constitutional crisis ?

[bellisarius]

The list of presidents that have told congress and/or the courts to go pack sand is long and distinguished. Trump is far from the first and he won't be the last. If that were the criteria for removal from office damn neat half of our past presidents would have never finished out their term(s).

 

[icanhelp1]

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



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.

It's the obligation of those agencies to protect within the constraints of the law!!! What's happened is that rogue agents taking the law in their own hands.

 

[bellisarius]

In a representative federal republic it is the people that decide, via elections, who will occupy what elective office. This is a case where unelected bureaucrats, both appointed and careerists, decided that they knew better than the people. If those actions are allowed to stand without severe punishment then why bother having elections at all? The Praetorian Guard will appoint the next Caesar.

 

[oralaccents]

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?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/Supertramp_-_Crisis.jpg

 

[SpeareChucker]

In a representative federal republic it is the people that decide, via elections, who will occupy what elective office. This is a case where unelected bureaucrats, both appointed and careerists, decided that they knew better than the people. If those actions are allowed to stand without severe punishment then why bother having elections at all? The Praetorian Guard will appoint the next Caesar.

Indeed...

Those whom 'hate' Trump,
have no message other than "I hate Trump."

When I/we disagreed with the vision and the guidance of President Obama, we did so on the basis of his philosophy and actions. What we are now witnessing is total and complete hated of everything the man does, even when he takes action that would normally meet with approval.

 

[Adre]

When we did it, it was always for the right reasons. When you do it, it’s always for the wrong reasons. But of course. GB rationalization at its finest.

 

[bellisarius]

Indeed...

Those whom 'hate' Trump,
have no message other than "I hate Trump."

When I/we disagreed with the vision and the guidance of President Obama, we did so on the basis of his philosophy and actions. What we are now witnessing is total and complete hated of everything the man does, even when he takes action that would normally meet with approval.

The signs were on the wall even then. We disagreed with Obama because we were racists. It didn't matter how cogent our arguments were, we were racists. Now Trump is the racist for having the temerity of demanding the laws of the land be enforced. (Anyone else see the pattern that's emerging in the body politic?)

 

[RobDownSouth]

We disagreed with Obama because we were racists.

Thank you for finally owning up to what others have said about you for years.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Indeed...

Those whom 'hate' Trump,
have no message other than "I hate Trump."

When I/we disagreed with the vision and the guidance of President Obama, we did so on the basis of his philosophy and actions. What we are now witnessing is total and complete hated of everything the man does, even when he takes action that would normally meet with approval.

Political philosophy of any kind really is something the current batch of lefty loonz seems incapable of grasping.

When we did it, it was always for the right reasons. When you do it, it’s always for the wrong reasons. But of course. GB rationalization at its finest.

Philosophical reason....as opposed to "I hate!!" like the current left.

Thank you for finally owning up to what others have said about you for years.

Resorting to DanC tactics??

Dishonesty is off the charts with RacistDownSouth....shocking.

 

[RobDownSouth]

That's the oxycontin talking. Go to bed, Muldoon. You've been shitposting most of the past 24 hours. Get some rest, come back refreshed, and start looking for a job. One that hopefully doesn't require a pre-employment drug test.

 

[BotanyBoy]

That's the oxycontin talking. Go to bed, Muldoon. You've been shitposting most of the past 24 hours. Get some rest, come back refreshed, and start looking for a job. One that hopefully doesn't require a pre-employment drug test.

I'm not on oxy and just slept 8 hrs.

Robs racism and dishonesty continue at an all time high.

Why must you be so dishonest and racist???

And I work for myself, fuck a job.

 

[Veroe]

Even if it is Dems playing politics the institution of Congress still should be respected.
That's how the checks and balances are maintained.

What's at issue is the use of executive privilege.
What is it intended to be used for?
Does Trump's application of it in this case fall under that?
That's the debate here.

I think holding Barr in contempt of congress is arguable.
Mnuchin on the other hand is much more of a clear case of contempt of Congress for not providing the tax returns he's clearly bound by law to provide.

