a right to testify if he wants. Executive privilege has no bearing one way or the other.
.
.
 
everysurfer

everysurfer

Phil Edwards status
Sep 9, 2013
6,713
1,811
113
Santa Barbara County
Mike_Jones said:
AGAIN, presidential executive immunity wields no authority which prevents administration officials who want to testify from testifying. Executive privilege protects all executive branch records from subpoena, and shields executive branch people who don't want to testify from being forced to testify.

MANY Trump administration employees testified in the House AFTER Trump invoked executive privilege. If you need, I can name some. Bolton has a right to testify if he wants. Executive privilege has no bearing one way or the other.
.
.
Click to expand...
You "forgot" to mention all the documents that were subpoenaed
 
M

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,524
2,331
113
.
Local book stores have started keeping the New York Times in the "fiction" section.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOJ disputes report on Bolton conversation with Barr about foreign leaders

Jan 28, 2020

The Department of Justice said in a statement Monday night that a report based on John Bolton's new book about a conversation the former national security adviser had last year with Attorney General William Barr about President Trump's relationship with foreign leaders "grossly" mischaracterized the exchange.

The New York Times reported that it obtained a manuscript of Bolton’s book "The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir," and published reports about it during Trump's Senate impeachment trial. The paper, citing the manuscript, reported that Bolton raised concerns to Barr that the president was granting personal favors to Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan and China's Xi Jinping.

Barr agreed to an extent with Bolton and said Trump created the appearance that he held excessive influence over investigations by the DOJ into some companies in these countries, the report said. The manuscript’s claim could bolster Trump critics who say the president is too warm with dictators.

The DOJ said it did not review the manuscript but said there was never any discussion about Trump's "undue influence" on investigations, "nor did Attorney General Barr state that the President’s conversations with foreign leaders was improper."

"If this is truly what Mr. Bolton has written, then it seems he is attributing to Attorney General Barr his own current views – views with which Attorney General Barr does not agree," the statement read.

Within hours of the first report, a pre-order link was posted for the book.

"Why didn’t John Bolton testify to the US House? Apparently his book wasn’t quite finished yet for presales!" Sen. Rand Paul tweeted......
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
 
M

mundus

Duke status
Feb 26, 2018
37,290
16,343
113
Mike_Jones said:
.
Local book stores have started keeping the New York Times in the "fiction" section.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOJ disputes report on Bolton conversation with Barr about foreign leaders

Jan 28, 2020

The Department of Justice said in a statement Monday night that a report based on John Bolton's new book about a conversation the former national security adviser had last year with Attorney General William Barr about President Trump's relationship with foreign leaders "grossly" mischaracterized the exchange.

The New York Times reported that it obtained a manuscript of Bolton’s book "The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir," and published reports about it during Trump's Senate impeachment trial. The paper, citing the manuscript, reported that Bolton raised concerns to Barr that the president was granting personal favors to Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan and China's Xi Jinping.

Barr agreed to an extent with Bolton and said Trump created the appearance that he held excessive influence over investigations by the DOJ into some companies in these countries, the report said. The manuscript’s claim could bolster Trump critics who say the president is too warm with dictators.

The DOJ said it did not review the manuscript but said there was never any discussion about Trump's "undue influence" on investigations, "nor did Attorney General Barr state that the President’s conversations with foreign leaders was improper."

"If this is truly what Mr. Bolton has written, then it seems he is attributing to Attorney General Barr his own current views – views with which Attorney General Barr does not agree," the statement read.

Within hours of the first report, a pre-order link was posted for the book.

"Why didn’t John Bolton testify to the US House? Apparently his book wasn’t quite finished yet for presales!" Sen. Rand Paul tweeted......
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Click to expand...
You believe a word out of Cover Up Barr"s justice dept? You are even dumber, more mentally ill than I thought.
 
afoaf

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,596
23,200
113
Mike_Jones said:
.
Local book stores have started keeping the New York Times in the "fiction" section.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOJ disputes report on Bolton conversation with Barr about foreign leaders

Jan 28, 2020

The Department of Justice said in a statement Monday night that a report based on John Bolton's new book about a conversation the former national security adviser had last year with Attorney General William Barr about President Trump's relationship with foreign leaders "grossly" mischaracterized the exchange.

The New York Times reported that it obtained a manuscript of Bolton’s book "The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir," and published reports about it during Trump's Senate impeachment trial. The paper, citing the manuscript, reported that Bolton raised concerns to Barr that the president was granting personal favors to Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan and China's Xi Jinping.

Barr agreed to an extent with Bolton and said Trump created the appearance that he held excessive influence over investigations by the DOJ into some companies in these countries, the report said. The manuscript’s claim could bolster Trump critics who say the president is too warm with dictators.

The DOJ said it did not review the manuscript but said there was never any discussion about Trump's "undue influence" on investigations, "nor did Attorney General Barr state that the President’s conversations with foreign leaders was improper."

"If this is truly what Mr. Bolton has written, then it seems he is attributing to Attorney General Barr his own current views – views with which Attorney General Barr does not agree," the statement read.

Within hours of the first report, a pre-order link was posted for the book.

"Why didn’t John Bolton testify to the US House? Apparently his book wasn’t quite finished yet for presales!" Sen. Rand Paul tweeted......
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Click to expand...
Barr's DOJ is complicit you spergy jizz chugger
 
  • Like
Reactions: mundus
hal9000

hal9000

Duke status
Jan 30, 2016
56,285
16,738
113
Urbana, Illinois
Mike_Jones said:
AGAIN, presidential executive immunity wields no authority which prevents administration officials who want to testify from testifying. Executive privilege protects all executive branch records from subpoena, and shields executive branch people who don't want to testify from being forced to testify.

MANY Trump administration employees testified in the House AFTER Trump invoked executive privilege. If you need, I can name some. Bolton has a right to testify if he wants. Executive privilege has no bearing one way or the other.
.
.
Click to expand...
executive immunity is not a thing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Share this page
Top Bottom