The Trump Whistleblower Extravaganza Thread

[Ibanez]

Ivy - thanks for turning me on to The Bulwark. I'm going to bookmark this site. I really enjoyed this OpEd by a senior editor.

Say what you want about Donald Trump as a president: He does not have a deep understanding of the legislative process. He spends more time on Twitter than most healthy, well-adjusted men of his age. He golfs a lot. He may have committed some . . . light treason.

But by God, when the chips are down and it’s time to craft the kind of important letter that will one day be featured in his presidential library—that’s a thing that’s going to happen, by the way—he writes the things himself.

Do you know who else wrote his own material? Lincoln.

Boom. Roasted.

https://thebulwark.com/a-close-textual- ... cy-pelosi/

[Ivytalk]

The Bulwark was started by Sykes, Bill Kristol, and some other never-Trumper Weekly Standard veterans. Sykes himself has moved steadily leftward. Before you know it, he’ll be another Joe Scarborough.

[Ibanez]

The Bulwark was started by Sykes, Bill Kristol, and some other never-Trumper Weekly Standard veterans. Sykes himself has moved steadily leftward. Before you know it, he’ll be another Joe Scarborough.

I did some reading, Sykes was a Young Democrat back in the 70s.

Do you read the website daily ?

[Ibanez]

The idiocy is in full force this morning.

CNN is re-running an interview from last night with Don Lemon and the Mayor of Salem and asking for her response to Trumps comments about the Salem witch trials.


Whatever happened to uplifting news? It seems to me it get buried during non-peak hours and Sunday morning shows.

[Ivytalk]

The Bulwark was started by Sykes, Bill Kristol, and some other never-Trumper Weekly Standard veterans. Sykes himself has moved steadily leftward. Before you know it, he’ll be another Joe Scarborough.

I did some reading, Sykes was a Young Democrat back in the 70s.

Do you read the website daily ?

Yes. I get it on my FB feed. Whether it survives the political demise of Drumpf is anyone’s guess. I’m betting against it. The Bulwark is not even close to National Review standards of reflecting contemporary conservative thought (which is actually quite varied).

[kalm]

Ivy - thanks for turning me on to The Bulwark. I'm going to bookmark this site. I really enjoyed this OpEd by a senior editor.

Say what you want about Donald Trump as a president: He does not have a deep understanding of the legislative process. He spends more time on Twitter than most healthy, well-adjusted men of his age. He golfs a lot. He may have committed some . . . light treason.

But by God, when the chips are down and it’s time to craft the kind of important letter that will one day be featured in his presidential library—that’s a thing that’s going to happen, by the way—he writes the things himself.

Do you know who else wrote his own material? Lincoln.

Boom. Roasted.

https://thebulwark.com/a-close-textual- ... cy-pelosi/

That was an entertaining read.

[BDKJMU]

Ignoring donk House subpoenas under exec privilege, asserting exec privilege with his conversations with his advisers (allowed under Article II, separation of powers) and saying see you in court isn’t obstruction of Congress as laid out above. Exactly what a president is supposed to do if he thinks Congress is not entitled to such information – assert executive privilege and let the courts decide. But donks don’t want to let the courts decide, because deciding things in courts take months and months. So they get mad and lower the bar for impeachment.

Derahowitz:

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/1524 ... s-balances

I think you're confusing 2 investigations. Trump asserted executive privilege in the Mueller Investigation. I don't see anywhere that he's asserted that privilege w/ regards to Ukraine.

I'm not. The basis for the donks 'Obstruction of Congress' charge is their claim of Trump ignoring subpoenas (or ordering others to do so) & asserting exec privilege in matters relating to the Ukraine investigation.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 382795002/

[houndawg]

Read part of Trumps screed last night, one thing that I have to agree with him on is that the Democrats have been screaming for impeachment since Day 1. Anyone would feel targeted after that.

That's just politics today.

Remember Moscow Mitch saying that Job 1 was making Obama a one-term President? And how "after Obama was re-elected in a landslide it was: "he gets nothing"? Thats how its been done since Newt Gingrich was SOH.