 

[icanhelp1]

Even if it is Dems playing politics the institution of Congress still should be respected.
That's how the checks and balances are maintained.

What's at issue is the use of executive privilege.
What is it intended to be used for?
Does Trump's application of it in this case fall under that?
That's the debate here.

I think holding Barr in contempt of congress is arguable.
Mnuchin on the other hand is much more of a clear case of contempt of Congress for not providing the tax returns he's clearly bound by law to provide.

When house democrats start using chicken props and parading around a bucket of KFC they lowered themselves to the level of childish school yard bullying.

 

[cowslinger64]

When house democrats start using chicken props and parading around a bucket of KFC they lowered themselves to the level of childish school yard bullying.

For a change they acted like republicans. Democrats don't live that lifestyle tho..

 

[icanhelp1]

For a change they acted like republicans. Democrats don't live that lifestyle tho..

Thank you for that insightful comment.

 

[Veroe]

When house democrats start using chicken props and parading around a bucket of KFC they lowered themselves to the level of childish school yard bullying.

Yeah that may have been going to childish levels, but that doesn't negate that they are Congress now and he's the attorney general and they shouldn't be at such odds with each other. The Dem that 'paraded around the bucket of KFC' was out of bounds but that doesn't really affect the problem to me.

Like I said I think its arguable.

 

[cowslinger64]

Thank you for that insightful comment.

Thank you!

I dropped down to your level. Just for a moment tho.

 

[icanhelp1]

Yeah that may have been going to childish levels, but that doesn't negate that they are Congress now and he's the attorney general and they shouldn't be at such odds with each other. The Dem that 'paraded around the bucket of KFC' was out of bounds but that doesn't really affect the problem to me.

Like I said I think its arguable.

The approval rating of congress is at a 17% level, this behavior only take's away from their credibility as a governing body. Putting the AG in contempt of congress for abiding by the law is as ridiculous as it gets. I can't understand how this contempt citation advances anyone's agenda. It's partisan and foolish. The house judiciary body was once a revered stalworth of our political system, now it's a joke. That contempt citation just demonstrate's how feckless they are as a judicial body and they're inability for genuine oversight.

 

[Rightguide]

Even if it is Dems playing politics the institution of Congress still should be respected.
That's how the checks and balances are maintained.

What's at issue is the use of executive privilege.
What is it intended to be used for?
Does Trump's application of it in this case fall under that?
That's the debate here.

I think holding Barr in contempt of congress is arguable.
Mnuchin on the other hand is much more of a clear case of contempt of Congress for not providing the tax returns he's clearly bound by law to provide.

Under current law the Congress is not entitled to any part of the Mueller Report, redacted or unredacted. The current law, written by a Democrat Congress, leaves the decision to the discretion of the Attorney General. Federal law prevents the release of (6e) Grand Jury material.

Nadler is demanding the AG go to court and request a federal judge release the material. It is not the job of the DOJ to act as the legal agent of the Congress in furtherance of its internal legislative branch investigations. Nadler knows if he sues for the release of the material his case will be kicked out of court. At any rate the President has exercised his Article II power over the DOJ:

"Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd wrote Nadler a letter stating that because the committee rejected the Justice Department's request to delay the contempt hearing against Barr, negotiations over any accommodations would be terminated, and "the president has asserted executive privilege over the entirety of subpoenaed materials." It is, Boyd continued, a "protective assertion" of privilege intended to ensure President Trump's ability to "make a final decision whether to assert privilege following a full review of these materials."

"Faced with Chairman Nadler's blatant abuse of power, and at the attorney general's request, the president has no other option than to make a protective assertion of executive privilege," Sanders said in a statement. "It is sad that Chairman Nadler is only interested in pandering to the press and pleasing his radical left constituency. The American people deserve a Congress that is focused on solving real problems like the crisis at the border, high prescription drug prices, our country's crumbling infrastructure, and so much more."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-...tire-mueller-report-and-underlying-documents/

 

[HisArpy]

Even if it is Dems playing politics the institution of Congress still should be respected.
That's how the checks and balances are maintained.

