Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 53

Thread: Brush up, this case is still controlling!

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    19,400
    Thanks
    1,745
    Thanked 6,394 Times in 5,099 Posts
    Groans
    1,397
    Groaned 908 Times in 849 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    Yes, he is.
    How do you know?

  2. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yurt View Post
    How do you know?
    He is personally known to me.

  3. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    19,400
    Thanks
    1,745
    Thanked 6,394 Times in 5,099 Posts
    Groans
    1,397
    Groaned 908 Times in 849 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    He is personally known to me.
    How is that possible?

  4. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yurt View Post
    How is that possible?
    It's possible, Yurt.

  5. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,491
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarod View Post
    What’s a private crime?
    a private life crime, meaning any crime done before he was president
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  6. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,665
    Thanks
    9,767
    Thanked 33,628 Times in 21,489 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,633 Times in 5,141 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anatta View Post
    for documents? of course not. Testimony is a different animal

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/dont-sub...mony-president
    While Trump might not be in the best position to defend a claim that presidents should not be compelled by courts to testify, the case that the judiciary possesses such an authority is hardly an easy one. Presidents have in the past avoided testing the issue by voluntarily agreeing to testify when necessary. After much delay, Bill Clinton eventually consented to giving testimony to independent counsel Kenneth Starr under carefully negotiated conditions. Other presidents have likewise chosen to cooperate when asked to testify.

    Previous Supreme Court cases have stopped well short of asserting a judicial power to subpoena presidential testimony in a criminal case.
    That’s another distinction without a difference!

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Jarod For This Post:

    Rune (05-27-2018)

  8. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,665
    Thanks
    9,767
    Thanked 33,628 Times in 21,489 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,633 Times in 5,141 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    a private life crime, meaning any crime done before he was president
    False

  9. #23 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,527
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 24,570 Times in 17,095 Posts
    Groans
    5,280
    Groaned 4,575 Times in 4,254 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anatta View Post
    civil case.. what does this have to do with Trump?
    You don't know? He has lots of state charges that he cannot pardon away. But first bite of the apple will be Mueller.

  10. #24 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,491
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarod View Post
    False
    so that portion only applies to the house and senate?
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  11. #25 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,665
    Thanks
    9,767
    Thanked 33,628 Times in 21,489 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,633 Times in 5,141 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    so that portion only applies to the house and senate?
    No
    4,487

    18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
    44 U.S.C. 2202 - The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.


    LOCK HIM UP!

  12. #26 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarod View Post
    That’s another distinction without a difference!
    subpoena of documents is very much different then subpoena of testimony.
    For reasons already given. the link expounds

  13. #27 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    You don't know? He has lots of state charges that he cannot pardon away. But first bite of the apple will be Mueller.
    criminal vs.civil you idjit / not state vs. fed

  14. #28 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    a private life crime, meaning any crime done before he was president
    I think private refers to non-professional crimes as POTUS

  15. #29 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,665
    Thanks
    9,767
    Thanked 33,628 Times in 21,489 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,633 Times in 5,141 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noise View Post
    I think private refers to non-professional crimes as POTUS
    Bam! Look at the brains on Brad!

  16. #30 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,665
    Thanks
    9,767
    Thanked 33,628 Times in 21,489 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,633 Times in 5,141 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noise View Post
    subpoena of documents is very much different then subpoena of testimony.
    For reasons already given. the link expounds
    False

Similar Threads

  1. The case for impeachment
    By tinfoil in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 01-31-2017, 11:06 AM
  2. Is there a case for doing nothing?
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-22-2012, 09:09 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-18-2012, 06:40 PM
  4. A Case For Carter
    By cancel2 2022 in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 01-04-2011, 04:31 AM
  5. Obama needs to brush up on ME history
    By TuTu Monroe in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-08-2009, 12:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •