(05-03-2018 08:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Was Rosenstein subpoenaed and did he ignore it? If not, has he said he would ignore a subpoena?

And if trump is subpoenaed by Mueller, what will you say if he ignores it?

I can't answer the first but the bottom one will end up with the SCOTUS deciding if Mr. Trump has to answer the questions.

(05-03-2018 11:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 09:17 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 08:47 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 08:39 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 08:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Was Rosenstein subpoenaed and did he ignore it? If not, has he said he would ignore a subpoena?

And if trump is subpoenaed by Mueller, what will you say if he ignores it?

Mueller can not subpoena Trump. Mueller can go to a judge and try to have a judge subpoena Trump. You cant just issue a subpoena on someone. You have to have just cause in order to force someone to take a deposition. And then there's that whole constitutionality thing they would have to clear. Go ahead and let the genie out of that bottle. You libturds will be REALLY sorry you did that.

The material Rosenstein has been stonewalling on has been under subpoena for a year. Congress DOES have the authority to directly subpoena Rosenstein in his role at the DOJ, as congress has oversight authority on that position.

Cool story bro, but you did not answer any of the questions I posed.

Since I appear to have answered your questions, what question do you want answered?

See bolded.

The first question was answered in my previous post. The second question isnt a hypothetical, his IS ignoring the subpoena, and has done so continually until he is threatened with contempt of congress. If this occurred where a judge issued the subpoena, he would be well past the point of serving jail time for contempt. Rosenstein has also continually lied about why he fails to honor the subpoena.

For your final question, like I said, you better not let that genie out of the bottle. If you want to try to force a sitting president to testify in front of a grand jury on things he's allowed to do under the constitution, then its going to be a whole lot of fun watching the next democratic dumb*** get skull drug through the same process.

Trump will fight the subpoena in court. The court will want to know what authority Mueller has to do this. As of this moment, thats not available, because Rod Rosenstein continues to stonewall the release of the Meuller scope memo. So Rosenstein will need to clean that memo up.

And here's where we keep coming back to: the only authority Mueller has to get Trump to answer questions based upon the original scope of the investigation has to do with testimony of Comey. So Muellers tainted team will have to either:

1. tell the court they believe Comey is telling the truth, whereas the defense has a tremendous amount of material that says Comey was a liar and that his FBI acted nefariously.

2. Admit to the court that Comey is a liar, but they should believe him in this case.

What it will eventually boil donw to is that A) the court says no to forcing Trump to answer questions or B) Trump will be told to answer a very few relevant questions to the Comey statements, and that these will be allowed to be provided as written statements.

This is the end game. The end game is that Muellers tainted team is getting painted into a very restricted area, where Trump will answer a few questions, and Mueller will be left with nothing and will be forced to issue a report.

Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

I would have loved to see the dumb*** Obama forced into a deposition in front of a grand jury about fast and furious, the IRS scandal, the fake dossier, etc. Please, go ahead and open up that bottle.

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

Emperor, not king.

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016?

No but apparently we did in 2008. Moochie says she's "forever our first lady." As Mark Stein said, you know what you call the person who is forever the first lady? Queen.

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

Again. Mueller can't just subpoena he has to go to a court and it would be kicked up to the SCOTUS.

Then Mueller would have to explain why he's subpeoning the president and have substantial proof that it's pertinent. Why do you think Mueller is above the law and can do what he pleases?

(05-03-2018 12:37 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

Again. Mueller can't just subpoena he has to go to a court and it would be kicked up to the SCOTUS.

Then Mueller would have to explain why he's subpeoning the president and have substantial proof that it's pertinent. Why do you think Mueller is above the law and can do what he pleases?

I don't think anyone was implying Mueller would just type out a document and serve trump, but yes, most agree that Mueller can subpoena trump...but no, it would not be easy, and I agree that it would likely end up at SCOTUS at some point.

Can Mueller subpoena Trump? Legal experts say yes — but it’s tricky.

(05-03-2018 02:47 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 12:37 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

Again. Mueller can't just subpoena he has to go to a court and it would be kicked up to the SCOTUS.
T
Then Mueller would have to explain why he's subpeoning the president and have substantial proof that it's pertinent. Why do you think Mueller is above the law and can do what he pleases?

I don't think anyone was implying Mueller would just type out a document and serve trump, but yes, most agree that Mueller can subpoena trump...but no, it would not be easy, and I agree that it would likely end up at SCOTUS at some point.

Can Mueller subpoena Trump? Legal experts say yes — but it’s tricky.

I thin that's similar to one of the articles i read last night. I don't do Vox. Feel like it was USA Today.

I'm not sure what Mueller would have to have to play that hand. I don't think the, hims won't talk to defense would work.

(05-03-2018 02:54 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 02:47 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 12:37 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

Again. Mueller can't just subpoena he has to go to a court and it would be kicked up to the SCOTUS.
T
Then Mueller would have to explain why he's subpeoning the president and have substantial proof that it's pertinent. Why do you think Mueller is above the law and can do what he pleases?

I don't think anyone was implying Mueller would just type out a document and serve trump, but yes, most agree that Mueller can subpoena trump...but no, it would not be easy, and I agree that it would likely end up at SCOTUS at some point.

Can Mueller subpoena Trump? Legal experts say yes — but it’s tricky.

I thin that's similar to one of the articles i read last night. I don't do Vox. Feel like it was USA Today.

I'm not sure what Mueller would have to have to play that hand. I don't think the, hims won't talk to defense would work.

