Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:22 PM
pbmus (11,393 posts)
So America's mayor threatens constitutional crisis....
|
14 replies, 1556 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
pbmus | Jun 2018 | OP |
DURHAM D | Jun 2018 | #1 | |
Ms. Toad | Jun 2018 | #11 | |
D_Master81 | Jun 2018 | #2 | |
BigmanPigman | Jun 2018 | #5 | |
former9thward | Jun 2018 | #7 | |
shanny | Jun 2018 | #10 | |
former9thward | Jun 2018 | #13 | |
YessirAtsaFact | Jun 2018 | #3 | |
hedda_foil | Jun 2018 | #9 | |
shanny | Jun 2018 | #12 | |
SCantiGOP | Jun 2018 | #4 | |
spanone | Jun 2018 | #6 | |
standingtall | Jun 2018 | #8 | |
NCTraveler | Jun 2018 | #14 |
Response to pbmus (Original post)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:25 PM
DURHAM D (29,835 posts)
1. "Us" / "We're" ??
Rudy apparently thinks he Trump's partner and co-President.
|
Response to DURHAM D (Reply #1)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 11:06 PM
Ms. Toad (25,730 posts)
11. My immediate reaction, as well. n/t
Response to pbmus (Original post)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:32 PM
D_Master81 (1,598 posts)
2. Is this just a delaying tactic?
They cant possibly think they're above a subpoena can they? Nixon tried this w/ the tapes and got voted down by the SC 9-0.
|
Response to D_Master81 (Reply #2)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:50 PM
BigmanPigman (40,955 posts)
5. Yep, expect nothing else until he is out of office.
Delay, distract and demean.
|
Response to D_Master81 (Reply #2)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 10:25 PM
former9thward (23,513 posts)
7. Tapes and personal testimony are legally two completely different animals.
The tapes were evidence and tapes can't be indicted. Compelled personal testimony can result in an indictment. No one can be sure how the courts would rule.
|
Response to former9thward (Reply #7)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 11:03 PM
shanny (6,709 posts)
10. Bill Clinton was compelled to testify. nt
Response to shanny (Reply #10)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 11:15 PM
former9thward (23,513 posts)
13. That was a civil case not criminal.
He was convicted of civil contempt of court -- not criminal perjury. Far different cases although given what happened to Clinton it would be an argument against testifying. Clinton said he had an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky and he still was convicted.
|
Response to pbmus (Original post)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:34 PM
YessirAtsaFact (2,049 posts)
3. Unlike the repugnant goons in Congress the Judiciary stands up to OrangeTurd
As noted above just a delaying tactic.
|
Response to YessirAtsaFact (Reply #3)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 10:38 PM
hedda_foil (15,186 posts)
9. It will go to SCOTUS. We do not yet know how they'll decide.
We know what precedent says. We don't know if the con majority will agree. They will decide the future of this nation. God help us.
|
Response to hedda_foil (Reply #9)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 11:06 PM
shanny (6,709 posts)
12. I can't see Roberts or Kennedy
rolling over for Trump on judicial authority. Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch, yes.
|
Response to pbmus (Original post)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:38 PM
SCantiGOP (11,173 posts)
4. Everybody has a right to go to court
Wouldn’t consider it a crisis for someone to do that.
|
Response to pbmus (Original post)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:53 PM
spanone (125,509 posts)
6. trumps lawyers have declared him above the law.
Response to pbmus (Original post)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 10:28 PM
standingtall (2,673 posts)
8. This could be a huge blunder
if Trump defies a subpoena and this goes to the supreme court and Trump loses there. What is he going to do then defy the supreme court? That would put republicans in between a rock and hard place. They will either have to admit they would not impeach or remove Trump under any circumstances or they would have to do the right thing in joining with Democrats in impeaching and removing him from office. Maybe Trump and his team doesn't plan on letting it get to the supreme court instead Trump plans to use Mueller's subpoena of him as a pretext to fire Mueller.
|
Response to pbmus (Original post)
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 11:22 PM
NCTraveler (30,481 posts)
14. Isn't that kind of understood in this situation?
If they don’t want to be under the restraints of a subpoena then they will have to argue against its validity.
|