Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues

I'm So Tired (Take 14)

A Question: Could an Administration, up to and including the AG and the President, be charged...?

...after they were out of office? For continued obstruction of justice?

What would it require?

Or should the Democrats just forget about it and move forward, if (they) win the next election?

Do crimes cease to exist whenever the Parties in the Congress switch power? Even up to, and including, treason?

Democrats have some decisions to make.

Hard Road To Travel

Slip Slidin' Away

Is the Congress in session?

Or are they home in their districts?

How many are still in Washington?

Should they be home or in the Capitol?

We see some of them every day on TV but are they taking precautions over the virus over legislating?

Will Trump create a military confrontation before the Election?

After all, there is nothing that unites the country like a good war.

Knowing that he will do anything to help himself win, this is something we cannot discount out of hand.

I'm afraid the damage this guy has done to our country and our institutions is insurmountable.

I look at he and his Party as nothing but traitors. They have created this environment of fear and division with their eyes wide open. It is unforgivable.

Now that you have had time to assimilate it, what do you think of yesterday's SC decisions?

Things do tend to look a little different in the rear view mirror.

But, from what I have gathered, the NY state case against Trump was granted and the Congressional case against Trump was not granted, although the Chief Justice stated that no president was above the law or exempt from subpoena.

A 7-2 majority voted that a grand jury could have access to Trump's tax returns in New York case. However, it would be in secret. What kind of problems might that present?

In my opinion, the Congressional ruling is slightly more problematic. They ruled that the Congressional request for financial documents was not "narrow" enough. Who will define what "narrow" means in the future? It could be open to interpretation, relative to political opportunity. What is to prevent any Court from saying it is not "narrow" enough? Either the Congress has the power of oversight or they do not.

In appearance, it looks as if the SC is saying that no one is above the law and the President must adhere to the requests of the grand jury and must adhere to the requests from Congress of relevant information.

In reality, it might be only a cover, to delay and to deny justice in both cases, in my opinion.

Ride of the Valkyries

Jimmie Brown, the Newsboy