Senate GOP uses Trump's executive privilege threat as rallying cry against subpoenas

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/executive-privilege-subpoena-fight/index.html

Why am I not surprised that they are using this line of thinking to explain why the Senate can't gather Subpoenas? Even though this is a laughably bad argument,
because before Republicans said that if Democrats wanted to gather more evidence for impeachment, they should have done so in the House, before passing articles of impeachment—Democrats were simply in too much of a hurry. Yet here, Senate Republicans are leaning toward not gathering too much evidence, because they are in too much of a hurry. So basically, ironically, rather than litigate the White House stonewalling, House Democrats threw up their hands and used it to impeach the president for obstructing Congress. Trump's defense team says that if Democrats wanted the documents and witnesses, they should have gone to court. Now Republicans are saying that they can’t gather the information either, because the White House will simply assert executive privilege—a claim that is at the very least arguable and might be knocked down in court. In a reasonable world, the rationale Republicans are offering would oblige them to vote for the second article of impeachment, which alleges obstruction of Congress. Instead, it’s being used as a fig leaf.

 

Looks like we need to go to the supreme court to find out where executive privilege ends and congressional oversight begins

 

Senate GOP uses Trump's executive privilege threat as rallying cry against subpoenas
My concern here is how these actions by both houses of Congress will end up impacting the Constitution & its impeachment process altogether. While it's true that if neither house is willing to go to court to help determine the boundaries & limits of Executive Privilege, then the President wins by default. Also, if both houses of Congress conclude that the court system process is itself too slow to allow impeachment to be effective, then the President wins again by forcing unnecessary delays over Congress. In either instance, Checks & Balances within the Constitution is effectively killed by Trump, who swore an oath to "protect, preserve & defend" that Constitution. It isn't necessary to find Trump guilty & replace him in order to preserve Checks & Balances, but it IS necessary to preserve the system by having a fair trial by following the procedures necessary to comply with norms. This whole impeachment process along with both houses of Congress' refusal to pursue a court decision on the limits of Executive Privilege, constitute a real present danger to the authority of & adherence to, the Constitution. Regardless of the outcome on Trump's impeachment, Congress should pursue a Supreme Court decision on the limits of Executive Privilege, for future reference & as an attempt to honor & preserve our Constitution.

 

Already done in The United States vs. Nixon.

 

Then why aren't Trump's lawyers abiding by that ruling?

 

Well there are differences of opinion on that now on which we apparently need clarification.

I think that they should testify but with immunity from prosecution for perjury.

The purpose of getting them to testify isn't to find the truth but to put them in a perjury trap.

Ask Trump straight up was the purpose of investigating Biden to find out about 2016. Or dirt for 2020. That's the difference between impeachable or not.
But Democrats won't do that, they'll ask 1000 questions about small details that don't matter and that he cannot answer accurately enough to avoid perjuring himself.

THAT is why no one from the administration has been testifying. Not the avoidance of truth. But to avoid fishing and perjury traps.

 

Sorry. I don't buy it. Your post just continues to support a non-supportable view that undercuts the Constitution. In Trump's mind, everything is political. In Trump supporter's minds, it's the same. But in reality, there are things that stand above the politics of the moment, & the impeachment of a President, along with the evidence motivating that impeachment, are one of those things. Undercutting the impeachment process is a direct way of weakening the Checks & Balances portion of the Constitution itself, with all the associated impacts on our government & our culture that such actions foreshadow.

 

I disagree, it is 100% political. This is just the strongest case they can make and it's extremely weak.

Simple fact the house dems impeached on a non impeachable offence with no good evidence because they want to hurt his chances in 2020.

 

The evidence you call "extremely weak" is just the opposite. Republicans like to claim the witnesses in the House were just spouting hearsay, but Republicans ignore the critical fact that some of those witnesses made copious notes at the time the events in question occurred. They weren't just making it up as they went along, or trying to piece it together from memory. They had notes backing up their testimonies--notes made at the time of the events themselves. And such notes are accepted in any court as evidence AGAINST hearsay.

