Judge says House must get Mueller grand jury information - CNBC

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It puts the action directly into congresses hands. You dont need me to hold your hand through the text.
If you dont see it then you dont see it. Out of my hands.
So we're done then right?

a reply to: Gryphon66

I ain't making the statement based on the who appointed the judges. I think most judges, once they get the supreme court seat, they have no reason to coddle up to anyone. Kav is the only one I have any doubt about one the supreme level.
I dont really have any doubt about Garland. I think he has enough integrity to not let politics, or hard feelings, sway his judgement probably. But, when the perception among even the dems is that hard feelings would be a factor in his decision I dont think he should be involved. He could recuse himself, but then there seems to be others at play in this that should recuse themselves also, so why should he have to?
Switch courts? Sorry, but having trouble trusting trump, barr, or the govt in general at this point not to manipulate the choice as to who should get it. I'd just prefer to save time and reduce the political whining and let it step up to the supreme court since that is where it will end up at anyway.

a reply to: dawnstar

Fair enough, I understand what you're saying, and I hope I didn't sound like I was critiquing you personally. So many in this thread dismiss the judge's ruling not on the merits but merely because she was appointed by Obama.

I don't agree with the politicizing of the judiciary but it has already been done in a major Constitutionally compromising way by the Republican Senate. That has ramifications.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
It seems that in one stroke, a majority of White House talking points have been struck down ... Impeachment inquiry is legal and the redacted findings of the Mueller Report are now in play reigniting possiblilities of Obstruction of Justice (an established reason to Impeach Presidents)

How do you folks see this progressing?

Fyi, no judge can over-rule the Constitution. She would have to provide a lot of citations to real evidence in support of such a claim, which is baseless on its face.

This will be appealed, and will have to go to the Supreme Court before the decision will be able to stand - and it won't be.

This is just another TDS 'we got him now!' yammering head point.

The judge only gave the DOJ 3 business days to release the documents. A very short fuse. An appeal can be heard and acted upon by a higher judge before Wednesday night?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Gryphon66
It seems that in one stroke, a majority of White House talking points have been struck down ... Impeachment inquiry is legal and the redacted findings of the Mueller Report are now in play reigniting possiblilities of Obstruction of Justice (an established reason to Impeach Presidents)

How do you folks see this progressing?

Fyi, no judge can over-rule the Constitution. She would have to provide a lot of citations to real evidence in support of such a claim, which is baseless on its face.

This will be appealed, and will have to go to the Supreme Court before the decision will be able to stand - and it won't be.

This is just another TDS 'we got him now!' yammering head point.

The Constitution is not being overruled.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
The Constitution is not being overruled.

Amy claim that the Constitution doesn't mean what it says, by a judge, in a judicial proceeding, is an attempt to over-rule the Constitution.

You people are dense.

The Mueller report was basing Obstruction off their purview and scope, which is radically different then how DOJ operates and understand Obstruction.

Once Barr took the reigns, it was a known fact that Muellers team would fail because Barr would see past their views on Obstruction.

This is beating a dead horse.

Also, the Federal Judge us beyond her scope in regards to Grand Jury information.

This is a total deadstick and once more, even if the House pulls off the sham articles of impeachment, it'll fail in the Senate.

a reply to: Arnie123

Furthermore, with the recent Criminal Inquiry gaining traction on the origins of the Russian probe, it calls into doubt the whole mueller case, we already know lawyers tried to pull a fast one on Obstruction till Barr came in.

Flynn is looking to get Charges dropped as well.

When you consider all this, it looks like this Federal Judge was pushed for this ruling in an attempt to get ahead of Trump, but it was a futile one.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Gryphon66
The Constitution is not being overruled.

Amy claim that the Constitution doesn't mean what it says, by a judge, in a judicial proceeding, is an attempt to over-rule the Constitution.

I would not say it doesn't happen, but not in this case. If the judge is wrong I would say they are misinterpreting the Constitution, not willfully trying to overrule it.

In the end the SC will tell us.

a reply to: Gryphon66

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

They have the sole power to impeach which happens from a vote on the floor .

