The Trump Presidency

[Vociferous]

You fail to understand the Congress has no need to enforce the subpoenas.
By refusing the subpoenas and instructing others to also refuse, Trump has obstructed Congress. Period.
He is simply guilty of 2nd Article of impeachment.

And as I told you, Congress already has a Constitutional means to punish for obstruction/contempt of Congress. IOW, they skipped a step by moving directly to impeachment, making it invalid due only to their impatience.

They have every right to recommend to the Senate by way of lodging articles of impeachment that the President be removed from office just for obstructing congress. They don't even need the article of abuse to make that recommendation.

Agreed, they can do whatever they have the votes for, regardless of how moronic.

Yet it is you who keeps repeating no crime has been committed when in fact criminality is not the issue. There is no conviction, punishment or detention involved. The POTUS is immune to criminal charges. ( whilst in office)

And? I have repeatedly said that impeachment is political, not criminal.

 

[iceaura]

And as I told you, Congress already has a Constitutional means to punish for obstruction/contempt of Congress.

It's called "impeachment".
That's what the Dems are trying to do.

Why aren't the Republicans helping them? They swore to protect the country from that kind of betrayal and violation of the Constitution, when they took office. Did they think that oath was a joke?

 

[sculptor]

and now'
a brief musical interlude

 

[Vociferous]

For those completely unaware of US law and politics, contempt of congress, e.g. obstruction of congress, has as its first recourse judicial ruling. And just like they skipped that step in seeking to subpoena people, they skipped it to use impeachment as a recourse to no statutory crime definable as a high crime or misdemeanor. Period. Either learn or remain willfully and permanently ignorant. Your choice...at least if you believe you have one.

 

[Quantum Quack]

For those completely unaware of US law and politics, contempt of congress, e.g. obstruction of congress, has as its first recourse judicial ruling. And just like they skipped that step in seeking to subpoena people, they skipped it to use impeachment as a recourse to no statutory crime definable as a high crime or misdemeanor. Period. Either learn or remain willfully and permanently ignorant. Your choice...at least if you believe you have one.

there is no need for a judicial ruling any more....the Senate has set the precedent.
Any president can now simply ignore congress when subpoenaed.

 

[Vociferous]

History lesson: Obama admin officials ignored congressional subpoenas, and the Kenneth Starr inquiry into Bill Clinton took four year, with many subpoenas ruled on by the judiciary.

The willfully ignorant obviously can't be bothered to do a simple Google search.

 

[Quantum Quack]

History lesson: Obama admin officials ignored congressional subpoenas, and the Kenneth Starr inquiry into Bill Clinton took four year, with many subpoenas ruled on by the judiciary.

The willfully ignorant obviously can't be bothered to do a simple Google search.

like I said:
there is no need for a judicial ruling any more....the Senate has set the precedent.
Any president can now simply ignore congress when subpoenaed.

Do you dispute this?

 

[iceaura]

For those completely unaware of US law and politics, contempt of congress, e.g. obstruction of congress, has as its first recourse judicial ruling.

That's not a "first recourse", but almost a last one.

Obama admin officials ignored congressional subpoenas, and the Kenneth Starr inquiry into Bill Clinton took four year,

Starr's silly waste of time and money took four years because he kept turning up exonerations and had to start over with different accusations. As with Hilary's emails, the wingnuts kept coming up empty.

Meanwhile, Obama's administration ignored none of the subpoenas or requests, but rather fought some of them - on fairly reasonable grounds, including the several precedents of the previous administration (W's)as defended by the very same people imposing the demands, the fact that his administration had already provided tens of thousands of unredacted documents and several witnesses etc, the fact that the ongoing partisan Republican monkeywrench attempts had abandoned all basis in reason or evidence, and so forth.

Another significant difference: Obama himself was never credibly accused, and his only connections to the alleged wrongdoings was via his official duties - an arena in which executive privilege does often apply.

Unlike Trump (or W, Reagan, et al), he was not using the powers of the Presidency to avoid prosecution for private crimes or take actions in his own private interest. (That's one reason he never faced impeachment, despite eight years of Republican Congressional efforts - there was never a visible case against him, as there is against Trump).

 

[(Q)]

History lesson: Obama admin officials ignored congressional subpoenas, and the Kenneth Starr inquiry into Bill Clinton took four year, with many subpoenas ruled on by the judiciary.

The willfully ignorant obviously can't be bothered to do a simple Google search.

Why is it that the willfully ignorant get their facts wrong and then go around telling others they are willfully ignorant.

The Obama administration did not ignore subpoenas, they rejected them at first, but eventually always complied by providing the documents requested. This happened with the Fast and Furious botched weapons sting investigation, the Benghazi attack, the communications related to the solar company Solyndra, CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards rule, Deep Water Horizon spill, ACA (Affordable Care Act), ACA website, Clean Water Rule, and Ft Hood shooting.