Perhaps you are like so many Trump supporters, who don't really care what the evidence says, or what the truth is regarding Trump. Perhaps you are like those who blindly followed most of history's worst authoritarian leaders, who felt loyalty to HIM was the only important thing in their lives. Millions of humans have fallen into that trap. Every time it happens they bring horror to everyone around them, & innocent people die as a result. I don't want to be part of that outcome. My loyalty is to to the law & to the Constitution, even if I disagree with some of them. I believe America must be a nation of laws, NOT MEN. What I see happening now with Trump & his servile supporters is just the opposite. Trump wants the country totally subservient to him. Trump & his supporters want America to be a nation of men, not laws, with him being the central man. Trump is the living nightmare the founding fathers feared would eventually appear. I join millions in saying I never imagined I'd ever live to see America forced to deal with this authoritarian threat to its heritage. I am amazed at how many Americans are impervious to the blessings they themselves threaten with their personal loyalty to Trump above country. As a Democrat & a democrat, I want change too. But I want positive change that makes the lives of Americans better--ALL AMERICANS. I DON'T want change in the form of single-minded, self-serving, authoritarian strong-man leadership by one individual with the brains of a country mule.

 

And none of them testified that Trump was asking for the investigation for personal gain. Aka bribery, aka extortion aka quid pro quo.

 

Other than for personal gain, there is no rational reason for his demanding it. Why are you defending this jerk?

Plus, it just came out today that in his new book, Bolton is giving precise details confirming that Trump was doing exactly what Democrats are charging him with. And, Bolton was there & experienced it personally. Gee. Care about the country for a change, & NOT Trump.

 

So you could have won in court, yet failed to try?
Sounds like you ****ed up.

FYI, that case was specific to very a specific piece of physical evidence. You have no such piece of evidence to request. United States v Nixon would do nothing for you, and you would lose in court.

 

More leaks reported by the usual NYT. Wana bet, the anonymous source for this leak is lying? My source says they are.
How about this reason, no one is above the law, including the Biden's. Trump mentions having the Ukraine do us a favor and the snowflakes rant and rave that Trump is now subject to blackmail, yet Biden's son makes millions for doing nothing and threats are made when Hunter comes under investigation and the DNC blinders say nothing to see here.

 

Because they are obstructing justice. The US v Nixon made it clear that the so called executive privilege does not extend beyond national security secrets. For example the congress can't demand the name of a CIA agent in Moscow. In the Clinton case they extended the ruling to include civil cases against the president. Both rulings were unanimous by the Supreme Court,
It's the so called executive privilege because that term appears nowhere in the constitution nor in law. It's a concept.

 

You'd still have to get a judge to enforce it.
The defendant is well within his rights to resist until compelled by a judge.
Do you not know how this works?

 

You're doing precisely what Trump does when confronted with some misdeed. You're diverting attention onto someone or something else, & pretending no wrong was done by Trump. That's no solution. I agree that Hunter Biden's association with Burisma looks & smells bad. There may be some cause for concern &/or a more thorough investigation, but that doesn't really connect with Trump or what he did in trying to force foreign interference into our domestic elections to benefit himself, & using the powers of the Presidency to force the issue with Ukraine. I'm a Democrat, & I have no problem with further investigation & follow up with the Biden issue. Why do you & other Trump supporters have problems investigating & following up with wrong doing by Trump, as a means of protecting & preserving our Constitution? You seem to want to punish Biden & all Democrats but never hold Trump responsible for anything that goes wrong, even when it's his own doing. That kind of selfish, self-serving attitude is not only unacceptable, but not totally out of kilter with American traditional values & ideals. America has always bragged about being a "nation of laws, not men." But Trump & his followers are rapidly turning that around & making America a "nation of men (Trump & his sycophants), not laws." That undermines everything our founding fathers tried to achieve with their lives, & betrays the highest ideals from which they worked. This is why I oppose Trump.

 

Incorrect. The subpeona is valid unless the person ordered to appear goes to court to block it. Trump only went to court over his tax returns. The rest were willful obstruction. That's how it works.

 

You can't compel without a judge.

 

Yes they can. Individuals are tough now because they no longer maintain jail facilities and that's why they use courts for that. The documents, legally, they could have sent the Sgt at arm's to the White House to collect them, by force if need be but that's not a road they chose to follow.

 

The executive is not a subject under congressional jurisdiction.

 

Just stop making **** up will ya please? It's annoying.

 

You need a judge, you know it, and now you're getting testy.

 

Something that really, really pisses me off is when someone says I know something when it is utter bull cow pies. It's insulting of my intelligence.