We are witnessing a first. Holding an Attorney General in contempt of court for not turning over documents that:
- Are not allowed by law and recent D.C. Court of appeals ruling to be made public. Barr would have to break the law to comply.
- Are not required by laws of Special Counsel to be turned over to Congress in the first place. IOW, they are not legally entitled to them (even if it was legal to do so).
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) May 8, 2019
48 comments:
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
Trump promised to release the returns.....NADA....Now you bash the congress for doing their job.....Oh well....maybe a good ass whipping would make you happy!!!! What could he possibly be hiding that the entire trump base is complicit with??????? Let them be sanitized by sunlight....LOLOLOL
Well someone going to get an ass wuppen but I don't think it's going to be Trump.
barr was held in contempt for committing LAWFUL ACTS as AG.
think about that for a minute.
and think about just how fucking bad the TDS in the democrat party has become to hold an AG in contempt FOR OBEYING THE FUCKING LAW.
alky stupid.
rrbMay 8, 2019 at 5:08 PM
The expansion of executive power and privilege can be used against everything if it stands.
all except for one thing - you cannot provide a single factual example of trump expanding executive power.
not one.
captain pen & phone on the other hand? examples are legion.
if you have to lie to make your case - and you always DO, alky - you never had a case to begin with.
and you stupid cocksuckers are so devoid of having any familiarity at all with the fucking law, that you just held the AG in contempt of congress for committing lawful acts.
there's stupid, and then there's "alky stupid" and the democrats all went "alky stupid" today.
Denny...
This has nothing to do with tax returns.
cold -
i think there's a secret contest going on between roger and denny.
the dumbest fuck wins, or something.
just a hunch.
C.H. TruthMay 8, 2019 at 5:27 PM
Roger
Your problem is you cannot answer the question."
E
Enforcement of the subpoena duces tecum was stayed pending this Court's resolution of the issues raised by the petitions for certiorari. Those issues now having been disposed of, the matter of implementation will rest with the District Court. "[T]he guard, furnished to [the President] to protect him from being harassed by vexatious and unnecessary subpoenas, is to be looked for in the conduct of a [district] court after those subpoenas have issued; not in any circumstance which is to precede their being issued." United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas., at 34. Statements that meet the test of admissibility and relevance must be isolated; all other material must be excised. At this stage the District Court is not limited to representations of the Special Prosecutor as to the evidence sought by the subpoena; the material will be available to the District Court. It is elementary that in camera inspection of evidence is always a procedure calling for scrupulous protection against any release or publication of material not found by the court, at that stage, probably admissible in evidence and relevant to the issues of the trial for which it is sought. That being true of an ordinary situation, it is obvious that the District Court has [418 U.S. 683, 715] a very heavy responsibility to see to it that Presidential conversations, which are either not relevant or not admissible, are accorded that high degree of respect due the President of the United States. Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, sitting as a trial judge in the Burr case, supra, was extraordinarily careful to point out that
"[i]n no case of this kind would a court be required to proceed against the president as against an ordinary individual." 25 F. Cas., at 192.
Marshall's statement cannot be read to mean in any sense that a President is above the law, but relates to the singularly unique role under Art. II of a President's communications and activities, related to the performance of duties under that Article. Moreover, a President's communications and activities encompass a vastly wider range of sensitive material than would be true of any "ordinary individual." It is therefore necessary 21 in the public interest to afford Presidential confidentiality the greatest protection consistent with the fair administration of justice. The need for confidentiality even as to idle conversations with associates in which casual reference might be made concerning political leaders within the country or foreign statesmen is too obvious to call for further treatment. We have no doubt that the District Judge will at all times accord to Presidential records that high degree of deference suggested in United States v. Burr, supra, and will discharge his responsibility to see to [418 U.S. 683, 716] it that until released to the Special Prosecutor no in camera material is revealed to anyone. This burden applies with even greater force to excised material; once the decision is made to excise, the material is restored to its privileged status and should be returned under seal to its lawful custodian.
Since this matter came before the Court during the pendency of a criminal prosecution, and on representations that time is of the essence, the mandate shall issue forthwith.
Affirmed.
United States vs Nixon
9-0 Nixon lost.
The President is trying hard to keep this in the system until after the election.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/418/683.html
Denny...
This has nothing to do with tax returns
WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH MY OPINION?????? IDIOT
And rat...you win the trump fellator of the year....and that is no secret!!! BWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
I hate to have to say this, but you are deep throating and swallowing ever single drop.
When the President, uses the executive authority beheadings of Crooked Hillary Clinton and other Democrats, you will be standing up behind him and saluting him.
This is the most dangerous moment in the history of the United States since 1861.
Nasty Roger , how are your now two ex-wife?
