The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
FAQ    Search

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2472 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117 ... 124  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 20131
Green Habit wrote:
Biff Pocoroba wrote:
Wow, I wasn't expecting them to return both cases back to the lower courts.
It buys Trump time but both imply that the records will eventually have to be handed over.
The key here is that they don't ultimately answer either way until after the election, reducing its salience on the campaign trail. It could heat up in either direction depending on if Trump loses or not.

The thing is...

1. At this point, his returns are pretty irrelevant to the campaign either way. He’s got no one left but true believers. That level of support is not enough to win. Clean tax returns wouldn’t change it, and neither would problematic ones.

2. It’s pretty clear that his hope was to establish a clean and complete presidential immunity to financial records requests, and to then to remain president.

His chances of remaining president notwithstanding, this seems to be a blow to that ambition.

_________________
(patriotic choking noises)


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 3:27 pm 
Offline
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Posts: 8342
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
It's hard to disagree with the reasoning of either case. Fundamentally, the central question of whether a sitting president can be investigated for crimes while still in office seems to be answered, and correctly. Likewise, whether a legislative branch without prosecutorial powers can legitimately subpoena documents that more than likely in no way advances legislation also seems to be correctly answered.

If not through subpoena, how then does The House investigate/determine whether to bring impeachment charges?




Summon Herman Munster.

_________________
Kaius wrote:
I really hope we get this figured out soon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 3:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 9:55 pm
Posts: 12966
Location: An office full of assholes
the more concerning opinion came out of the Wisconsin Supreme Court


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Rank This Poster
 Profile

Joined: Thu January 10, 2013 2:19 am
Posts: 5471
Location: SOUTH PORTLAND
Chris_H_2 wrote:
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
It's hard to disagree with the reasoning of either case. Fundamentally, the central question of whether a sitting president can be investigated for crimes while still in office seems to be answered, and correctly. Likewise, whether a legislative branch without prosecutorial powers can legitimately subpoena documents that more than likely in no way advances legislation also seems to be correctly answered.

If not through subpoena, how then does The House investigate/determine whether to bring impeachment charges?

I'm not sure it can, at least insofar as it concerns the executive branch. Impeachment is 100% a political exercise. And despite the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard, there is nothing inherently criminal about it. In the political vein, if the House issues a subpoena to the President and she or he refuses to comply, then the answer may be that that refusal can (and indeed should) be considered in deciding whether to bring articles of impeachment.

As in the president or any official facing impeachment is pleading the fifth? In a non-legal way.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24758
Location: Illinois
SCOTUS is a joke. This is like Tom Brady asking Brian Hoyer to check in during the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 9:55 pm
Posts: 12966
Location: An office full of assholes
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
It's hard to disagree with the reasoning of either case. Fundamentally, the central question of whether a sitting president can be investigated for crimes while still in office seems to be answered, and correctly. Likewise, whether a legislative branch without prosecutorial powers can legitimately subpoena documents that more than likely in no way advances legislation also seems to be correctly answered.

If not through subpoena, how then does The House investigate/determine whether to bring impeachment charges?

I'm not sure it can, at least insofar as it concerns the executive branch. Impeachment is 100% a political exercise. And despite the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard, there is nothing inherently criminal about it. In the political vein, if the House issues a subpoena to the President and she or he refuses to comply, then the answer may be that that refusal can (and indeed should) be considered in deciding whether to bring articles of impeachment.

As in the president or any official facing impeachment is pleading the fifth? In a non-legal way.

i think i understand what you're asking. if someone pleads the 5th in a civil proceeding, there's an "adverse inference" (legal term) that is made that the allegation to which the person asserts the 5th is true. so here, it could be the same type of thing.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 4:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Rank This Poster
 Profile

Joined: Thu January 10, 2013 2:19 am
Posts: 5471
Location: SOUTH PORTLAND
Chris_H_2 wrote:
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
It's hard to disagree with the reasoning of either case. Fundamentally, the central question of whether a sitting president can be investigated for crimes while still in office seems to be answered, and correctly. Likewise, whether a legislative branch without prosecutorial powers can legitimately subpoena documents that more than likely in no way advances legislation also seems to be correctly answered.

If not through subpoena, how then does The House investigate/determine whether to bring impeachment charges?

I'm not sure it can, at least insofar as it concerns the executive branch. Impeachment is 100% a political exercise. And despite the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard, there is nothing inherently criminal about it. In the political vein, if the House issues a subpoena to the President and she or he refuses to comply, then the answer may be that that refusal can (and indeed should) be considered in deciding whether to bring articles of impeachment.

As in the president or any official facing impeachment is pleading the fifth? In a non-legal way.

i think i understand what you're asking. if someone pleads the 5th in a civil proceeding, there's an "adverse inference" (legal term) that is made that the allegation to which the person asserts the 5th is true. so here, it could be the same type of thing.
Right, that's what I was getting at. I'm now wondering if the refusal to comply with a house subpoena should be considered more than obstruction?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 4:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 9:55 pm
Posts: 12966
Location: An office full of assholes
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
It's hard to disagree with the reasoning of either case. Fundamentally, the central question of whether a sitting president can be investigated for crimes while still in office seems to be answered, and correctly. Likewise, whether a legislative branch without prosecutorial powers can legitimately subpoena documents that more than likely in no way advances legislation also seems to be correctly answered.

If not through subpoena, how then does The House investigate/determine whether to bring impeachment charges?

I'm not sure it can, at least insofar as it concerns the executive branch. Impeachment is 100% a political exercise. And despite the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard, there is nothing inherently criminal about it. In the political vein, if the House issues a subpoena to the President and she or he refuses to comply, then the answer may be that that refusal can (and indeed should) be considered in deciding whether to bring articles of impeachment.

As in the president or any official facing impeachment is pleading the fifth? In a non-legal way.

i think i understand what you're asking. if someone pleads the 5th in a civil proceeding, there's an "adverse inference" (legal term) that is made that the allegation to which the person asserts the 5th is true. so here, it could be the same type of thing.
Right, that's what I was getting at. I'm now wondering if the refusal to comply with a house subpoena should be considered more than obstruction?

so it's a weird dynamic. subpoenas are ordinarily enforceable by the power of contempt. if the house holds someone in contempt, one of the ways it can enforce it is by referring the matter to the u.s. attorney's office, which is of course an arm of the executive branch, to prosecute. and we know that that's not happening when the executive branch itself is involved.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 4:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24758
Location: Illinois
So what is it people are celebrating here? We are still never going to see his tax returns.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 4:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 6488
Chris_H_2 wrote:
elliseamos wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
It's hard to disagree with the reasoning of either case. Fundamentally, the central question of whether a sitting president can be investigated for crimes while still in office seems to be answered, and correctly. Likewise, whether a legislative branch without prosecutorial powers can legitimately subpoena documents that more than likely in no way advances legislation also seems to be correctly answered.

If not through subpoena, how then does The House investigate/determine whether to bring impeachment charges?

I'm not sure it can, at least insofar as it concerns the executive branch. Impeachment is 100% a political exercise. And despite the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard, there is nothing inherently criminal about it. In the political vein, if the House issues a subpoena to the President and she or he refuses to comply, then the answer may be that that refusal can (and indeed should) be considered in deciding whether to bring articles of impeachment.
Well said. :thumbsup:


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 6488
Their Twitter feed is en fuego right now.



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu July 09, 2020 9:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24758
Location: Illinois
Text I got from a maga today:

Scotus says you can't see Donald's taxes

He's not wrong


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 1:51 am 
Offline
User avatar
Posting (live)
 Profile

Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am
Posts: 18945
nah man cause this temporary shield of protection collapses once he leaves office

and he is so stupid he'll likely commit new crimes

_________________
All posts by this account, even those referencing real things, are entirely fictional and are for entertainment purposes only; i.e. very low-quality entertainment. These may contain coarse language and due to their content should not be viewed by anyone


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 2:01 am 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24758
Location: Illinois
96583UP wrote:
nah man cause this temporary shield of protection collapses once he leaves office

and he is so stupid he'll likely commit new crimes


If we can't see them before November who cares?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 2:03 am 
Offline
User avatar
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Posts: 42183
Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Who gives a shit about trump? Half of Oklahoma is Indian territory now. That's hilarious.

_________________
verily, if life had no sense, and had I to choose nonsense, this would be the most desirable nonsense for me also.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 2:33 am 
Offline
User avatar
Posting (live)
 Profile

Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am
Posts: 18945
verb_to_trust wrote:
96583UP wrote:
nah man cause this temporary shield of protection collapses once he leaves office

and he is so stupid he'll likely commit new crimes


If we can't see them before November who cares?


people who want to see him punished in 2021+

_________________
All posts by this account, even those referencing real things, are entirely fictional and are for entertainment purposes only; i.e. very low-quality entertainment. These may contain coarse language and due to their content should not be viewed by anyone


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 3:46 am 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Posts: 24758
Location: Illinois
96583UP wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
96583UP wrote:
nah man cause this temporary shield of protection collapses once he leaves office

and he is so stupid he'll likely commit new crimes


If we can't see them before November who cares?


people who want to see him punished in 2021+



Anyone who thinks that will happen is delusional


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 3:47 am 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 6:02 am
Posts: 6863
Location: I am taking care of some ducks
I.... agree with verb.

_________________
What the fuck kind of post is that Argo?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 3:49 am 
Offline
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 1:53 pm
Posts: 15827
Location: I am taking care of some ducks
that way madness lies

_________________
a sweet boy with a friendly disposition and a good sense of humor


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri July 10, 2020 3:54 am 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 6:02 am
Posts: 6863
Location: I am taking care of some ducks
I can stop anytime I want to. Just this once.

_________________
What the fuck kind of post is that Argo?


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2472 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117 ... 124  Next

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: B, Rob and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Mon September 21, 2020 1:36 pm