Show me anywhere in the constitution where the House of representatives how’s the power to investigate without granting the defendant his constitutional rights . For that matter show me any clause of the Constitution that cites the rules for investigation .

a reply to: Fallingdown

Just what are those constitutional rights? I kind of doubt if you know.
Heck, any one of us peons could have had our income tax records handed over to congress without us even knowing.
The law requires the IRS to hand over to Congress them if requested. And the courts are pretty lenient when it comes to any justification that congess might give for wanting them. Planned parenthood ended up handing over all kinds of documents when congress investigated them. Maybe they could let us know what kind of rights they were granted

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: dawnstar

Fair enough, I understand what you're saying, and I hope I didn't sound like I was critiquing you personally. So many in this thread dismiss the judge's ruling not on the merits but merely because she was appointed by Obama.

I don't agree with the politicizing of the judiciary but it has already been done in a major Constitutionally compromising way by the Republican Senate. That has ramifications.

Havent seen you mention she worked for DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN PATRICK LEAHY FOR 2 DECADES YET.....

Please dont think that we are all just anti Obama, we are anti scum as well

Lolz🤪

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
"Any claim that the Constitution doesn't mean what it says, by a judge, in a judicial proceeding, is an attempt to over-rule the Constitution."

I would not say it doesn't happen, but not in this case. If the judge is wrong I would say they are misinterpreting the Constitution, not willfully trying to overrule it.

I disagree. They are a judge. A judge knows better. The TDS loons here who cannot see the obvious truth have an excuse. The judge doesn't - well, they do, they are a TDS suffering Obama appointee...

In the end the SC will tell us.

Yep.

Before she was a judge she was a lobbyist for many years. She faught hard to make sure their were tons of limitations on the Freedom Of Information Act. We all know how much we dont want freedom of information right?

Lolz🤪

a reply to: Arnie123

Flynn is looking to get Charges dropped as well.

Flynn took a plea deal. The judge hasn't been satisfied that he's fulfilled his end of the deal, which is why his sentencing has been delayed.

He can't get his perjury charge dropped without getting the other charges, and more, reinstated. Then he'd have to go to trial on those.

originally posted by: Scepticaldem

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
"Any claim that the Constitution doesn't mean what it says, by a judge, in a judicial proceeding, is an attempt to over-rule the Constitution."

I would not say it doesn't happen, but not in this case. If the judge is wrong I would say they are misinterpreting the Constitution, not willfully trying to overrule it.

I disagree. They are a judge. A judge knows better. The TDS loons here who cannot see the obvious truth have an excuse. The judge doesn't - well, they do, they are a TDS suffering Obama appointee...

In the end the SC will tell us.

Yep.

Before she was a judge she was a lobbyist for many years. She faught hard to make sure their were tons of limitations on the Freedom Of Information Act. We all know how much we dont want freedom of information right?

Lolz🤪

I'm sure her ruling will be overturned in the Appeals Court based on that.

a reply to: dawnstar

well Gosh why would Kavanaugh have any hard feeling??

it's not like a bunch of lies were told about him was it??

Avenatti was supposed to run for President, the paragon of truth , Justice, and the American way...

No one ever gets upset about the Truth, and no one lied, so what gives??

You think kavanaugh is "tainted" but RBG is good right? senile but good..

I think Thomas might have an oppinion about Kavanaugh, what do you think?

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: Gryphon66

The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

They have the sole power to impeach which happens from a vote on the floor .

Show me anywhere in the constitution where the House of representatives how’s the power to investigate without granting the defendant his constitutional rights . For that matter show me any clause of the Constitution that cites the rules for investigation .

I don't have to show you in the Constitution just point out the mistakes in your assumptions. Impeachment is not a judicial or criminal trial but a Congressional investigation prior to impeachment which is basically bringing charges. The trial will be in the Senate and Trump will have all the rights in the world to defend himself.

The Constitution gives the House the right to legislate which includes an implicit right to set their own Rules of operation by resolution. These Rules are voted on at the beginning of each Congressional Session. The Rules among other things, establish Committees and their powers which include investigation and subpoena particularly empowered by the Republican House in 2015 to allow Committee Chairs to issue subpoenas on their own and have closed-door meetings.

a reply to: Gryphon66

So there is no Co-equal branches of Government any longer

and everyone is cool with that

Great, so everyone and their brother is gonna gun for the House from here on out..

the next election will put the Republicans back in the House.

then the House can say "Democrats have no say" and it's all cool cause thems the rules.

the House is the Supreme ruler of the USA

thanks Democrats.