What's at issue is the use of executive privilege.
What is it intended to be used for?
Does Trump's application of it in this case fall under that?
That's the debate here.

I think holding Barr in contempt of congress is arguable.
Mnuchin on the other hand is much more of a clear case of contempt of Congress for not providing the tax returns he's clearly bound by law to provide.

Trump is within his authority, as previously determined by the SCOTUS, to use his exec privilege on the redacted parts of the report as well as all the supporting evidence AND any testimony regarding same.

Barr is guided and constrained by the language of the Statute which allows for Mueller's appointment. It is Barr's decision, not Congress, which bits, if any, of the report are released and which are withheld.

Mnuchin is in the same position as Barr. The tax code prohibits him from releasing the tax information, even to Congress, unless there is a lawful reason. The basis Congress is using is specious at best. One doesn't need to examine the specific tax information of a specific individual to determine if the IRS is doing it's duty regarding auditing of tax returns. Instead, if that's the purpose of the investigation by Congress, they should be conducting their inquiry toward the IRS, it's officials and employees, and their procedures. Mnuchin's denial accurately cites the law in this case.

In the end, it is the D's in Congress who have created, and continue to worsen, this situation. IMO, it hasn't reached the level of a Constitutional crisis because, so far, the system is working as designed. Eventually the 3rd branch of the Gov will become involved, swat the offender(s), and things will go back to normal. As designed.

However, should the above spanked branch not obey and continue to manifest an unlawful exercise of power, THEN there is a Constitutional crisis.

We are not there yet. We're not even close.

 

[HornyProf]

How is Trump trying to deny the authority of congress???

That's pure buuuu shit.

umm. trying to keep Mueller and MGahn from testifying.. One of the functions of congress is oversight of the executive. You can't very well do that if the President stymies you at every turn, using this fictitious notion of "executive prilvidge"--show me where that clause is in the Constitution.

 

[RobDownSouth]

There would be no constitutional crisis if they'd pass a law making failure to comply with a Congressional subpoena a hanging offense.

 

[RobDownSouth]

umm. trying to keep Mueller and MGahn from testifying.. One of the functions of congress is oversight of the executive. You can't very well do that if the President stymies you at every turn, using this fictitious notion of "executive prilvidge"--show me where that clause is in the Constitution.

Botany Boy has always believed in the theory of a unitary authoritarian head of state, as long as the officeholder meets certain credentials (white, Republican, etc).

 

[icanhelp1]

Even if it is Dems playing politics the institution of Congress still should be respected.
That's how the checks and balances are maintained.

What's at issue is the use of executive privilege.
What is it intended to be used for?
Does Trump's application of it in this case fall under that?
That's the debate here.

I think holding Barr in contempt of congress is arguable.
Mnuchin on the other hand is much more of a clear case of contempt of Congress for not providing the tax returns he's clearly bound by law to provide.

The Mueller report was a special counsel investigation whose results are under the auspices of the attorney general and no one else. Contrary to popular belief, Mueller reports to Barr and no one else. The report is a DOJ function not a congressional function and does not need to be made public. Congress has their own investigative capability organic to their committees. If Nadler takes the contempt issue to court he will lose! This is political posturing at it's finest, a royal shit show that continues to divide us as a nation.

 

[Veroe]

In the end, it is the D's in Congress who have created, and continue to worsen, this situation. IMO, it hasn't reached the level of a Constitutional crisis because, so far, the system is working as designed. Eventually the 3rd branch of the Gov will become involved, swat the offender(s), and things will go back to normal. As designed.

However, should the above spanked branch not obey and continue to manifest an unlawful exercise of power, THEN there is a Constitutional crisis.

We are not there yet. We're not even close.

I agree with you there, though I think its a little bit closer to that crisis than you do, but agree generally that we're not there yet.

The rest is arguable depending on which side of the divide you fall on.

My main worry is if this causes an erosion of how the system is supposed to function. Though that remains nothing more than me just worrying about it...so far.