Pelosi Impeachment Inquiry

[Cuddles]

You've seen that in writing?-- I doubt it---- By they way, even if true, it's meaningless here because it is incumbent on POTUS to root out corruption.

 

[El OchoCinco]

I thought lawyers were lawyers for life.
.....Did you get disbarred Ocho?
(inserting good nature'd laughter here)...
It was that new receptionist wasn't it?
Oh well.

Still licensed .

 

[Spike Trader]

Until Trump asserts executive privilege and then your Spike goes limp, again.
Sorry bud, you guys are at the end of the road.

That's is expected , because that's all he is good for , exerting executive privilege and signing executive orders.

He will be exposed and he is not going to like it . He will shit on Graham and McConnell and everyone else

Did you see the Lev Parnas tapes?..

 

[El OchoCinco]

The question is whether Trump can claim executive privilege to prevent Bolton from willfully testifying. If Bolton is subpoena to testify against his will he can claim executive privilege to not be compelled to testify. But can a 3rd party claim a privilege to stop someone else who chooses to testify (assuming hypo that Bolton wants to testify on his own)

Interesting legal question. I know a client can prevent his Lawyer from testifying claiming attorney client privilege but that is a more clearly delineated right and coded...Executive privilege claimed by a public official for comments said in privacy in a "trial"?

Too lazy and care to little to research but does present a legal issue.

 

[Cuddles]

The question is whether Trump can claim executive privilege to prevent Bolton from willfully testifying. If Bolton is subpoena to testify against his will he can claim executive privilege to not be compelled to testify. But can a 3rd party claim a privilege to stop someone else who chooses to testify (assuming hypo that Bolton wants to testify on his own)

Interesting legal question. I know a client can prevent his Lawyer from testifying claiming attorney client privilege but that is a more clearly delineated right and coded...Executive privilege claimed by a public official for comments said in privacy in a "trial"?

Too lazy and care to little to research but does present a legal issue.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/st...executive-privilege-to-block-bolton-testimony

Trump’s attorneys hint they will invoke executive privilege to block Bolton testimony

 

[piezoe]

Everyone is assuming that Roberts has authority and jurisdiction to make a legal ruling on something. He does not. The powers of the supreme court or an article 3 court do not follow the chief justice just because he is in another role somewhere. He can perhaps rule on whether it needs to go before a true court based on his advisory opinion but that is not the same as making a definitive ruling on the underlying issue. He has no authority or jurisdiction to do that unless he is back sitting as a supreme court or article 3 judge.

OK. still we are talking four days.

 

[piezoe]

... it is incumbent on POTUS to root out corruption.

Yup, just like Al Capone, incumbent upon him not only to fight corruption, but to "root out" corruption wherever it lurks. Are you quoting the little known "corruption rooting" clause in the constitution here? I try to be respectful of other opinions that I don't share. But we all have our limits. You sir, are a joke.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

The question is whether Trump can claim executive privilege to prevent Bolton from willfully testifying. If Bolton is subpoena to testify against his will he can claim executive privilege to not be compelled to testify. But can a 3rd party claim a privilege to stop someone else who chooses to testify (assuming hypo that Bolton wants to testify on his own)

Interesting legal question. I know a client can prevent his Lawyer from testifying claiming attorney client privilege but that is a more clearly delineated right and coded...Executive privilege claimed by a public official for comments said in privacy in a "trial"?

Too lazy and care to little to research but does present a legal issue.

Bolton does not have the ability to invoke executive privilege. ---The President does though and he can keep Bolton silent. It is the President's prerogative, not Bolton's . This would be ruled in the favor of The President by the courts. You would have a 9 to 12 month litigation of executive privilege. This is what The Idiot Dems want.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

Yup, just like Al Capone, incumbent upon him not only to fight corruption, but to "root out" corruption wherever it lurks. Are you quoting the little known "corruption rooting" clause in the constitution here? I try to be respectful of other opinions that I don't share. But we all have our limits. You sir, are a joke.

Massive Classic Liberal Misdirect MCLM

 

[El OchoCinco]

Bolton does not have the ability to invoke executive privilege. ---The President does though and he can keep Bolton silent. It is the President's prerogative, not Bolton's . This would be ruled in the favor of The President by the courts. You would have a 9 to 12 month litigation of executive privilege. This is what The Idiot Dems want.

You didn't read what I wrote well..the question is whether Trump can claim executive privilege to stop a 3rd party from willfully testifying...

If Bolton says he will appear on his own will to testify, can Trump block him. The precedent here is really thin and only case law is persuasive citing other privileges under the law.

Bolton does not have a special privilege under the law and since he was fired I doubt he signed an NDA. we are talking about public office not private relationships that have well recognized law.

Thus the question....