They absolutely are entitled to the documents. Look at US V Nixon. Also, Trump has stated that he has ordered the Executive Branch to not comply with any subpoenas. However, he didn’t claim Executive Privilege. Just fighting.
Nope, there is. Getting Guiliani, Pompeo and Mulvaney under oath and testifying truthfully would definitely give a lot more evidence.
You don’t claim privilege in a vacuum. If you believe communications are privileged, you refuse to divulge their content. The party wanting the information then has to take you to court to force you or your witness to answer (or produce documents). In that proceeding, you formally assert privilege, and the judge decides whether you are entitled to it or not. Trump was never taken to court by the Democrats.
Correct. The Dems impeached Trump in the house. Now they want the Senate to impeach him again, when that’s not the Senate’s function and the Senate has no right to do it.
Because they were closer to Trump than the other witnesses. Trump told Zelensky to work with Guiliani. So Guiliani would know what Trump said. Mulvaney admitted the quid pro quo already so we know he knows what it is. Trump has prevented evidence to be presented that would exonerate him, so I think we can safely assume what they would have to say is bad for Trump.
Haha. Okay, so I think that are incriminating, and that’s why they are being withheld. Are you saying they are exculpatory and are being withheld?
They did subpoena them. At least Mulvaney. He refused to testify at the direction of the President.
Yeah, that’s funny. I “have all the dirt” because I have been paying attention. But, instead of me, how about Mulvaney?
Not releasing the documents and allowing the testimony is now enshrined in Article 2. No need to go to court, since the ability of the House to have access to the docs and personnel is established law.
Read above. Article 2.
If it’s “established law” then going to Court is how you get access
If it’s established law then the President should stop mobstructing.
That’s a typo. It’s obstruction. They are not using any means to fight the subpoenas. They are just following Trump’s guidance to not cooperate at all.
And that would take forever. Well into the year. Why wait?
It is the prerogative of the court to determine what witnesses are relevant. AFAIK, the only additional “witnesses” House Republicans wanted to testify were the whistleblower and Adam Schiff. Neither one of these people were directly involved in any way with the abuse of power on the part of the president. Having them testify was clearly a red herring, going after the “right” of investigation, which is already established by the constitution. For example, if a defense attorney wanted to call the prosecutor as a “witness”, but could not show the judge how the prosecutor himself was involved in the crime being investigated, any reasonable judge would not deem such testimony as evidence.
Ridgerunner, you might want to check the web for articles that explain the difference between the role of the House and the role of the Senate. The house does not remove the president from office once he is impeached. The Senate has to do that.
If the President would simply comply with duly-authorized subpoenas, we wouldn’t have this problem. He decided to not cooperate at all.