Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have two eye witnesses to a murder. You learn of two more.
Why would you not want to present 4?
 
You would want to present 4 after losing at trial for failing to present the 4 at trial when you had the chance but that’s why we’re different
 
Last edited:
Confidential communication is not a response to a party that sends a subpoena. It is a refusal to respond.
 
Maximus1 said:
Confidential communication is not a response to a party that sends a subpoena. It is a refusal to respond.
Click to expand...
Except you asserted a specific order not to respond
Maximus1 said:
Trump refused any response at all. Ordered they be ignored.
Click to expand...
Back to the question. : did you supply CNN with these confidential atty client communications including said “order”? Did you hack WH server?
 
Last edited:
Maximus1 said:
Trump might be deprived of a benefit of hiding the truth. OMG
Click to expand...
Making argument for future GOP house to impeach next Democrat POTUS for not immediately complying with even illegal subpoenas since Democrat POTUS not complying is “hiding the truth”
 
Nope. It isn’t. A subpoena is sent, a response is given. Even if the response is:
Ignore
Or order don’t respond.
What I said to your own lawyer is irrelevant. Imagine! No subpoena ever gets responded to because the recipient might have spoken to his own lawyer?
 
Last edited:
Aquinas11 said:
You talking about the Trump phone call?
Click to expand...
No, the endless deflection that somehow Biden did something wrong by having a corrupt prosecutor fired.
Aquinas11 said:
Ok let’s try this again , I’ll go slow

The
Nixon
Court
Ruled
On
The
Subpoenas
Click to expand...
And Nixon was impeached.
Aquinas11 said:
No , you’ve lowered bar so much that merely NOT IMMEDIATELY complying w subpoena = impeachment & removal
Click to expand...
No, I haven’t set the bar too low. I agree with the House that extortion is an impeachable offense.
Aquinas11 said:
Dems already dropped bribery like a bad habit when realized ZERO evidence

What else you got?
Click to expand...
They didn’t drop bribery and it is the substance of the abuse of power charge against Trump.

What else you got?
 
With respect to every witness requested to testify and every document requested, Trump ordered ZERO COOPERATION will be observed.
That is different
 
Trump did not assert executive privilege.
Maybe double secret executive privilege but that only applies at FABER
 
Maximus1 said:
A subpoena is sent, a response is given. Even if the response is: IgnoreOr order don’t respond.
Click to expand...
(1) Subpoena
(2) Order on how to respond to Subpoena
(3) Response to Subpoena

You’re confusing (1), (2), (3)

You made a specific allegation on (2) that Trump specifically ordered subpoenas be ignored (as opposed to challenge and then comply if Court rules).

You then said you’re “100% sure” as opposed to say 95% sure Trump made that order

So back to the question : how did you get access to confidential attorney client communications between Trump and attorneys? Or was the above a misrepresentation that Trump gave that order (yes)
 
Last edited:
The President has a right to protect conversations with his advisers and treat them confidentially (“presidential privilege”). Taking that dispute between the Article I and II branches to the Article III branch (the courts) is not obstruction; it is the normal process. Trump and his team clearly stated that’s what they would do.
 
Maximus1 said:
Trump ordered ZERO COOPERATION will be observed.
Click to expand...
Again you don’t have access to confidential attorney client communications so have no clue

Caps don’t make an argument more valid
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top