[SeattleGriz]

The Bulwark has a piece by Charlie Sykes to the effect that the Donks should pursue a strategy of “impeach and withhold” at this point: pass the articles of impeachment, but refuse to send them to the Senate until and unless McConnell and company agree to rules for an impartial trial. The hope is to put pressure on a few “vulnerable” GOP Senators to increase the possibility of conviction. My old Donk Con Law professor favors that option.

Is that Laurence Tribe?

[houndawg]

I think you're confusing 2 investigations. Trump asserted executive privilege in the Mueller Investigation. I don't see anywhere that he's asserted that privilege w/ regards to Ukraine.

I'm not. The basis for the donks 'Obstruction of Congress' charge is their claim of Trump ignoring subpoenas (or ordering others to do so) & asserting exec privilege in matters relating to the Ukraine investigation.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 382795002/

The elephant in the room is the President refusing to cooperate in any way and forbidding the likes Bolton, Pompeo, and Mulvaney from cooperating. No matter how much drama queen the conks pull out it isn't enough to distract from that fact. It shines like a supernova.

[SeattleGriz]

I'm not. The basis for the donks 'Obstruction of Congress' charge is their claim of Trump ignoring subpoenas (or ordering others to do so) & asserting exec privilege in matters relating to the Ukraine investigation.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 382795002/

The elephant in the room is the President refusing to cooperate in any way and forbidding the likes Bolton, Pompeo, and Mulvaney from cooperating. No matter how much drama queen the conks pull out it isn't enough to distract from that fact. It shines like a supernova.

Why weren't they called in the House, meybe subpoena'd?

[CID1990]

I'm not. The basis for the donks 'Obstruction of Congress' charge is their claim of Trump ignoring subpoenas (or ordering others to do so) & asserting exec privilege in matters relating to the Ukraine investigation.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 382795002/

The elephant in the room is the President refusing to cooperate in any way and forbidding the likes Bolton, Pompeo, and Mulvaney from cooperating. No matter how much drama queen the conks pull out it isn't enough to distract from that fact. It shines like a supernova.

So issue a subpoena. Arguing the difference between telling principals not to testify, and making an official claim of privilege is a semantic debate.

Congress has the power of subpoena. They never issued one for Bolton, who wants to testify, but the reason he can’t is because he could be held criminally liable for disclosing privileged info if he defied Trump outside of a court order.

So as much as you may want to defend the obstruction article, it is weak at best because the courts will hold that telling cabinet members not to testify is a de facto claim of executive privilege.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skjellyfetti]

John Roberts, up to bat.

[houndawg]

The elephant in the room is the President refusing to cooperate in any way and forbidding the likes Bolton, Pompeo, and Mulvaney from cooperating. No matter how much drama queen the conks pull out it isn't enough to distract from that fact. It shines like a supernova.

Why weren't they called in the House, meybe subpoena'd?

Why didn't they volunteer like Sondland did if they have nothing to hide?

[CID1990]

Why weren't they called in the House, meybe subpoena'd?

Why didn't they volunteer like Sondland did if they have nothing to hide?

Already explained to you, HD

Do you need the BIG LETTERS AND COLORS book explanation?

[SeattleGriz]

Why didn't they volunteer like Sondland did if they have nothing to hide?

Already explained to you, HD

Do you need the BIG LETTERS AND COLORS book explanation?

I'm going to let CID take care of my light work.

[houndawg]

The elephant in the room is the President refusing to cooperate in any way and forbidding the likes Bolton, Pompeo, and Mulvaney from cooperating. No matter how much drama queen the conks pull out it isn't enough to distract from that fact. It shines like a supernova.

So issue a subpoena. Arguing the difference between telling principals not to testify, and making an official claim of privilege is a semantic debate.

Congress has the power of subpoena. They never issued one for Bolton, who wants to testify, but the reason he can’t is because he could be held criminally liable for disclosing privileged info if he defied Trump outside of a court order.

So as much as you may want to defend the obstruction article, it is weak at best because the courts will hold that telling cabinet members not to testify is a de facto claim of executive privilege.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not defending anything, I'm saying that somebody who had nothing to hide would be eager to testify, somebody like the President. He can do anything, he said so himself. So why doesn't he want to make this thing go away when he has the power to make it go away?

[Skjellyfetti]

The elephant in the room is the President refusing to cooperate in any way and forbidding the likes Bolton, Pompeo, and Mulvaney from cooperating. No matter how much drama queen the conks pull out it isn't enough to distract from that fact. It shines like a supernova.

Why weren't they called in the House, meybe subpoena'd?

Pompeo and Mulvaney were subpoenaed.

I don't get why Bolton wasn't subpoenaed. But, it doesn't seem like he didn't intended to testify to the House. The McGahn ruling opened the door for him. Hoping Senator Conks can get Roberts to force these.

[houndawg]

Why weren't they called in the House, meybe subpoena'd?

Pompeo and Mulvaney were subpoenaed.

I don't get why Bolton wasn't subpoenaed. But, it doesn't seem like he didn't intended to testify to the House. The McGahn ruling opened the door for him. Hoping Senator Conks can get Roberts to force these.

Still, this is about Trump not his functionaries. Why won't he speak under oath?

[CID1990]

Why weren't they called in the House, meybe subpoena'd?

Pompeo and Mulvaney were subpoenaed.

I don't get why Bolton wasn't subpoenaed. But, it doesn't seem like he didn't intended to testify to the House. The McGahn ruling opened the door for him. Hoping Senator Conks can get Roberts to force these.

No, Reek

As I explained before, the McGahn ruling did not open the door for Bolton, regardless of what the plaintiff's attorneys say. He still has the threat of liability UNLESS he is going to testify to exactly the same thing McGahn would testify to. Given that Bolton obviously would have had separate conversations with Trump over Ukraine than McGahn, there is almost zero chance that would be the case. Otherwise he runs the risk of a post facto ruling of privilege.

Use some common sense. You might avoid some of the bloodletting here if you do

[Skjellyfetti]

He's said he would fight a subpoena. You seem to think if Democrats subpoenaed him, he would show up the next day.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1XH2BU

If Bolton wants a court ruling specifically on his testimony, it will take months for it to be ruled on - like McGahn's was.

The only way he testified in the next few months is if Roberts makes him. Slim chance... but, I think it's the best one.

[CID1990]

He's said he would fight a subpoena. You seem to think if Democrats subpoenaed him, he would show up the next day.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1XH2BU

If Bolton wants a court ruling specifically on his testimony, it will take months for it to be ruled on - like McGahn's was.

The only way he testified in the next few months is if Roberts makes him. Slim chance... but, I think it's the best one.

I already said that weeks ago - the subpoena has to be challenged in court and upheld. The “it would take too long” excuse is vapid and shallow. It’s no wonder you would repeat it.

This is why the obstruction article is completely contrived, and why impeachment is now underwater.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

He's said he would fight a subpoena. You seem to think if Democrats subpoenaed him, he would show up the next day.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1XH2BU

If Bolton wants a court ruling specifically on his testimony, it will take months for it to be ruled on - like McGahn's was.

The only way he testified in the next few months is if Roberts makes him. Slim chance... but, I think it's the best one.

I already said that weeks ago - the subpoena has to be challenged in court and upheld. The “it would take too long” excuse is vapid and shallow. It’s no wonder you would repeat it.

This is why the obstruction article is completely contrived, and why impeachment is now underwater.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm OK with waiting for Bolton's book, but he probably should write it before SDNY steals his thunder.

[CID1990]

I already said that weeks ago - the subpoena has to be challenged in court and upheld. The “it would take too long” excuse is vapid and shallow. It’s no wonder you would repeat it.

This is why the obstruction article is completely contrived, and why impeachment is now underwater.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm OK with waiting for Bolton's book, but he probably should write it before SDNY steals his thunder.

This impeachment reminds me of the parable of the goatherd

A wolf was stalking the goatherd’s flock and the herder wanted to thwart the wolf.

So he put his entire herd to the knife to prevent them from being killed by the wolf.

(to great applause by the other goatherders)

Then months later, the starving and weakened goatherd was killed by the wolf.

The End


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk