Congressial Investigations on Trump - Post Mueller

[Danny Bateman]

Wow. Good lord is this brazen. This is basically the DOJ trying to extort Congress into backing off or telling them he'll tattle to his boss and try to bury everything.

 

It's time to push back, hard, against Barr. He's destroying the rule of law and the only remedy is to call his bluff and hold him in contempt. Fire back with everything they have or he's just going to get worse.

 

 

[ZRod]

10 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

Wow. Good lord is this brazen. This is basically the DOJ trying to extort Congress into backing off or telling them he'll tattle to his boss and try to bury everything.

 

It's time to push back, hard, against Barr. He's destroying the rule of law and the only remedy is to call his bluff and hold him in contempt. Fire back with everything they have or he's just going to get worse.

 

 

Are we in a constitutional crisis now, because this feels like one...

 

What the hell is so damning in those few redactions that they won't give it up behind closed doors?

[Danny Bateman]

2 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Are we in a constitutional crisis now, because this feels like one...

 

What the hell is so damning in those few redactions that they won't give it up behind closed doors? 

 

I'd sure like to know, but I'm not sure it ultimately would determine Barr's conduct.

 

He got this job on the premise he would do everything in his power to protect Trump and be his fixer. That's obviously not the role an AG should play. But it's always been his only calculus. DO whatever it takes to be combative, punch back, drag things out, deny, delay and kick things to the courts to buy more time in hopes of an eventual win.

 

What I will say, without being hyperbolic, is that Barr is not a good public servant acting in good faith. He' s a grifter and a GOP hack on his last joyride working doggedly to destroy the impartiality of our justice system.

[Moiraine]

Hypothetical: Trump loses the election and we have a peaceful transition.

 

What is the government going to do to shore up our checks and balances? They clearly need to make changes.

[ZRod]

6 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

Hypothetical: Trump loses the election and we have a peaceful transition.

 

What is the government going to do to shore up our checks and balances? They clearly need to make changes.

Nothing will change unless the GOP loses it's majority in the Senate too.

 

[Danny Bateman]

Nadler called Barr's bluff. Says he may need to take action against others who are obstructing Congressional oversight.

 

 

[Danny Bateman]

17 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

Hypothetical: Trump loses the election and we have a peaceful transition.

 

What is the government going to do to shore up our checks and balances? They clearly need to make changes.

 

You're right. All of it worked previously on the premise of elected officials not being scummy dirtbags who are actually afraid of pushing the law to its breaking point. Mutual respect for the powers of other branches.

 

We need to codify some of these checks and balances. If something is explicitly written into law it's much harder to ignore it. You'll lose in court. It's why Mnuchin ignoring the law that states he has to turn over Trump's taxes to Congress is weird. A court saying "shall" isn't the same as "must" is going to require an unlikely favorable legal interpretation.

 

As @ZRod pointed out, though, that requires Dems to win back both houses of Congress and be the adults, because the GOP is drowning in corruption. Which brings me back to the question of how the heck Dems can even win a majority in the Senate right now. The small state thing is very irksome. And you're right, small states aren't going to give up that power. It will have to be taken from them kicking and screaming.

[NM11046]

I think to be safe we've got to flip 5 seats in Senate to take over (and hold the rest). 

 

We've got to win AZ (I think we will - he's a strong candidate) ME (not clear who runs vs. Collins), defend Doug Collins Alabama seat, flip IA (Some of you here can influence that local race), CO - which actually should be easier based on the purple-ness of the state and Gardiners' performance the last few yearsl

[Ratt Mhule]

Nadler is one empty threat after another. My guess is no vote on contempt today. They will give Barr another extension til Monday. Nothing will happen and another extension will be given with another empty threat. Until the dems actually do something this will continue. They wont because they are cowards. 

[Ulty]

8 hours ago, ZRod said:

Nothing will change unless the GOP loses it's majority in the Senate too.

 

 

I would expect that a GOP led Senate would be all too eager to implement stronger checks and balances if a Dem was in the white house. As long as those checks and balances are revocable the next time a Republican becomes president again. Hypocrisy doesn't bother them, they thrive on it.

[Danny Bateman]

Scumlords gonna scumlord.

 

 

[RedDenver]

3 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

Scumlords gonna scumlord.

 

 

And now Obama admin claiming executive privilege comes back to bite the Dems. Why is there even executive privilege? We need more transparency in our government.

[Danny Bateman]

Link for those who want to watch the committee hearing:

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-live-barr-faces-contempt-vote-from-house-committee

[RedDenver]

9 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

Link for those who want to watch the committee hearing:

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-live-barr-faces-contempt-vote-from-house-committee

They won't hold him in contempt. The Dems have no spine.

[knapplc]

13 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Why is there even executive privilege? We need more transparency in our government.

 

It has legitimate uses. It's the responsibility of the American voter to elect honorable politicians who will use it for those legitimate purposes. But when you elect a criminal, they abuse it.