I thought most special counsels would just refer their findings to congress for further action. We'll see eventually I guess. Although it would be nice for something to make it to the SCOTUS level so some precedent could be set...however, I don't think we're likely to see anything like this for quite awhile if ever again.

(05-01-2018 12:22 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Articles of impeachment are being drafted to be ready in case he stonewalls again.


Members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus have drafted articles of impeachment against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, calling it a “last resort” if the Justice Department continues “slow walking” its response to document requests.

Sources with the caucus emphasized they are not planning right now to move forward with any impeachment effort -- apparently intending the draft as a warning shot to the DOJ in their quest for documents.

The draft, obtained by Fox News Tuesday, comes just days after House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced they had reached an agreement with the Justice Department on producing documents.

At this point, are we sure that Devin Nunes is even literate?




Exclusive: Nunes demands Justice Department records. Then he doesn't read them.

(05-07-2018 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 12:22 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Articles of impeachment are being drafted to be ready in case he stonewalls again.


Members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus have drafted articles of impeachment against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, calling it a “last resort” if the Justice Department continues “slow walking” its response to document requests.

Sources with the caucus emphasized they are not planning right now to move forward with any impeachment effort -- apparently intending the draft as a warning shot to the DOJ in their quest for documents.

The draft, obtained by Fox News Tuesday, comes just days after House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced they had reached an agreement with the Justice Department on producing documents.

At this point, are we sure that Devin Nunes is even literate?




Exclusive: Nunes demands Justice Department records. Then he doesn't read them.

So you are admitting they didnt turn them over? If you read the article, you would get that. Also, and this article also confirms that there were, again, redactions.

The 3 judges have had it with the redactions. Time and time again the DOJ and FBI have been busted lying about the redacted parts.

(05-03-2018 08:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Was Rosenstein subpoenaed and did he ignore it? If not, has he said he would ignore a subpoena?

And if trump is subpoenaed by Mueller, what will you say if he ignores it?

Two interesting thoughts about your question.

Rosenstein will have to make his move first---and if he chooses to ignore the subpoena, then he essentilly creates a precedent for Trump to follow. Secondly, there is a difference between Rosenstien and Trump. Rosenstein has a boss---Trump doesnt. As president, Trump alone is a coequal branch of government. Rosenstien, on the other hand, would have no real defense for not appearing before Congress if Trump orders Rosenstein to testify.

(05-07-2018 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 12:22 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Articles of impeachment are being drafted to be ready in case he stonewalls again.


Members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus have drafted articles of impeachment against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, calling it a “last resort” if the Justice Department continues “slow walking” its response to document requests.

Sources with the caucus emphasized they are not planning right now to move forward with any impeachment effort -- apparently intending the draft as a warning shot to the DOJ in their quest for documents.

The draft, obtained by Fox News Tuesday, comes just days after House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced they had reached an agreement with the Justice Department on producing documents.

At this point, are we sure that Devin Nunes is even literate?




Exclusive: Nunes demands Justice Department records. Then he doesn't read them.

Whats the point you are trying to make? My guess is he is trying to answer a specific question and the DOJ keeps redacting the relevant portion of the document. That said, it doesnt matter. If the police ask you for your divers license---you give it to him---it doesnt matter if he actually looks at it or he hands it to his partner to look at. He still needed it. If you hand him an ID with all the information redacted, why bother looking at it all? Whether he reads it or not doesnt excuse federal employees from responding to a legal demand from the body with constitutional oversight authority over those federal employees.

If Gowdy and Nunes's staff members have read the documents, what difference does it make whether Nunes himself read them? The staff does the detail work anyway.

(05-07-2018 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  If Gowdy and Nunes's staff members have read the documents, what difference does it make whether Nunes himself read them? The staff does the detail work anyway.

Gowdy himself reportedly read the documents, so why didn't Devin? And I'm sorry, but I would prefer my elected representatives do their own legwork on matters of this much importance and not farm it out to a staffer. But that's just me I guess.

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

No. But they apparently appointed one. The king has no clothes.

(05-08-2018 08:37 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  If Gowdy and Nunes's staff members have read the documents, what difference does it make whether Nunes himself read them? The staff does the detail work anyway.

Gowdy himself reportedly read the documents, so why didn't Devin? And I'm sorry, but I would prefer my elected representatives do their own legwork on matters of this much importance and not farm it out to a staffer. But that's just me I guess.

What difference does it make? And based on their histories, I would think Gowdy has much more expertise in the area than Nunes.

(05-03-2018 12:02 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Did we elect a King in 2016? Why do Trump supporters behave like he is above the law? Of course he has to follow a subpoena.

Umm, Mueller has to obey the law, too. A complication which is seemingly becoming a bit inconvenient. As far as a subpoena, he can show up but he still doesn't have to answer any questions. And no, that is not admitting guilt. That is saying, you don't have anything, so I'm not going to help you out.

The only way I let him answer questions, if I'm his lawyer, is under the Hillary-Comey rules. Informal, off the record, unsworn, with counsel present, and with your letter of exoneration already drafted.

(05-03-2018 03:00 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I thought most special counsels would just refer their findings to congress for further action. We'll see eventually I guess. Although it would be nice for something to make it to the SCOTUS level so some precedent could be set...however, I don't think we're likely to see anything like this for quite awhile if ever again.

Be prepared to see it EVERY time a pub wins the White House. It's the new template. Pay big bucks for dirt on the new guy in town, use your plants in the State Dept, DOJ, and FBI to feed the narrative to the MSM, go after him for several years via investigations to, at a minimum, disrupt his ability to lead the country, and at a maximum, get him impeached.