I suspect they are with real men.
Jesus Alky you are too emotional.
BREAKING: House Intel just subpoenaed DOJ for all counterintelligence and foreign intelligence materials in the probe, the full report, and underlying evidence.
DOJ has responded to our requests with silence and defiance.
Congress needs the material. We will not be obstructed.
Question just for Roger. Do you have the physical ability to stay this emotionally high strung until your team losses in 2020?
WASHINGTON — The Senate Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed Donald Trump Jr. to answer questions about his contention that he had only limited knowledge of a project to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, a source with direct knowledge told NBC News.
The committee, led by Republicans, is nearing completion of its investigation into Russian election interference — a probe that is expected to result in a series of written reports.
The news was first reported by Axios.
Trump Jr. testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in September 2017. He said he was only "peripherally aware" of the Moscow development proposal, which was kept secret from voters.
Michael Cohen, then a lawyer for the Trump Organization, who was pursuing the project, told the committee a different story. He testified that he briefed Trump Jr. and his sister Ivanka Trump about the project "approximately 10" times.
The Republican lead Senate.
Shut up kput'z.
How can on be silent
And yet
Defiance
Explain OTT Alky
Are these the new falling bombshell shoes?
1st Amendment beats Alky every time.
F u Alky
With Pres. Trump Winning on so many issues that matter to Americans it is Fun to watch Alky crawl back in the bottle.
Biden is going to win the Democrats nomination.
Sanders is locking down Super Deligates. But, will be again screwed out of the Nomination.
The girls like Peter Buttplug and those that where born with a cunt are off the Radar.
the Justice Department slammed Wednesday’s vote on the contempt as “politically motivated and unnecessary”
The DOJ is not supposed to be the mouthpiece for the President. They swear to Protect and defend the Constitution, not the President.
@TimRunsHisMouth
So when Democrats vote Barr in contempt and this goes to court...
And the court upholds the redactions in the Mueller report...
Will they say the court is part of the conspiracy and owned by Russia?
This insanity will never end.
not until we vote these insane dems out of Congress
Alky, that 1st Amendment continues to kick your stupid broke down ads.
Both sides get their say. Guess what, The Executive Branch thanks to Obama has more Power, not the wimps in the US House.
Speaker in Name Only Polosi has gotten nada done.
US House Record Under Speaker in Name Only Polosi.
A big Fat Zero.
Yet to see her budget get a floor vote.
No new Health Care Bill on the floor
No middle income tax cut.
No infrastructure bill
No New Green Deal
Nothing for Americans.
You are the biggest asshat .......
In the last 24 hours, we learned that the president is a #BillionDollarLoser, his biggest evangelical backer covered up an apparent sex scandal, his attorney general is facing a contempt charge in the House and his son is being subpoenaed by the Senate.
In the last 24 hours.
The DOJ is not supposed to be the mouthpiece for the President. They swear to Protect and defend the Constitution, not the President.
Well idiot, the House held the A.G. (leader of the DOJ) in contempt because he wouldn't break the law for them.
They are a mouthpiece for sanity.
The US House is a lot drunk with power.
Roger what happened to those 2018 promises of the Socialist Democrats.
Promise Made, Promises never intended to keep.
"Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is callimg for more gun control"
Idiot sand monkey.
Disarm America, not a fucking chance.
Grandstanding.
But what really bugs me now is the use of executive privilege, that is not in the Constitution, that he is attacking the balance of power between the executive branch and the Congress.
Of course, politics aside , I fear the power of the executive branch. He's going far more towards a dictatorship. I would oppose it if President Hillary Clinton had declared herself above the law and use executive privilege to stop, let's say, an investigation into alleged emails, endangering national security, and refused subpoenas requested by the Republican controlled house! I would strongly disagree with her.
That is a lie.
They are not going to release the grand Jury investigation information or testimony.
If they did that, they would have broken the law, but they are not going to release the release the grand Jury investigation information or testimony.
You are taking the party line, and have not looked into the allegations, or determined their accuracy!
The House of Representatives has the authority to see the unredacted report.
S. Scott A**hole you are either ignorant or stupid.
They cannot release everything!
They WOULD be breaking the law.
Geezus it's like talking to a brick wall.
Scott, do you think that Trump will try to censor Mueller? Would you support him?
FOX
Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano told host Neil Cavuto that special counsel Robert Mueller can resign from the Department of Justice if the president tries to stop him from testifying about his final report. Napolitano says it might come to that because the Mueller report says that the president committed obstruction of justice, which "has been found by either the Congress or the House Judiciary Committee consistently to be a lawful constitutional basis for impeachment."
