WH counsel testimony

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11044
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

WH counsel testimony

#1 Post by Beebs52 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:58 am

So...why not Nussbaum? Or Foster? Oh. That's right, one is 80 plus, one is deceased.
Gosh.
Oh please.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11044
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: WH counsel testimony

#2 Post by Beebs52 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:06 pm

Gotta get sarcafont.
Oh please.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 19270
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: WH counsel testimony

#3 Post by Bob78164 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:21 pm

Beebs52 wrote:So...why not Nussbaum? Or Foster? Oh. That's right, one is 80 plus, one is deceased.
Gosh.
I'll help you out with the sarcafont.

That's why Congressional Republicans abandoned any efforts to investigate either of the Clintons.

The Mueller Report put Don McGahn in the room when actions occurred that constitute obstruction of justice. The American people need to hear from him. Not what someone -- neither Mueller nor Barr -- say he said. We need to hear from him, directly and under oath. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11044
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: WH counsel testimony

#4 Post by Beebs52 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:29 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:So...why not Nussbaum? Or Foster? Oh. That's right, one is 80 plus, one is deceased.
Gosh.
I'll help you out with the sarcafont.

That's why Congressional Republicans abandoned any efforts to investigate either of the Clintons.

The Mueller Report put Don McGahn in the room when actions occurred that constitute obstruction of justice. The American people need to hear from him. Not what someone -- neither Mueller nor Barr -- say he said. We need to hear from him, directly and under oath. --Bob
Missed my point. John Dean. Interestingly Nussbaum advised Clinton not to appoint independent prosecutor, whose advice he rued not taking.
Oh please.

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 23295
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: WH counsel testimony

#5 Post by Bob Juch » Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:57 pm

Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:So...why not Nussbaum? Or Foster? Oh. That's right, one is 80 plus, one is deceased.
Gosh.
I'll help you out with the sarcafont.

That's why Congressional Republicans abandoned any efforts to investigate either of the Clintons.

The Mueller Report put Don McGahn in the room when actions occurred that constitute obstruction of justice. The American people need to hear from him. Not what someone -- neither Mueller nor Barr -- say he said. We need to hear from him, directly and under oath. --Bob
Missed my point. John Dean. Interestingly Nussbaum advised Clinton not to appoint independent prosecutor, whose advice he rued not taking.
Former Nixon aide John Dean testifies of ‘remarkable parallels’ to Watergate, as GOP mocks appearance
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/former ... ump-probes
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
a1mamacat
Posts: 6518
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:02 pm
Location: Great White North

Re: WH counsel testimony

#6 Post by a1mamacat » Mon Jun 10, 2019 2:15 pm

One of the many things I don't understand, is why all these people, ignoring subpoenas, are not being arrested and marched into the chambers. Aren't subpoenas legal demands to appear?
Lover of Soft Animals and Fine Art
1st annual international BBBL Champeeeeen!

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 5580
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: WH counsel testimony

#7 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 2:40 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:So...why not Nussbaum? Or Foster? Oh. That's right, one is 80 plus, one is deceased.
Gosh.
I'll help you out with the sarcafont.

That's why Congressional Republicans abandoned any efforts to investigate either of the Clintons.

The Mueller Report put Don McGahn in the room when actions occurred that constitute obstruction of justice. The American people need to hear from him. Not what someone -- neither Mueller nor Barr -- say he said. We need to hear from him, directly and under oath. --Bob
I believe there has to be 30 hours of video from McGahn's testimony to Mueller, (of which he probably used about one minute of in his report). Let them have that. And let us have it so we can be sure the cong-dems don't do the same thing as I suspect Mueller's team did.
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... All thought comes from the right wing noise machine(TM)... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything... Made the trump apologist and enabler playoffs... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 19270
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: WH counsel testimony

#8 Post by Bob78164 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:11 pm

a1mamacat wrote:One of the many things I don't understand, is why all these people, ignoring subpoenas, are not being arrested and marched into the chambers. Aren't subpoenas legal demands to appear?
Congress does have "intrinsic authority" to enforce its own subpoenas by having the sergeant at arms take people into custody and bring them to the hearing. The House has made a decision instead to use the alternative method of using the court system to enforce its subpoenas. I'm guessing they believe that enforcing a subpoena that has been "blessed" by the courts will be less controversial than the former alternative. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 19270
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: WH counsel testimony

#9 Post by Bob78164 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:14 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:So...why not Nussbaum? Or Foster? Oh. That's right, one is 80 plus, one is deceased.
Gosh.
I'll help you out with the sarcafont.

That's why Congressional Republicans abandoned any efforts to investigate either of the Clintons.