 

[Tiassa]

History lesson: Obama admin officials ignored congressional subpoenas, and the Kenneth Starr inquiry into Bill Clinton took four year, with many subpoenas ruled on by the judiciary.

The willfully ignorant obviously can't be bothered to do a simple Google search.

Laws and law enforcement, reportage and commentary, fallacy names, s-apostrophe; it's one thing to be wrong, but you go out of your way to humiliate yourself in the process.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Now Trump declares the separation of powers to be at his whim!

 

[Quantum Quack]

Today's news headlines that Trump attempted to persuade Julian Assange into testifying that Russia had no involvement in the hacking of DNC in exchange for a pardon.

Assange's lawyer Edward Fitzgerald QC told the court his team wanted to submit more evidence — including a statement from another of Assange's lawyers, Jennifer Robinson.

He told the court the statement detailed an allegation that the former US Republican congressman Dana Rohrabacher visited Assange on the instructions of US President Donald Trump.

src: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02...-assange-presidential-pardon-alleged/11982676​

He really like to make a deal ....lol

The USA threatens Assange with extradition from the UK then offers a pardon if he gives false witness thus proving the Russians involvement by default...

 

[Vociferous]

Laws and law enforcement, reportage and commentary, fallacy names, s-apostrophe; it's one thing to be wrong, but you go out of your way to humiliate yourself in the process.

Ah, more of the usual unsupported accusations of error. It's sad that that's all you seem to have to contribute.

And funny that most, if not all, of those actually illustrate your own errors in comprehension.

 

[Write4U]

The Obama administration did not ignore subpoenas, they rejected them at first, but eventually always complied by providing the documents requested.

I believe that was the historical mistake of Pelosi. She should have followed the historical procedure of subpoena of persons and papers and SCOTUS adjudication after refusal. This would have ensured that all facts saw the light of day or the accused would have been in contempt of court, regardless of time frame. Either way, lawfull procedure would have prevailed and the republican senate would not have been able to claim "insufficient evidence" and make a joke of the solemn sworn duty to protect the Constitution.

In view of the results of this botched impeachment, the damage done to the republic is far worse than spending a few years on investigation in according to strict rules of order. In short this was a bungled half-assed impeachment and strengthened the assumption of the current dictatorship.

 

[sculptor]

... In short this was a bungled half-assed impeachment ...

Amen to that.

 

[(Q)]

I believe that was the historical mistake of Pelosi. She should have followed the historical procedure of subpoena of persons and papers and SCOTUS adjudication after refusal. This would have ensured that all facts saw the light of day or the accused would have been in contempt of court, regardless of time frame. Either way, lawfull procedure would have prevailed and the republican senate would not have been able to claim "insufficient evidence" and make a joke of the solemn sworn duty to protect the Constitution.

In view of the results of this botched impeachment, the damage done to the republic is far worse than spending a few years on investigation in according to strict rules of order. In short this was a bungled half-assed impeachment and strengthened the assumption of the current dictatorship.

Perhaps, you're right, and even murderers and rapists sometimes get away with their acts of violence due to a botched trial in the criminal justice system, but it doesn't mean they weren't guilty. What's really sad are the folks who are happy about it.

 

[Write4U]

What's really sad are the folks who are happy about it.

Jan might be one of them.
This is not an few isolated individuals or groups, this is some 25-30% of the population!

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak only evil.....

 

[(Q)]

Jan might be one of them.
This is not an few isolated individuals or groups, this is some 25-30% of the population!

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak only evil.....

Ever watch the videos of Trump's rallies? The chat on the side is filled with comments like, "Trump is God, Trump is Jesus, Trump is Lord" etc. Even a moronic psychopath like Trump can easily bamboozle the religious.

 

[(Q)]

So now, the Dow is tail spinning due to coronavirus and Trump blames it on the Democratic debate the other night. What's Trump's answer to that, hand it over to Mike Pence. Pence will pray the virus away.

 

[Write4U]

Yep, after dismantling the CDC, Trump is scrambling to catch up to by installing the VP who has absolutely no experience in virology.

It is also true that in 2018 the Trump administration fired key officials connected to the U.S. pandemic response, and they were not replaced.

Also in 2018, news reports circulated that detailed the Trump administration’s cut by 80% to the CDC’s program that worked in various countries to fight epidemics. “Countries where the CDC is planning to scale back include some of the world’s hot spots for emerging infectious disease, such as China, Pakistan, Haiti, Rwanda and Congo,” the Washington Post reported in 2018.

The fact that epidemic prevention-efforts were scaled back in China gained new significance in February 2020 as coronavirus spread globally after it was first detected in Wuhan, China, in late 2019.

The Trump administration fired the U.S. pandemic response team in 2018 to cut costs.

Rating

True

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-cut-cdc-budget/