"Asking people who work for you to lie to federal investigators, which is what Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton were accused of doing, has traditionally been characters as a species of 'high crimes and misdemeanors'" he said.
"The president says that didn't happen," he explained. "Bob Mueller says it did [and] it would be a basis for the House Judiciary Committee to begin investigations if they want."
ANDREW NAPOLITANO: They are probably going to subpoena Bob Mueller and then he would be under the burden either to comply or to go to a federal judge and have the subpoena quashed. He is an employee of the Justice Department so his boss, Bill Barr, could already say you could go, could change his mind because his boss, the president, has changed his mind.
NEIL CAVUTO: But they’re mad at everybody, Barr, Mueller if he doesn’t, right?
NAPOLITANO: Bob Mueller can negate all of this by resigning from the DOJ, saying my job is over. Then he’s a private citizen and nobody can stop him.
CAVUTO: Does the president have the power to say you shall not testify?
NAPOLITANO: To a government employee? Yes. He does not have that power to a private person. There is no privilege. The report is 99% public. The author of the report has helped make it public. He certainly lawfully can testify about it.
CAVUTO: All right. I thought the president open, had nothing to hide, everyone wants to talk, let’s do this.
NAPOLITANO: That was the attitude of the president when he first learned of the four-page summary of conclusions Attorney General Barr released. That was the attitude of the president when the report first came out, when the president’s people like the rest of us examined the rest of the report, he flipped 180 degrees and was back to being critical of Mueller and the investigation and the people that participated in it. Then he said I have nothing to hide, then he said as recently as just last night, I don’t want him to go. So I don’t know how that plays out. I don’t know if I don’t want him to go is because to be translated in "I order him not to go" or if it’s just the president’s opinion at the moment.
CAVUTO: So if Mueller were to testify, and there is a difference of opinion between Bill Barr and Mueller's people on what constitutes a pass on obstruction of justice, I get the sense that for Mueller's people it is not a total exoneration. Maybe the president doesn't want that brought up?
NAPOLITANO: I would think that if Mueller testifies, it will be the biggest audience since the finale of "Dallas" and "Who shot JR?" There will be a lot of back and forth. Republicans basically saying, "Why didn't you investigate how this whole thing started?" A legitimate question. And Democrats saying, "Isn't this obstruction of justice? Isn't this obstruction of justice? Isn't this obstruction of justice?" That latter Q&A is probably what the president doesn't want...
Asking people who work for you to lie to federal investigators, which is what Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton were accused of doing, has traditionally been characters as a species of "high crimes and misdemeanors."
CAVUTO: The president says that didn't happen.
NAPOLITANO: Right, right. Bob Mueller says it did, so it would be a he-said-he-said. But it would be a basis for the House Judiciary Committee to begin investigations if they want.
Stated differently, obstruction of justice has been found by either the Congress or the House Judiciary Committee consistently to be a lawful constitutional basis for impeachment.
Alkylanche
The Democrats sole intention over the next year and a half is to create such a chaotic national political landscape that the 2020 electoral pitch to the American people will be that the only way to end the chaos is to vote President Trump out of office.
It would appear that Democrats have made the cold and calculated decision that they cannot effectively engage the President on policy. Understandably so. How do you argue against an economic policy that results in higher wages and the lowest unemployment numbers in a half decade after previously telling the public to get used to the new normal? How do you engage in a discussion of health care policy when the last plan you sold to the American public was based upon lower cost and an ability to keep both your plan and your doctor and all three turned out to be false? How do you effectively engage the President on immigration when the President has been on the issue for three and a half years while you have insisted there is not a problem? It would require an admission that doing nothing was in error and a capitulation that most of what Trump has wanted is in fact necessary.
The calculation appears to be that if the political scene becomes chaotic enough, a majority of likely voters will tune it all out and come to the conclusion that the only way to end the chaos is to change Presidents in much the same way that parents of screaming infants tend to give the infant what it wants. That impulse will be fostered by the continuous mantra that Trump’s personality is poisonous to our national unity. “He’s the cause of divisiveness.” “He’s a racist.” “He’s an authoritative dictator.” The added bonus for Democrats will be that the criminal charges soon to come over the Obama Administration’s interference in the 2016 election will be explained away as simply “trumped” up political charges by an “authoritative dictator”.
There would appear to be two potential outcomes:
1. The American electorate sees through the smoke and punishes the Democrats at the ballot box for their conduct; or
2. The scheme works and Democrats get a pass on their complicity in the Obama Administration’s interference in the 2016 election.
The true beauty of democracy is in either scenario, we the American people get exactly what we deserve.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-08/chaos-order-day
Alkylanche
it is amusing to watch the dumb fuck flail around, wildly and blindly copy/pasting nonsense about nixon that has absolutely no relationship to what's happening today.
an alky-lanche of alky stupid. it's what we get for indulging the idiot.
even mail order couldn't take it anymore.
heh.
