Grand Jury material temporary blocked by Supreme court

[Snow96]

@Jezcoe

Is it Whitewater? Is that what you are pointing to?

Not white water.

[Jezcoe]

@Snow96

@Jezcoe

Ahhhh the catch -22 rears it head again.

Yes it is a catch - 22. If the president can’t be charged with a crime until he’s impeach, but congress has no authority to impeach him for crimes committed before he became president.

That is a standard that has never existed… like… ever.

So why is it allowed now?

[Jezcoe]

@Snow96

@Jezcoe

Is it Whitewater? Is that what you are pointing to?

Not white water.

Whatever… i really don’t care.

If you want to share what you are referencing… then please do… or not.

[Snow96]

@Jezcoe

That is a standard that has never existed… like… ever.

So why is it allowed now?

In my opintion, the impeachment process is for while a person is president and not for anything before that.

[Snow96]

@Jezcoe

Whatever… i really don’t care.

If you want to share what you are referencing… then please do… or not.

Cattle futures trading account.

[PurpnGold]

@Snow96

In my opintion, the impeachment process is for while a person is president and not for anything before that.

Which is a silly notion. Someone can commit murder on Jan 18 become President On Jan 21 and we can’t touch them?

Ridiculous

[Jezcoe]

@Snow96

@Jezcoe

That is a standard that has never existed… like… ever.

So why is it allowed now?

In my opintion, the impeachment process is for while a person is president and not for anything before that.

Once again… that is a standard that has never existed like ever.

But let us go with that.

Let us say that a year before the election a President commits a murder. During the Presidency information of that murder comes to light. Like… let us say that there are pictures and eye witnesses… it was some weird murder cult.

Is there no remedy for Congress to remove a murderer from office?

[Jezcoe]

@Snow96

@Jezcoe

Whatever… i really don’t care.

If you want to share what you are referencing… then please do… or not.

Cattle futures trading account.

Oh that… who cares? It happened before BIll was president.

But really… all of the scandals around the Clintons… even the dumb ones… was basically whitewater.

[Ben_Natuf]

not ridiculous. legally sound reasoning.

you impeach a president, nor a candidate, not a private citizen. if your going to impeach a president it should be for what a president does.

[Snow96]

@Jezcoe

Oh that… who cares? It happened before BIll was president.

But really… all of the scandals around the Clintons… even the dumb ones… was basically whitewater.

The cattle futures investigation lead to white water. It was a follow the money thing.

But the funnest one, was court order for law firm records that dissapeard. Then after her attorney committed suicide – and the clintons demanded access to his office before law enfocement – and those missing court ordered law firm record show up in the white house? Just things that make you go hmmmmm.

[Jezcoe]

@Snow96

@Jezcoe

Oh that… who cares? It happened before BIll was president.

But really… all of the scandals around the Clintons… even the dumb ones… was basically whitewater.

The cattle futures investigation lead to white water. It was a follow the money thing.

But the funnest one, was court order for law firm records that dissapeard. Then after her attorney committed suicide – and the clintons demanded access to his office before law enfocement – and those missing court ordered law firm record show up in the white house? Just things that make you go hmmmmm.

Yes… We are a much better nation for all of that. Especially the ruling of Clinton V Jones.

I am glad that the President isn’t off the hook for what happened before the Presidency.

You?

[PurpnGold]

@Ben_Natuf

not ridiculous. legally sound reasoning.

you impeach a president, nor a candidate, not a private citizen. if your going to impeach a president it should be for what a president does.

Is this just the Donald Trump standard or will this be applied to Biden if after he is elected we find out he committed crimes with Hunter or that he sexually assaulted someone?

[Ben_Natuf]

its the same standard i’ve always adhered to. if not… where do you draw the line? 1 year? 5 years? 20… do you unseal juvenile records?

[PurpnGold]

@Ben_Natuf

its the same standard i’ve always adhered to. if not… where do you draw the line? 1 year? 5 years? 20… do you unseal juvenile records?

