The Barr hearing.

[Que]

We're talking about Barr.

Try and keep current.

Rosenstein is doing the redactions.

Try to keep current.

 

[cowslinger64]

Rosenstein is doing the redactions.

Try to keep current.

He works directly for Barr, who was directly hired by Trump.



Try not to be an idiot.

 

[Que]

He works directly for Barr, who was directly hired by Trump.



Try not to be an idiot.

He appointed St. Mueller. All Attorneys General are "directly hired" <sic> by the President, as are sll.other cabinet positions in the Executive branch.

Try not to be an idiot.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

More here;
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constit...ection-1/investigations-in-aid-of-legislation

Yeah. Like anyone here other than me is going to read ANY of that.

And NONE of this comes close to addressing the issue of when "pertinency," which is at the heart of Rob's Teapot Dome legislative reference, comes into even theoretical conflict with the Separation of Powers doctrine.

For Rob or anyone else to think for one minute that Trump's status as a "federal employee" subjects him to 1920s legislation expanding Congressional subpoena power that "trumps" (no pun intended) the rest of the Constitution that creates co-equal branches of government, IS that very thing that makes Rob uniquely.....well, Rob-stupid.

There are laws and legal procedures that even a sitting President is NOT above. But you would have to be an unmitigated idiot to believe that post-TeaPot dome legislation is one of them.

 

[cowslinger64]

He appointed St. Mueller.

Try not to be an idiot.

Far different set of circumstances, beach ball head.

 

[Que]

Far different set of circumstances, beach ball head.

Well, you tried not to be an idiot.

...I guess.

What "circumstance" regarding the Mueller investigation that was instigated by Rod Rosenstein is "far different" than the self-same Rod Rosenstein reviewing the requested (by him) report?

 

[BoyNextDoor]

And now comes the media with their "Trumps hand picked Attorney General" meme.

LMAO, the others were selected by lottery?

With Barr writing editorials and sending unsolicited opinions to the DOJ trumpeting his odd legal opinion that the POTUS is above the law, yeah, that's a real shocker.

He clearly does not have the professionalism or legal mind of an Elliot Richardson, or a William Ruckelshaus or a Janet Reno.

 

[cowslinger64]

Well, you tried not to be an idiot.

...I guess.

What "circumstance" regarding the Mueller investigation that was instigated by Rod Rosenstein is "far different" than the self-same Rod Rosenstein reviewing the requested (by him) report?

Barr is now his boss. Hand picked by trump.


If this were on Obama, you'd be chomping at the bit about it.


Stop being such a ball licker.


Btw... you're not smart enough to call anyone an idiot. Especially me.

 

[cowslinger64]

Yeah. Like anyone here other than me is going to read ANY of that.

I realize these people aren't message board idiots like hisderpy and col. limpdick... but they do have some qualifications to make an intelligent argument.



-----------------


First one speaks to the right wing numbnuts here


Daniel Shaviro, law professor, New York University
This is not an issue on which there is any possibility of reasonable disagreement. Any well-informed person who disagrees either that the Ways and Means Committee has an obligation to demand Trump’s tax returns as part of fulfilling its oversight duties or that Trump is legally obliged to turn them over is either a partisan hack or contemptuous of the rule of law.



Jessica Levinson, law professor, Loyola Law School
I expect the justices of the Supreme Court may well be the ones to answer the question. A reading of the plain language of the tax code indicates that Congress does in fact have the legal authority to request and obtain tax information from any filer, including the president. Therefore, if Steven Mnuchin, the secretary of the Treasury, refuses Congress’s request, he would be violating the law.


Andy Grewal, law professor, University of Iowa

Does Rep. Neal need a legitimate legislative purpose? In my view, that answer is clearly yes.


Leandra Lederman, law professor, Indiana University
As chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Neal absolutely has the power to request the president’s tax returns and returns of his businesses.


Philip Hackney, law professor, University of Pittsburgh
The statute provides that if the Ways and Means Committee chairman makes a written request, “the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified.” Chairman Neal made a written request specifying certain returns of President Trump. The IRS has an obligation to turn over the returns. Congress made tax returns private by statute but provided commonsense exceptions such as allowing a state agency a path to access returns when need is shown. It also made an exception for specific committees of Congress without regard to any need. It is appropriately using that exception in this instance.



