Try to understand this: If it doesn’t take away his money or effect him physically he just doesn’t give a flying fuck. File that lawsuit-he won’t show up and you can’t make him. Demand to see documents-he won’t hand them over and you can’t make him. Demand his cronies appear-he won’t let them and you can’t force them.
The Supreme Court has the power to expedite cases when they feel that timeliness requires it. They can essentially say “This case needs our decision within a short time period in order for the decision to matter so we’re bypassing the normal route through the appeals system.”
Thanks for the explanation. Doesn’t the White House defying House subpeonas during an impeachment inquiry merit that kind of intervention?
One would think they would. Perhaps they need to be formally asked.
“The one text message that I saw… I don’t even know most of these ambassadors. I didn’t even know their names. But the text message, the text message that I saw, from Ambassador Sondland, who is highly respected, was, there’s no quid pro quo. He said that.” Trump, four days ago.
It is now coming out that Sondland was on the phone with Trump just before sending that text message. Trump wrote one bogus press release on Air Force One, did he dictate that text to Sondland?
Shit, I wouldn’t testify today either if I was as crooked as Sondland. I’d be getting a lawyer.
I just reread this story from about a week before the 2016 election…
Donald Trump’s Companies Destroyed Emails in Defiance of Court Orders
It’s worth a read because he is currently employing a number of shady tactics that have worked for him in the past. Here’s the concluding paragraph…
IANAL but I assume that went on the ultra fast track since it was actually an election decision. This is probably not deemed as much of an emergency. To me it needs timelier resolution but I’m a nobody!
Seriously.
…“important” is subjective.
I was and am interested in pointing out to you that you didn’t understand what the word “evidence” meant, and to point out that despite your assertion that no evidence was posted, evidence actually was posted.
Incorrect.
That precedent applies when the link that is requested is directly applicable to the OP. You yourself acknowledge that it really wasn’t, so much so you created a new thread to address it.
Exactly.
I have a sneaking suspicion that such a lawsuit would be dismissed as a political question. This contradicts my earlier support for a lawsuit, but as I read more about how the Supreme Court has handled congressional-executive disputes in the past, the more I feel that such a suit will be dismissed.
~Max
Is it even judicable? I would think it is a political question solved by contempt of Congress.
Excellent news!
This isn’t a policy dispute. If the SCOTUS won’t intervene when one branch openly defies the 100% legal and proper procedures of another, how can a rogue executive ever be held accountable?
Contempt of Congress, great. Then what? Are there consequences, or will it just “look bad” on Trump’s next report card?
My (probably flawed) understanding is that Congress could seek criminal enforcement if they find that someone has ignored their legally-filed requests and subpoenas, through the Department of Justice (so, yes, in theory, there can and should be consequences). However, given that the DoJ is run by AG William Barr, who has shown absolutely no inclination to do anything even remotely against the wishes of Trump, I would imagine that any requests from Congress to the DoJ to enforce this would be met with a yawn, at best.
What, if anything, can be done about Barr? What recourse is there if our DOJ has turned against us?
I’ll be surprised if SCOTUS takes it up. They generally don’t get involved in cases where the law is well settled, as it is in this case. There are just no real issues for them to decide. MAGA Hats may not understand it, but the Constitution makes crystal clear in Article 1 that Congress has powers of oversight over the Executive Branch. Trump’s arguments in opposition have zero basis. Unless SCOTUS is prepared to just literally shit all over the Constitution, they have no reason to elevate this case.
You are absolutely right about the slow crawls through the courts. No one up until this “president” has weaponized our institutions as he has been willing to do. He politicizes everything. No doubt you’ve noticed his practice of defining any ruling adverse to his interests as being done by “Democrats!”
Courts don’t rule on the basis of their political views. At least, they’re not supposed to. Impartiality is their highest ethical duty. But this asshole has no problem calling this into question from every possible angle in a bid to save his own worthless skin. He doesn’t care how much damage he does to our institutions by politicizing them and politicizing judicial process.
He also weaponizes the deliberative (usually slow) process of the courts as much as he can. Some of the courts have recognized this tactic and have expedited their rulings in an effort to counter it. Still, it is slow. Trump and his henchmen count on it.
Trump is 100% the most dangerous thing that has ever happened to our country.
The Supremes told Nixon he had to turn over the tapes. If they can order that a president produce physical evidence why could they not order a president to allow material witnesses?
Man, if Lincoln was alive he’d be rolling in his grave.
From what I can gather from the last couple of hours of this thread, it goes like this:
House: Here’s a subpoena.
White House: Fuck off.
House: We’re asking DOJ to enforce the subpoena.
DOJ: Nah. (licks Trump’s asshole one more time)
House: We’ll take it to the SCOTUS.
SCOTUS: We don’t intervene in interbranch issues.
White House: The witch hunt is over!