The Mueller Report put Don McGahn in the room when actions occurred that constitute obstruction of justice. The American people need to hear from him. Not what someone -- neither Mueller nor Barr -- say he said. We need to hear from him, directly and under oath. --Bob
I believe there has to be 30 hours of video from McGahn's testimony to Mueller, (of which he probably used about one minute of in his report). Let them have that. And let us have it so we can be sure the cong-dems don't do the same thing as I suspect Mueller's team did.
The Justice Department has apparently agreed today to release to Congress the evidence Mueller had. As long as releasing that material doesn't compromise an ongoing investigation, I have no problem with making it public. But it's been the Justice Department, not Congress, that's been insisting on secrecy. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11044
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: WH counsel testimony

#10 Post by Beebs52 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:54 pm

So why not have Nussbaum testify?
Oh please.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 19270
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: WH counsel testimony

#11 Post by Bob78164 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 6:15 pm

Beebs52 wrote:So why not have Nussbaum testify?
Because as far as I can tell he hasn't served in government for 25 years so there's no reason to think he knows anything about whether Donny did or didn't obstruct justice or whether he did or didn't knowingly accept help from the Russian government to get elected. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11044
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: WH counsel testimony

#12 Post by Beebs52 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 6:17 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:So why not have Nussbaum testify?
Because as far as I can tell he hasn't served in government for 25 years so there's no reason to think he knows anything about whether Donny did or didn't obstruct justice or whether he did or didn't knowingly accept help from the Russian government to get elected. --Bob
But Dean does?
Oh please.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11044
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: WH counsel testimony

#13 Post by Beebs52 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 6:18 pm

Are you retarded?
Oh please.

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 5580
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: WH counsel testimony

#14 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:33 pm

Beebs52 wrote:Are you retarded?
He suffers from the same brain injury as polly does.
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... All thought comes from the right wing noise machine(TM)... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything... Made the trump apologist and enabler playoffs... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar

User avatar
Ritterskoop
Posts: 5378
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:16 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: WH counsel testimony

#15 Post by Ritterskoop » Mon Jun 10, 2019 10:33 pm

a1mamacat wrote:One of the many things I don't understand, is why all these people, ignoring subpoenas, are not being arrested and marched into the chambers. Aren't subpoenas legal demands to appear?
They are for you and me, in the sense that if we did not appear, we would be held in contempt of court or Congress, and punished. On TV, this always means going to jail, but my guess is that sometimes it is a fine or something less telegenic.

The president says that Congress does not have the authority to compel him or his people to appear. It's an interesting notion, one that we don't run up against all that much. Of course, plenty of times, people don't appear when subpeonaed, but it's not out of principle, but because they know they have done something wrong, and don't want to be punished.
If you fail to pilot your own ship, don't be surprised at what inappropriate port you find yourself docked. - Tom Robbins
--------
At the moment of commitment, the universe conspires to assist you. - attributed to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 10832
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: WH counsel testimony

#16 Post by BackInTex » Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:06 am

Ritterskoop wrote:Of course, plenty of times, people don't appear when subpeonaed, but it's not out of principle, but because they know they have done something wrong, and don't want to be punished.
I compare this to an unlawful search. Many times people refuse to be searched or allow their property to be searched without a warrant, not on principle but because they have something to hide. But that is their right. On the other hand, many times a search warrant is not available because there is not enough enough evidence. "I'm pretty sure he's hiding something illegal" is not enough reason. The same should go for subpoenas. The Mueller investigation is a good case in point. Most of the indictments from the investigation were due to the investigation. Pretty much nothing was found other than wrongful actions resulting from investigation. That is hope of the testimonies being requested. Ask enough questions enough ways over enough time and someone is bound to conflict something they said somewhere sometime. Its rather pathetic and concerning.
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 17944
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: WH counsel testimony

#17 Post by silverscreenselect » Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:21 am

BackInTex wrote: On the other hand, many times a search warrant is not available because there is not enough enough evidence. "I'm pretty sure he's hiding something illegal" is not enough reason. The same should go for subpoenas.
A subpoena is not a search warrant. A person can't refuse to testify on general principles. They can invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer particular questions.

Our legal system of subpoenas in both civil and criminal cases has worked well for over 200 years. If it's inconvenient or embarrassing for Donald Trump, that's his problem, not the system's.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 6933
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: WH counsel testimony

#18 Post by tlynn78 » Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:33 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote: On the other hand, many times a search warrant is not available because there is not enough enough evidence. "I'm pretty sure he's hiding something illegal" is not enough reason. The same should go for subpoenas.
A subpoena is not a search warrant. A person can't refuse to testify on general principles. They can invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer particular questions.

Our legal system of subpoenas in both civil and criminal cases has worked well for over 200 years. If it's inconvenient or embarrassing for Donald Trump, that's his problem, not the system's.
I know, right? So much better to delete tens of thousands of emails after having them subpoenaed. :roll:
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

Post Reply