constitutional crisis ?

[bellisarius]

Legally obstruction is not in play, politically the democrats seem to think it is. The fact is that they can't indict him, all they can do is impeach. And without unassailable evidence that is a step that would come with great political consequences to themselves.

In reality Trump is protecting the office. The prima facia evidence is that the Obama administration weaponized the DOJ and the intelligence leadership for political purposes. If that can be done against a republican it certainly can be done against a democrat. Swords tend to have two edges.

So from my perspective the democrats are not just rabidly anti-Trump, they are making every move possible to cover their own asses. The notion that any administration would weaponize those departments (not to mention the IRS) should be anathema to all Americans. The expected indictment of high officials of the previous administration is NOT going to go well for them in 2020.

I would think that politically the last thing a democrat congress would want to do is to hold Barr in contempt. Neither Barr, nor Wray, nor Trump are going anywhere and they aren't intimidated. Royally pissing off the AG just doesn't smack me as a wise move.

 

[Kantarii]

the white house has, with its blanket exec priv decree, seemingly said...to the house "bring it on"....

I see it more like the White House told Congress to go fuck itself, we’ll see you in court
Kant

 

[bellisarius]

I see it more like the White House told Congress to go fuck itself, we’ll see you in court
Kant

He's 'playing' them masterfully. They're chasing ephemera while the administration is getting things done and winning court case after court case. Even Pelosi has remarked as such but she doesn't seem to have control of her own congress. The democrats are in chaos, anarchy even, and I haven't seen that in my lifetime.

 

[Wrong Element]

Legally obstruction is not in play, politically the democrats seem to think it is. The fact is that they can't indict him, all they can do is impeach. And without unassailable evidence that is a step that would come with great political consequences to themselves.

In reality Trump is protecting the office. The prima facia evidence is that the Obama administration weaponized the DOJ and the intelligence leadership for political purposes. If that can be done against a republican it certainly can be done against a democrat. Swords tend to have two edges.

So from my perspective the democrats are not just rabidly anti-Trump, they are making every move possible to cover their own asses. The notion that any administration would weaponize those departments (not to mention the IRS) should be anathema to all Americans. The expected indictment of high officials of the previous administration is NOT going to go well for them in 2020.

I would think that politically the last thing a democrat congress would want to do is to hold Barr in contempt. Neither Barr, nor Wray, nor Trump are going anywhere and they aren't intimidated. Royally pissing off the AG just doesn't smack me as a wise move.

"It's terrible to politicize the Justice Department but hats off to Trump for doing just that."

Tune in at the same time tomorrow for more sponsored-by-Franzia hypocrisy.

 

[Ramone45]

I don’t see all this hoopla as a Constitutional Crisis. It’s political bullshit where some people in our government are making mountains out of molehills, something they want to carry on through to the election in 2020 with the hopes it’ll undo the 2016 election.

Honestly, I don’t see it playing out well for the Democrats in the long run.
Kant

It's going to be a disaster for the Democrats and in seems like everyone knows it except Democratic politicians. How can they not know they are handing President Trump a second term? One of the low points for me with the Democrats was Kamala Harris' questioning of General Barr. I think there's something wrong with her. She asked General Barr if he read the Mueller Report and if he conducted his own investigation. What? Two years and $30 million later, she's asking is HE conducted an investigation? The Mueller Report WAS the investigation. Let's investigate the investigation of the investigation. The Democrats are never going to stop and President Trump will be re-elected. The Democrats will struggle for years to come back from this.

 

[Kantarii]

It's going to be a disaster for the Democrats and in seems like everyone knows it except Democratic politicians. How can they not know they are handing President Trump a second term? One of the low points for me with the Democrats was Kamala Harris' questioning of General Barr. I think there's something wrong with her. She asked General Barr if he read the Mueller Report and if he conducted his own investigation. What? Two years and $30 million later, she's asking is HE conducted an investigation? The Mueller Report WAS the investigation. Let's investigate the investigation of the investigation. The Democrats are never going to stop and President Trump will be re-elected. The Democrats will struggle for years to come back from this.

There “is” something wrong with Kamala Harris - she’s from California. Her chances of getting elected as president are better than Elizabeth Warren’s but far worse than Hillary Clinton - and we all seen how that ended. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be any crying over a “stolen” election

 

[bellisarius]

There “is” something wrong with Kamala Harris - she’s from California. Her chances of getting elected as president are better than Elizabeth Warren’s but far worse than Hillary Clinton - and we all seen how that ended. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be any crying over a “stolen” election

Biden is the front runner with Bernie running second. Bernie's just now started fighting back so we'll see.