If the crime is within the statue of limitations then it should not matter if you are President or not. If it is outside of that, then impeachment is the answer if we find out after the person is elected

[kingarthur65]

@anon91495210

That’s not what he’s claiming. You do understand that these are equal branches, right? What the left is suggesting is that the House alone should have the power to investigate anything they want regarding Trump. That’s never been the standard, the only have the power of impeachment. There are many things the House can do to bring the President to the table, just like there’s many things the President can do to bring the house to the table. The judicial has equal power as well. None of them report to the other, they are independent for a reason. If they want information from Trump that he’s not willing to give, they can go to the courts and ask for that information. If the court agrees, they get it. If not, they don’t. Our system works fine and why Liberals want to trash it and just allow Pelosi to act like a dictator is beyond me.

Incorrect. The President has argued he has absolute immunity. The argument is that since he is immune from prosecution, there is no need to investigate him for a crime. Under this argument his lawyers have stated that Nixon never should have been investigated and never should have been impeached because the President is immune from investigation
Sekulow made a similar argument this month in front of the Supreme Court.
This isn’t about certain information Congress can ask for. This is about absolute immunity. The courts have ruled against this so far, but it takes time for this to go through the court system. In the meantime, Trump can act as if he has this immunity. Even though the courts have ruled against this theory.
If Trump loses this SCOTUS case today, I expect him to amend his argument to be able to push another theory through the court system. At that point we will start all over again.
This is exactly what Schiff described during impeachment and why the House did not want to wait for the court system.

[kingarthur65]

@Jezcoe

@Snow96

@Jezcoe

Oh that… who cares? It happened before BIll was president.

But really… all of the scandals around the Clintons… even the dumb ones… was basically whitewater.

The cattle futures investigation lead to white water. It was a follow the money thing.

But the funnest one, was court order for law firm records that dissapeard. Then after her attorney committed suicide – and the clintons demanded access to his office before law enfocement – and those missing court ordered law firm record show up in the white house? Just things that make you go hmmmmm.

Yes… We are a much better nation for all of that. Especially the ruling of Clinton V Jones.

I am glad that the President isn’t off the hook for what happened before the Presidency.

You?

The Justices that were on the court for Clinton v Jones will have to contort themselves to find a favorable ruling for Trump

[DougBH]

@kingarthur65

Trump is claiming absolute immunity. No oversight at all. He can deny access to all current and former aides. He can deny any subpoena for documents requested by Congress. He’s not claiming this just for impeachment. He’s claiming he has this right for any request. It was also called “temporary Presidential immunity” by Sekulow

Should the Executive have that power?

No. There is not absolute immunity.
Also, a Congress that has shown itself more interested in political harassment than real oversight (including one impeachment they knew would fail beforehand) cannot pretend to be in perpetual impeachment mode and have access to every item, public or private, that touches on a President.

That’s what courts are for…that’s why the temporary block.

[kingarthur65]

@DougBH

@kingarthur65

Trump is claiming absolute immunity. No oversight at all. He can deny access to all current and former aides. He can deny any subpoena for documents requested by Congress. He’s not claiming this just for impeachment. He’s claiming he has this right for any request. It was also called “temporary Presidential immunity” by Sekulow

Should the Executive have that power?

No. There is not absolute immunity.
Also, a Congress that has shown itself more interested in political harassment than real oversight (including one impeachment they knew would fail beforehand) cannot pretend to be in perpetual impeachment mode and have access to every item, public or private, that touches on a President.

That’s what courts are for…that’s why the temporary block.

You might want to tell that to Sekulow and the President’s other attorneys. They claim there is. Not only from Congress but from any authority:

DENNY CHIN: What’s your view on on the Fifth Avenue example? Local authorities couldn’t investigate. They couldn’t do anything about it. That’s your position?

WILLIAM CONSOVOY: That is correct. That is correct.

[anon91495210]

NO ONE has argued that he’s “Immune from prosecution”. What part of that aren’t you getting?

[anon91495210]

Again, that is NOT what he’s arguing. He’s exercising executive privilege and if you were the focus of constant investigation for 3 years that turned up zero evidence, would you just turn over everything they asked for? I would force them to get a warrant for EVERYTHING. Let’s not forget, he’s turned over thousands of documents and willingly allowed a bunch of his staff to testify. When is enough? Let’s also not forget that the DNC paid Russians for the dossier that they used to get a FISA warrant and accused HIM of Russia collusion. When the other side has proven they’ll go to extremely corrupt lengths to try to frame you, why the HELL would you give them a single piece of paper without forcing them to get permission from the courts?