Are you trying to pretend congress doesn’t have access to lawyers? This singular opinion rules the land?
My layman’s interpretation of the exceptions to rule 6(e) makes me believe this exception may apply.
Rule 6(e)(3)(D)
An attorney for the government may disclose any grand-jury matter involving foreign intelligence, counterintelligence (as defined in 50 U.S.C.§401a3003), or foreign intelligence information (as defined in Rule 6(e)(3)(D)(iii)) to any federal law enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense, or national security official to assist the official receiving the information in the performance of that official’s duties. An attorney for the government may also disclose any grand-jury matter involving, within the United States or elsewhere, a threat of attack or other grave hostile acts of a foreign power or its agent, a threat of domestic or international sabotage or terrorism, or clandestine intelligence gathering activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power or by its agent, to any appropriate federal, state, state subdivision, Indian tribal, or foreign government official, for the purpose of preventing or responding to such threat or activities.
Assuming your argument is accurate, which I doubt, I can’t in my wildest imagination believe that House DEMs would vote to impeach solely to force Barr’s hand.
The House Judiciary Committee must value Turley’s insight to invite him.
Yeah…never heArd of an attorney bluffing. I was involved in a lawsuit where the plaintiff attorney blustered that he was going for the full level of our liability coverage. After mediation he settled for 500k. They do that to try to back the opposition. Off. Don’t blink.
An impeachment inquiry is not impeachment… My argument has precedence…
First someone has to introduce an impeachment bill (lack of better term)
Then the house has to vote to start the investigation
That is when the house wouls start requesing information.
So far, the only thing that has been done is an intruduciton of articles of impeachment. There has been no house vote on any of them.
So again, will they go through the steps of introducing articles of impeachment, and having the house vote to start the investigation JUST to get the full mueller report?
We will see what we will see. My guess is DEMs won’t get their way.
Exactly the point I was trying to make. I still believe they will begin the process next year, but I don’t believe they would go through all of that simply to force Barr’s hand.
I believe they will continue to thump their chests and threaten all kinds of things as red meat for their base, but in the end nothing will come of it.
As Newt said today on Sean’s show. This could be the biggest backfire in the history of politics. The depths of democratic corruption may be exposed if the libs can’t stop Barr. Now some are demanding the resignation of Linsey Graham because he want’s full transparency as well.
The media will be on the DEMs side as they attempt to discredit and take down Barr. We all saw this coming. With the completion of the Mueller probe and a strong AG, the gloves can now come off.
Hey did you have that chat with him?
Whether I agree with him or not I do read his work.
1 Like
Nonsense… A resolution of inquiry is all that is required… Nadler introduced one in 2017 when in the minority…
They don’t need to introduce articles of impeachment, that happens after an inquiry…
1 Like
No doubt. This is going to get interesting. The dems will attempt to destroy anyone who threatens to expose the truth. Fasten your seatbelts.
The process is well defined and the house never needs to even vote on articles of impeachment… A resolution of inquiry will get them everything they need…
I still think Rosenstein singing?
Where did you get yours?
Please and thank you
Still It needs to be voted on by the house to proceed. You seem to not want that to happen. I know many of the Dem’s don’t want to be on record as having voted for or against any part of impeachment. Longer they wait, the harder it gets to do it – wait to long and it will look to the american voter as done solely to hinder a sitting presidents re-election.
No…they start an impeachment inquiry first…