The rest are bench players looking for some playing time for 2024.

 

[Rightguide]

I have no doubt that it will go to the floor and be passed. Barr will most likely respond with a law suit of his own re. violation of 5th amendment rights.

The President has shut it all of with executive privilege. If Congress tries to take it to court they'll get their asses handed to them, the judge will read them the political question doctrine and throw it out. The law is clear. They have no legal right to any of the Mueller Report, redacted or not, let alone all of the witness interviews of White House employees, 302s, etc., it's all protected. So, is this a crisis, I think it's more of a constitutional exercise.

 

[Rightguide]

There “is” something wrong with Kamala Harris - she’s from California. Her chances of getting elected as president are better than Elizabeth Warren’s but far worse than Hillary Clinton - and we all seen how that ended. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be any crying over a “stolen” election

What's wrong with Kamala is she's a pro-communist air head, the archetypal California Democrat.

 

[Rightguide]

pelosi is no idiot.
and you are right - ever so right - that if she opts to go forward she must corral her own rabble as well, if not better than, the other side of the aisle already has.

Go forward with what?

 

[Dribble]

It isn't just a constitutional crisis...but a moral one. Who makes jokes when their supporters call out "shoot them at the border". Why Donald does.

 

[jaF0]

I think some Republicans have gone nuts too, like the Chairman of the senate Intel Committee for one.

Sounds like he grew a backbone. Maybe he'll call Mitch to testify too about his role in covering up Donny's messes.

 

[jaF0]

I see it more like the White House told Congress to go fuck itself, we’ll see you in court

A true, honest American would not do that. A Russian agent, well ....

 

[SpeareChucker]

is this (us) government currently in a constitutional crisis?

if so, what does this actually mean - and portend - in contemporary context?

if not, what avenue would keep such a crisis at bay?

if we can keep the rhetoric somewhat civil (if only as an exercise?)
perhaps we can actually learn a bit more than the slogans of the moment?

I've said this before and I'll say it again:

When government becomes remote and centralized then individuals will band together in the name of self-preservation. Ironic that.

In the battle for The Wealth of a Nation, the rhetoric must be mercurial...

 

[SpeareChucker]

A true, honest American would not do that. A Russian agent, well ....

Like when Eric Holder told everyone to go pound sand?

 

[bellisarius]

A true, honest American would not do that. A Russian agent, well ....

Are you an American? Have you ever read American history?

 

[jaF0]

Like when Eric Holder told everyone to go pound sand?

If you had been paying attention, you would have seen me say many, many times that Holder should be in prison.

 

[icanhelp1]

is this (us) government currently in a constitutional crisis?

if so, what does this actually mean - and portend - in contemporary context?

if not, what avenue would keep such a crisis at bay?

if we can keep the rhetoric somewhat civil (if only as an exercise?)
perhaps we can actually learn a bit more than the slogans of the moment?

If there is it's the use of agencies like the DOJ, FBI, NSA, NIA, FISA, the state department and a presidential administration using it's powers to spy on civilians, violating civil liberties in a subversive attempt to depose a president. I wonder where the ACLU is? OH that's right, they're bought off by democrats and atheist.

 

[SpeareChucker]

If you had been paying attention, you would have seen me say many, many times that Holder should be in prison.

Thank you for that admission.

And Lynch?

 

[jaF0]

If there is it's the use of agencies like the DOJ, FBI, NSA, NIA, FISA, the state department and a presidential administration using it's powers to spy on civilians,

It is the obligation of those agencies to protect the nation against foreign agents. It is their reason for being.

Thank you for that admission.

And Lynch?

Not sure bout Lynch, but I've also said many, many times that Clit'n should be, maybe both of them. Since there is no statute of limitations on murder, they're still in jeopardy as is Holder.

I don't play favorites when it comes to major crimes. I can't see why others even try to defend Donny's widespread offenses.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Funny that,

From the specific to the generic coupled with a mea culpa...



What do you believe are his myriad of crimes?

 

[BotanyBoy]

I can't see why others even try to defend Donny's widespread offenses.

Because you can't prove any offenses.....you just have faith that they happened because you don't like him.

 

[SpeareChucker]

It always boils down to, "our criminal was minor,"


But yours cannot be tolerated....

 

[jaF0]

Crimes should be prosecuted, even if you're Donny and you do everything possible to thwart investigation, discovery of evidence and release of reports to cover your ass.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Crimes should be prosecuted, even if you're Donny and you do everything possible to thwart investigation, discovery of evidence and release of reports to cover your ass.

Again, I know you are not one of his fans, but what crimes?