26 votes

President Trump's lawyers said the President and his administration won't cooperate in an ongoing impeachment inquiry

15 comments

  1. [9]
    mike10010100
    Link
    This is the most ridiculous thing Trump's administration has done yet. In the letter, they claim the right to cross-examine witnesses, which, as far as anyone can tell, is what the Senate trial's...

    This is the most ridiculous thing Trump's administration has done yet. In the letter, they claim the right to cross-examine witnesses, which, as far as anyone can tell, is what the Senate trial's purpose is.

    Did everyone in Trump's administration who understand how the Constitution works leave?

    17 votes
    1. [6]
      Deimos
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      They're going to keep refusing to cooperate until there are some actual consequences. Almost everything that's been happening goes something like this: Someone: You're supposed to do this thing....

      They're going to keep refusing to cooperate until there are some actual consequences. Almost everything that's been happening goes something like this:

      Someone: You're supposed to do this thing.
      Trump admin: No.
      Someone: But you're required to.
      Trump admin: No.

      And then nothing significant happens, nobody is punished, and it starts over from the top with the next issue.

      If nothing else, I think Trump's presidency has demonstrated how much of the system has really just been running on the honor system. In theory there are supposed to be protections and consequences, but nobody seems to have the ability or willingness to apply them.

      24 votes
      1. [5]
        mike10010100
        Link Parent
        The problem is that none of their refusals have worked their way very far in the court system. But what's to stop Trump from simply ignoring the courts altogether, even the Supreme Court?

        The problem is that none of their refusals have worked their way very far in the court system.

        But what's to stop Trump from simply ignoring the courts altogether, even the Supreme Court?

        7 votes
        1. [3]
          Gaywallet
          Link Parent
          I'm not sure anything can. He's absolutely convinced that he has all the power in the world and that everything that is negatively said about him is fake news. He is the very definition of delusional.

          But what's to stop Trump from simply ignoring the courts altogether, even the Supreme Court?

          I'm not sure anything can. He's absolutely convinced that he has all the power in the world and that everything that is negatively said about him is fake news. He is the very definition of delusional.

          3 votes
          1. [2]
            kfwyre
            Link Parent
            Back in 2016, Trump was asked during one of his debates with Clinton whether he would accept the results of the election should she win. He dodged the question. Even when pressed, he refused to...

            Back in 2016, Trump was asked during one of his debates with Clinton whether he would accept the results of the election should she win. He dodged the question. Even when pressed, he refused to answer. I think his quote was something like "I'll leave you in suspense." It sent a chill right up my spine. This was not only unprecedented and disturbing behavior for the potential leader of our country, but it came across like a veiled threat. At the time I didn't think he was going to win, and it made me worry -- genuinely worry -- about what he might do should he lose. He didn't seem the type to bow out gracefully.

            We never saw what he would have done with a loss because he ended up winning. Now we're in a similar situation --only the stakes are much, much higher. In 2016 he wasn't willing to concede a hypothetical loss for something he didn't even have yet. Now he actually has it and all the power that comes with it. Now he has something to lose and is threatened not by a hypothetical, but by forces that are very, very real.

            That chill in my spine is still there, and it's gotten significantly colder.

            15 votes
        2. skybrian
          Link Parent
          Fear of jail time. Maybe not for Trump, but the people working for him do care about this, which is one reason they keep resigning. If the courts say someone should go to jail for contempt, it's...

          Fear of jail time. Maybe not for Trump, but the people working for him do care about this, which is one reason they keep resigning. If the courts say someone should go to jail for contempt, it's still the case that they go to jail. The police are not disobeying the courts.

          The "honor system" thing seems to apply mostly to Congress. Legally, Contempt of Congress is a thing, but according to Wikipedia they haven't arrested a witness since 1935, and it remains to be seen whether they will actually do it.

          1 vote
    2. [2]
      ibis
      Link Parent
      My guess is that they understand, they are just counting on the public not understanding. They are looking for excuses to justify their lack of cooperation, so that their stance looks principled...

      My guess is that they understand, they are just counting on the public not understanding.

      They are looking for excuses to justify their lack of cooperation, so that their stance looks principled and the democrats can be painted as the bad guys. If they have to make up a justification, then so be it. With all the misinformation out there already, who will pay much attention to one more?

      5 votes
      1. mike10010100
        Link Parent
        America has fully descended into USSR-mode. Full on disinformation campaigns conducted by the executive branch.

        America has fully descended into USSR-mode. Full on disinformation campaigns conducted by the executive branch.

        3 votes
  2. [3]
    psi
    Link
    The White House's letter is worth a read, as chilling as it is. Frankly, it's amazing that lawyers wrote this letter, given the tenuous relation between its contents and actual facts. Take this...

    The White House's letter is worth a read, as chilling as it is. Frankly, it's amazing that lawyers wrote this letter, given the tenuous relation between its contents and actual facts. Take this paragraph on page 2, for example.

    For his part, President Trump took the unprecedented step of providing the public transparency by declassifying and releasing the record of his call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine. The record clearly established that the call was completely appropriate and that there is no basis for your inquiry. The fact that there was nothing wrong with the call was also powerfully confirmed by Chairman Schiff’s decision to create a false version of the call and read it to the American people at a congressional hearing, without disclosing that he was simply making it all up.

    It's as though Trump wrote it himself.

    Some particularly egregious claims I've noticed:

    Not surprisingly, the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice has made clear on multiple occasions that employees of the Executive Branch who have been instructed not to appear or not to provide particular testimony before Congress based on privileges or immunities of the Executive Branch cannot be punished for following such instructions. (pg 4)

    • The Office of Legal Counsel works for the executive branch and in some sense for the President. It is not the final arbiter of legislative-executive disputes.

    The real problem, as we are now learning, is that Chairman Schiff’s office, and perhaps others — despite initial denials — were involved in advising the whistleblower before the complaint was filed. (pg 7)

    • Apparently illegally circumventing the Whistleblower Protection Act is fine when the executive branch does it (ie, not forwarding the complaint as required by statute), but it's not okay when the legislative branch does it (despite there being no evidence the legislature actually did something illegal).

    When Trump is inevitably impeached, expect Trump to continue to argue in the Senate trial that his rights are being infringed upon, while saliently omitting that he's talking about the rights of those criminally charged. Expect the GOP to argue that, though the evidence appears incriminating , it does not prove his guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt".

    But bear in mind that the constitution requires no such standard of evidence for impeachment. A civil trial only requires a preponderance of the evidence (ie, 51% or more), a threshold more appropriate here. After all, if Trump is convicted, that conviction would come with no loss of rights. Instead, he would simply lose the privilege of being President.

    9 votes
    1. sublime_aenima
      Link Parent
      He likely did. Trump is not one to take direction from subordinates. He wrote the note from his doctor before being sworn in, why wouldn’t he continue and dictate this as well?

      It's as though Trump wrote it himself.

      He likely did. Trump is not one to take direction from subordinates. He wrote the note from his doctor before being sworn in, why wouldn’t he continue and dictate this as well?

      5 votes
    2. mike10010100
      Link Parent
      I really hope Democrats pull out video clips of their fellow Republicans arguing exactly these points during the Clinton impeachment. I know they're incapable of feeling shame, but they really...

      I really hope Democrats pull out video clips of their fellow Republicans arguing exactly these points during the Clinton impeachment. I know they're incapable of feeling shame, but they really should be confronted with their hypocrisy.

      4 votes
  3. Eric_the_Cerise
    Link
    It sounds extreme, but if Congress continues to press this, it might actually come down to who the US military supports. Trump is the Commander in Chief, but US military members make their vow to...

    It sounds extreme, but if Congress continues to press this, it might actually come down to who the US military supports. Trump is the Commander in Chief, but US military members make their vow to the Constitution, not any branch of the govt.

    3 votes