The Red Sox, who steamrolled to a World Series crown last October, are poised to visit the White House on Thursday. Team manager Alex Cora announced last week he would not attend, citing his frustration with the administration's efforts to help his native Puerto Rico recover from a devastating hurricane. Nearly a dozen players, including American League MVP Mookie Betts, have said they will join him in skipping the ceremony.
All those bypassing the White House are players of color. Every white player on the team — as well as J.D. Martinez, who is of Cuban descent — was expected to attend.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
The House of Representatives has the authority to see the unredacted report.
no they don't alky.
stop lying.
barr knows, and rightly so, that an unredacted version of the report would be leaked to the bozo's post and cnn approximately 5 minutes after fat jerry get's his greasy hands on it.
furthermore, there is nothing in the unredacted version that shed additional light upon mueller's conclusion. all it would do would be to release the names of the hundreds who were interviewed, and that kacsinky scumbag over at cnn would promptly doxx those people within a day or so.
the fact is, release of an unredacted version serves no legal, constitutional, or legislative oversight purpose, and is being demanded purely to cause harm to the presidency.
barr knows this and has steadfastly refused to break the law so fat jerry can continue his crusade.
you're a liar alky. and an imbecile. that which you don't merely get wrong on the facts you choose to lie about. that's a sociopathic mental illness that should be crying out for help.
you will die with trump as your president. and deservedly so.
NAPOLITANO is a lawyer and longtime contributor to Faux News.
The 3rd grade English failure copy and pasted nonsense from a website no one considers is rational.
All those bypassing the White House are players of color.
wow. an impressive show of defiance. especially to the president who has done more to reduce the unemployment of the minority community than any other president in my lifetime.
and when all is said and done, trump's still president and puerto rico is still a corrupt shithole.
i guess cora really showed him, eh alky?
Blogger Roger Amick said...
NAPOLITANO is a lawyer and longtime contributor to Faux News.
no shit. next you'll tell us that water is wet.
and he's also bitter over being passed up for a USSC nomination.
in other words, he's the "shep smith" legal analyst on fox. a token malcontent who has been on a crusade to avenge his butthurt.
They are not going to release the grand Jury investigation information or testimony.
If they did that, they would have broken the law, but they are not going to release the release the grand Jury investigation information or testimony.
The members of the house committee have the right to see the unredacted document.
All little Jimmy has are insults and racist diatribes.
This is why almost nobody visits this blog anymore.
no shit. next you'll tell us that water is wet.
and he's also bitter over being passed up for a USSC nomination.
in other words, he's the "shep smith" legal analyst on fox. a token malcontent who has been on a crusade to avenge his butthurt.
hey alky...
ready to take the "alky challenge" yet?
all it takes is a single verifiable and factual example of trump's unconstitutional executive overreach that is leading us to a constitutional crisis.
didja find one yet?
your nixon comparison fails on the facts.
got another?
c'mon alky. it's not like you have anything better to do since mail order bailed on your psychotic ass.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
This is why almost nobody visits this blog anymore.
our host has explained to you on numerous occasions citing chapter and verse as to why visits have dropped.
and it has everything to do with YOU alky, and no one else.
i'm a known quantity who has been here since day one. when this blog REALLY took a bad turn is shortly after scott made his only mistake - granting an asshole like you front page privileges.
show me an editor's note that specifically refers to me like THIS:
Editor's Note:
The views of Roger Amick are in no way endorsed or supported by me, and should not be considered representative of either the historical or current Coldheartedtruth blog.
C.H. Truth
you were as successful in driving away blog visitors as you were in driving away your "beautiful panamanian mail order bride" or whatever the fuck you used to call her.
so, you were saying alky?
. I would oppose it if President Hillary Clinton had declared herself above the law and use executive privilege to stop, let's say, an investigation into alleged emails, endangering national security, and refused subpoenas requested by the Republican controlled house! I would strongly disagree with her.
So when Clinton refused FBI subpoenas for her personal server, and then had it wiped clean prior to the FBI having to come physically confiscate it...
Did you demand she face charges for obstruction (or objection) to Justice?
Did you demand that Eric Holder and Barack Obama should be charged with some sort of crimes when they refused Congressional subpoenas over Fast and Furious (and those were bi-partisan subpoenas)?
Seems you had your chances in the past to show us that you are stickler for the law and that you would hold your own accountable. But you didn't under these exact same circumstances when the names were Clinton, Holder, or Obama rather than Trump, Barr.
You are a partisan hack, so quit suggesting differently.
Post a Comment