Lawyer issues warning to Congress on Barr contempt: 'You are heading into a world of hurt'

Publius · 2019-05-16T12:25:19.823Z

Snow96:

Turley, a George Washington University law professor,

So you and most Dem’s in congress know more than a law professor? Really? You want to go with that? Where did you get your degree?

I’m sure you were making the same argument a few years back when we had a constitutional law professor in the White House, amirite?

Snow96 · 2019-05-16T13:43:21.371Z

You mean the one that kept saying “I can’t just make it happen over and over again”, then he talked to 1 more lawyer who told him if congress wouldn’t act he could?

That constitutional lawyer?

Publius · 2019-05-16T15:01:50.958Z

We get it. Law professors you agree with = good, ones you don’t agree with = bad.

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-16T15:51:49.338Z

Hey, I pretty much nailed it with Trump’s taxes. More than a few forum LIBs jumped on my case for arguing that we wouldn’t be seeing them anytime soon. They laughed, claiming that the IRS would have no choice, while predicting a quick turnaround.

And…………………………

As I predicted, there is no indication they will be forthcoming anytime soon.

Most of the house requests will suffer the same fate, and I seriously doubt they will ever see the completely unredacted Mueller report.

CanadianJudo · 2019-05-16T16:04:26.242Z

Obama was a law professor.
it isn’t that hard to become a lawyer you just have to pass a test.

BlueTex · 2019-05-16T16:43:25.589Z

peek-a-boo:

Hey, I pretty much nailed it with Trump’s taxes. More than a few forum LIBs jumped on my case for arguing that we wouldn’t be seeing them anytime soon. They laughed, claiming that the IRS would have no choice, while predicting a quick turnaround.

And…………………………

As I predicted, there is no indication they will be forthcoming anytime soon.

Most of the house requests will suffer the same fate, and I seriously doubt they will ever see the completely unredacted Mueller report.

LOL… I’ll answer the question for you… 1880 was the last time an appeals court or the supreme court found congress oversteps its bounds with a subpoena.

Judge Mehta asked Trump’s lawyers this same question during a hearing this Tuesday… He will be ruling on the matter next week…

CNN – 14 May 19

First courtroom test for House subpoena of Trump financial records | CNN...

A federal judge in Washington cast doubt on Tuesday that the courts could limit Congress’ ability to investigate President Donald Trump, in the first major hearing over congressional subpoenas for Trump’s financial records.

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-16T16:54:01.650Z

From your article:

So far, the President’s legal team has said Mehta is moving too quickly. Even if the Trump team were to ultimately lose the case, the federal courts could be used to tie up the subpoena for months – potentially past the 2020 elections.

Pretty much what I’ve argued. The House won’t be seeing Trump’s tax records anytime soon.

BlueTex · 2019-05-16T16:59:47.969Z

peek-a-boo:

From your article:

So far, the President’s legal team has said Mehta is moving too quickly. Even if the Trump team were to ultimately lose the case, the federal courts could be used to tie up the subpoena for months – potentially past the 2020 elections.

Pretty much what I’ve argued. The House won’t be seeing Trump’s tax records anytime soon.

That only applies if Mehta does not allow enforcement of the subpoena while they appeal.

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-16T17:42:37.347Z

I don’t see that happening. Think about it. If he forces the executive branch to turn over material, you can’t take the material back. Any follow on appeals would be meaningless.

BlueTex · 2019-05-16T17:46:57.076Z

peek-a-boo:

I don’t see that happening. Think about it. If he forces the executive branch to turn over material, you can’t take the material back. Any follow on appeals would be meaningless.

You appear to be unclear on the details of the case. The subpoena is to Mazars, not to Trump or the administration.

The GOP used these same powers to get information from Fusion GPS’s bank in Jan 2018.

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-16T19:19:02.316Z

We will see how this plays out.

zantax · 2019-05-16T19:30:17.533Z

Yeah, the one who thought he could say when congress was in session or not and could murder US citizens without due process. That constitutional law expert.

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-16T19:49:22.614Z

Obama is a self-proclaimed constitutional law expert (a legend in his own mind) . Turley is a widely recognized constitutional law expert.

Vigilante · 2019-05-16T20:26:08.590Z

peek-a-boo:

The key point is this isn’t some magic that would change anything.

DEMs still seem to be under some deluded impression that the new DEM majority in the House can snap their fingers and the Executive branch is compelled to jump when they say jump.

We’ve seen this same kind of pushback from the executive branch to congressional requests and subpoenas throughout history. We are seeing it in this administration and we will see it in the next administration.

Please Dont Stop!! LOL. Did I steal somebody’s opportunity to say that??

BlueTex · 2019-05-20T21:11:04.390Z

The fun starts now…

https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/status/1130580434444623872

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-20T22:46:27.246Z

Nothing has changed with the Mazar ruling. The WH will still continue to fight tooth and nail. They will win some and they will lose some.

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-20T22:48:41.370Z

My prediction is that leaked one-sided information will hit the MSM within hours of DEMs obtaining the records. The intention was never oversight and the Obama appointed Judge all but conceded that point.

biggestal99 · 2019-05-20T22:50:04.232Z

peek-a-boo:

In this particular case, it sounds like they are likely to lose but plan to proceed anyway. Why would they do that if not for political gain?

The abortion laws passed don’t have a chance to pass constitutionality yet the stupid states are passing them left and right.

Allan

peek-a-boo · 2019-05-20T22:51:15.804Z

They are attempting to force the SCOTUS to revisit Roe vs Wade. Were that to happen, my prediction is that Roe vs Wade will stand in a lopsided vote; Something like 8-1 or 7-2.

biggestal99 · 2019-05-20T22:53:12.268Z

peek-a-boo:

They are attempting to force the SCOTUS to revisit Roe vs Wade. Were that to happen, my prediction is that Roe vs Wade will stand.

So why are they even trying, Roberts will never overturn Roe.

No nay never.

Don’t they realize that or are they just pandering to the stupid for votes.

Allan