BillsFanNC Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Holder and Obama's ***** for brains reign showed that this is possible. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Perp walk him. And what are they hiding? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 He was talking about unprecedented complaints about the DOJ and the work they do. I'm guessing here he was talking about AG Barr, the Mueller report, and the criticism Barr got for describing the political persecution of DJT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Hur investigation exonerated the President. Aren't you guys still trying to figure out what the Biden laptop says? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 8 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Hur investigation exonerated the President. Aren't you guys still trying to figure out what the Biden laptop says? No it didn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 2 minutes ago, Doc said: No it didn't. Sure did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4th&long Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 11 minutes ago, Doc said: No it didn't. They have it in writing. This is all theater, they just want sound bites to use in campaigns. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 26 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Hur investigation exonerated the President. Aren't you guys still trying to figure out what the Biden laptop says? It said he was incompetent to stand trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 9 minutes ago, Westside said: It said he was incompetent to stand trial. No, he was just cleared of wrong doing. So cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 8 minutes ago, 4th&long said: They have it in writing. This is all theater, they just want sound bites to use in campaigns. If they have it in writing, there's no reason for the AG refuse a lawful subpoena. Let's be fair--a transcribed recording doesn't provide a full accounting of what actually happened. Tone matters. Attitude matters. The recording may show evidence of evasiveness or deception. Plus, if information was omitted or incorrectly transcribed, who would know? Why is it ok for this AG to operate outside the law, just because he wants to? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted May 17 Author Share Posted May 17 WH trying to claim executive privilege, despite: They already waived executive privilege for the transcript. Executive privilege doesn't apply here because he wasn't president when he pilfered documents. Rest assured these tapes are very bad for Biden. 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: If they have it in writing, there's no reason for the AG refuse a lawful subpoena. Let's be fair--a transcribed recording doesn't provide a full accounting of what actually happened. Tone matters. Attitude matters. The recording may show evidence of evasiveness or deception. Plus, if information was omitted or incorrectly transcribed, who would know? Why is it ok for this AG to operate outside the law, just because he wants to? And these days the WH regularly alters official transcripts to hide dementia Joe's multiple daily "gaffes" even when video exists that anyone can cross reference. Therefore I have zero confidence these transcripts give an exact replica of words spoken. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Teflon Joe!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 i still laugh that people expected Garland to be fit for a judgeship on the most high court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 When Conald was in office, the cult had NO issues with executive privilege... On 1/25/2020 at 5:44 PM, Foxx said: Secondly, there is the whole separation of powers thing. executive privilege has historical precedent all the way back to George Washington. there is good reason for it as well. in matters of foreign policy (and any and all policy for that matter), you can't have people talking about the Presidents innermost thoughts. they can't say how the President really feels about certain things. and there are yet multitudes of other reasoning here that just makes exposing executive thoughts, conversations and/or documents, not a great idea. part of what the White House is doing by claiming Executive Privilege is maintaining that historical precedent for all of the future Presidents to come. just as it was preserved for this current Administration by the previous ones. Look at this fine human: On 1/21/2020 at 5:00 PM, njbuff said: I have stepped back from this political nonsense with the Bills season going on, but I have a question for the political experts on here.......... Isn't it the President's JOB to look into corruption, or am I missing something here? Doesn't the President have executive privilege to do whatever the fvck he wants if he sees their is potential corruption? If the answers to these two questions are yes.......... then the answer to this question should be a yes................. Is this whole thing a fvcking ridiculous farse? Even DR agrees! On 1/21/2020 at 5:00 PM, Deranged Rhino said: Yes. And there is more! On 6/12/2019 at 8:38 PM, B-Man said: But Orange Man Bad. https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/trump-invokes-executive-privilege-over-census-documents-sought-by-oversight-committee/ Lots more hypocrisy: On 6/4/2019 at 9:31 AM, B-Man said: “Once this clown car passes a contempt vote they will be cleared to take legal action in subpoena battle, ‘sources’ told Politico. Both McGahn are Barr are being tormented with nuisance subpoenas because the White House has claimed it is exercising executive privilege and refusing to let them testify. And Bonnie goes on.... On 5/9/2019 at 12:04 AM, B-Man said: Rep. Jerry Nadler, who’s leading this stunt, thought he could strong-arm the DOJ by laying down an arbitrary deadline. In response, Bill Barr called his bluff and told Jerry to go eat some more KFC with Steve Cohen, because he’s not giving him anything. Executive privilege was claimed over all subpoenaed materials and we’ve likely got a long court battle ahead. I missed the part in the Constitution where Congress is entitled to whatever they want just because they say so. Perhaps Nadler could point it out. It’s not the DOJ’s job to provide Congress with raw investigative materials. They can go do their own leg work if that’s their goal. The goalposts never stop moving. Hysterical. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4th&long Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 1 hour ago, BillStime said: When Conald was in office, the cult had NO issues with executive privilege... Look at this fine human: Even DR agrees! And there is more! Lots more hypocrisy: And Bonnie goes on.... Hysterical. Well that should end this thread. Used their own argument against them lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 6 minutes ago, 4th&long said: Well that should end this thread. Used their own argument against them lol! Thats why they want me banned. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: If they have it in writing, there's no reason for the AG refuse a lawful subpoena. Let's be fair--a transcribed recording doesn't provide a full accounting of what actually happened. Tone matters. Attitude matters. The recording may show evidence of evasiveness or deception. Plus, if information was omitted or incorrectly transcribed, who would know? Why is it ok for this AG to operate outside the law, just because he wants to? Biden and Garland are above the law 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 3 hours ago, boyst said: i still laugh that people expected Garland to be fit for a judgeship on the most high court. Is he flying the US flag upside down? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L Ron Burgundy Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 19 minutes ago, TH3 said: Is he flying the US flag upside down? Is he sharing top secret Intel with Mary Jane Rottencrotch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts