Trump-Russia Probe: Criminal Investigation...

[Mountain Man]

With any luck, the White House will continue to tell Schiff exactly where he can stick his demand letters, and the Supreme Court will ultimately decide to what extent Congress can harass the president and still be within the bounds of the Constitution.

[JimL]

In other news...

The Adam Schiff Empowerment Act

House Democrats plan to pass their Trump impeachment resolution Thursday. Its full description is: "Directing certain committees to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, and for other purposes."

A better and much shorter title would be the Adam Schiff Empowerment Act.

The resolution gives Rep. Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, far-reaching power over the Trump impeachment proceedings. Speaker Nancy Pelosi remains the ultimate authority, of course, but, like a chairman of the board choosing a chief executive officer, she has picked Schiff to run the show. And in the resolution, Democrats will give him near-total control.

For those of you who have been declaring Trump a dictator-wannabe -- I think Schiff is jealous.

I think you're so biased that you see only what you want to see. The House rules as set by Schiff, Pelosi et. al. give republicans and this President far greater leeway in defense of himself than was allowed in any previous Impeachment.

[JimL]

With any luck, the White House will continue to tell Schiff exactly where he can stick his demand letters, and the Supreme Court will ultimately decide to what extent Congress can harass the president and still be within the bounds of the Constitution.

Funny how the courts keepn shooting down your legal claims, MM, perhaps you should find a different source to mimic.

[Cow Poke]

I think you're so biased that you see only what you want to see....

yuh

[Mountain Man]

Funny how the courts keepn shooting down your legal claims...

None of this has yet been tested in court. The one recent ruling was not actually related to an official impeachment inquiry even though the Democrats are pretending it was, which is why I hope Trump pushes it to its breaking point and rides this thing all the way to the Supreme Court.

[NorrinRadd]

None of this has yet been tested in court. The one recent ruling was not actually related to an official impeachment inquiry even though the Democrats are pretending it was, which is why I hope Trump pushes it to its breaking point and rides this thing all the way to the Supreme Court.

Exactly. They need to start really aggressively pushing the various separation of powers implications as far as they can possibly go. Including ignoring Federal district courts that presume to make nationwide rulings.

[rogue06]

Not OK with Obama, but the difference is:

number of times statements or limiting moves have been done

general nature of the statements made. e.g. "The media is the ENEMY of the people"

That's like saying "I'm gonna kick your butt" several times is worse than actually kicking their butt a couple of times.

[JimL]

None of this has yet been tested in court. The one recent ruling was not actually related to an official impeachment inquiry even though the Democrats are pretending it was, which is why I hope Trump pushes it to its breaking point and rides this thing all the way to the Supreme Court.

You MM, argued long and hard, citing supposed laws, that the Congressional investigation and the issueing of subpoenas was illegal, but a judge just ruled you wrong.

[Mountain Man]

You MM, argued long and hard, citing supposed laws, that the Congressional investigation and the issueing of subpoenas was illegal, but a judge just ruled you wrong.

No, actually, the ruling was, in fact, very narrow, but the Democrats are attempting to broadly apply it with their resolution to change the rules of an impeachment inquiry that doesn't officially exist because it was never voted on.

I know you're cheering this on because you don't care what the Democrats do just so long as they get Trump, but remember, if they can shred the Constitution to go after the President of the United States, then what's to stop them from the doing the same to you? You keep crying about dictatorships and oppressive government regimes, but when the Democrats serve up a textbook example, you smile and say, "Oh, well, that's alright!"

[JimL]

No, actually, the ruling was, in fact, very narrow, but the Democrats are attempting to broadly apply it with their resolution to change the rules of an impeachment inquiry that doesn't officially exist because it was never voted on.

I know you're cheering this on because you don't care what the Democrats do just so long as they get Trump, but remember, if they can shred the Constitution to go after the President of the United States, then what's to stop them from the doing the same to you? You keep crying about dictatorships and oppressive government regimes, but when the Democrats serve up a textbook example, you smile and say, "Oh, well, that's alright!"

MM, the House rules were set, not by this majority democratic House, they were set in 2015 by that majority republican House.

[oxmixmudd]

That's like saying "I'm gonna kick your butt" several times is worse than actually kicking their butt a couple of times.

No its not rogue. You are smarter than this.

Trump saying 'The media is the enemy of the people', or "It's all just fake news" is not like promising to do something you never do (e.g. saying you'll kick someones butt vs actually doing it). Those words have real effect, as we can see at any rally were the crowd is worked into a frenzy against the media. It closes minds, forms opinions, and it's a lie. And it is a stategy that has played out historically to significant effect in dictatorships and other oppressive governments all over the world.

So Obama going after a single reporter that got under his skin, yeah, that is not good. But Trump is after any reporter anywhere that does not print what he likes. And he'll turn on them in an instant, as we've seen when Fox doesn't say what he likes. This is orders of magnitude worse that what Obama did in terms of the total effect of his actions here and even across the world as modern dictatorships watch what the leader of the Free World is saying and take tacit approval from it to ratchet up their own oppression of the press.

[rogue06]

No its not rogue. You are smarter than this.

Trump saying 'The media is the enemy of the people', or "It's all just fake news" is not like promising to do something you never do (e.g. saying you'll kick someones butt vs actually doing it). Those words have real effect, as we can see at any rally were the crowd is worked into a frenzy against the media. It closes minds, forms opinions, and it's a lie. And it is a stategy that has played out historically to significant effect in dictatorships and other oppressive governments all over the world.

So Obama going after a single reporter that got under his skin, yeah, that is not good. But Trump is after any reporter anywhere that does not print what he likes. And he'll turn on them in an instant, as we've seen when Fox doesn't say what he likes. This is orders of magnitude worse that what Obama did in terms of the total effect of his actions here and even across the world as modern dictatorships watch what the leader of the Free World is saying and take tacit approval from it to ratchet up their own oppression of the press.

Actually Obama went after several reporters involved in wholly separate instances which establishes a pattern of behavior and more than established a precedent to be followed. If the press does anything you don't like (such as release a story that you wanted to be the one who released it), you sic the federal government on them. What's more nobody (or very few) will ever say anything in opposition to such behavior. Yeah, that's one heck of a message to put out.

But that's okay since it was the Obamessiah.

And Trump has, AFAICT, been careful not to brand the entire media as "fake news" or the like but picks specific instances.

[JimL]

Actually Obama went after several reporters involved in wholly separate instances which establishes a pattern of behavior and more than established a precedent to be followed. If the press does anything you don't like (such as release a story that you wanted to be the one who released it), you sic the federal government on them. What's more nobody (or very few) will ever say anything in opposition to such behavior. Yeah, that's one heck of a message to put out.

But that's okay since it was the Obamessiah.

And Trump has, AFAICT, been careful not to brand the entire media as "fake news" or the like but picks specific instances.

No, it's not okay, and it's not okay for Trump either, which is what you seem to be suggesting. The Obama administration went after reporters it seems who they believed were doing something illegal, revealing classified info or whatever, and they did so by use, or abuse of an old and arcane law, the espionage act, which was definitely over the top. But, they didn't condemn the press in general as fake news, they didn't tell you not to believe what you see or hear from the press. They weren't trying to sell to the people an Owellian lie about the media. Both were wrong in their own ways, but only Trump targeted the media in general in order to destroy the peoples confidence in a free press.