And on and on and on


https://www.vox.com/2019/4/9/18296806/trump-tax-returns-congress-legal-experts

 

[bellisarius]

Rosenstein is doing the redactions.

Try to keep current.

With Mueller assisting as per several federal laws.

The democrats are either totally stupid or posturing for their totally stupid constituency. Take your pick.

 

[Que]

Barr is now his boss. Hand picked by trump.


If this were on Obama, you'd be chomping at the bit about it.


Stop being such a ball licker.


Btw... you're not smart enough to call anyone an idiot. Especially me.

So let me get this straight.

You, a political science genius are asserting that Rod Rosenstein did not defer to his previous boss, Trump's hand picked Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, but he has suddenly decided to kau tau to his current boss when Rosenstein's departure has already been announced and it is thought he is just stating over long enough to ensure the Mueller report is given the appropriate scrutiny?

Your intellect is indeed dizzying.

 

[TontoedRanger]

With Mueller assisting as per several federal laws.

The democrats are either totally stupid or posturing for their totally stupid constituency. Take your pick.

Awwwww. We gotta choose? Can we pick both?

 

[bellisarius]

Awwwww. We gotta choose? Can we pick both?

Of course.

 

[Que]

With Barr writing editorials and sending unsolicited opinions to the DOJ trumpeting his odd legal opinion that the POTUS is above the law, yeah, that's a real shocker.

He clearly does not have the professionalism or legal mind of an Elliot Richardson, or a William Ruckelshaus or a Janet Reno.

You had no idea who any of those were until you googled them except perhaps Reno.

I noticed that you didn't list the most recent two attorneys general. 50% of them were black. Why didn't you list the black guy as a brilliant legal mind? Are you saying he was a token appointment? That seems pretty racist to me.

You also didn't list former Attorney General William Barr. Nobody seem to have any problem with his legal scholarship or his professionalism when he was actually a serving Attorney General.

 

[cowslinger64]

So let me get this straight.

You, a political science genius are asserting that Rod Rosenstein did not defer to his previous boss, Trump's hand picked Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, but he has suddenly decided to kau tau to his current boss when Rosenstein's departure has already been announced and it is thought he is just stating over long enough to ensure the Mueller report is given the appropriate scrutiny?

Your intellect is indeed dizzying.

You, as a master of nothing but driving people around care to offer your thoughts as though they carry any sort of weight whatsoever ask me that question.. the answer is:


You really are a partisan hack. If you don't think that is absolutely possible, you're dumber than I figured.


I think it's cute when you put on your big boy panties and run your mouth.

 

[toeskr]

It's hilarious.

Pubmoron: We believe every lie!

Dems: We know.

Cool story zippo.

 

[TontoedRanger]

Of course.

http://img.picturequotes.com/2/49/48684/i-love-my-freedom-i-love-my-america-quote-1.jpg

 

[Que]

I realize these people aren't message board idiots like hisderpy and col. limpdick... but they do have some qualifications to make an intelligent argument.



-----------------


First one speaks to the right wing numbnuts here


Daniel Shaviro, law professor, New York University
This is not an issue on which there is any possibility of reasonable disagreement. Any well-informed person who disagrees either that the Ways and Means Committee has an obligation to demand Trump’s tax returns as part of fulfilling its oversight duties or that Trump is legally obliged to turn them over is either a partisan hack or contemptuous of the rule of law.



Jessica Levinson, law professor, Loyola Law School
I expect the justices of the Supreme Court may well be the ones to answer the question. A reading of the plain language of the tax code indicates that Congress does in fact have the legal authority to request and obtain tax information from any filer, including the president. Therefore, if Steven Mnuchin, the secretary of the Treasury, refuses Congress’s request, he would be violating the law.


Andy Grewal, law professor, University of Iowa

Does Rep. Neal need a legitimate legislative purpose? In my view, that answer is clearly yes.


Leandra Lederman, law professor, Indiana University
As chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Neal absolutely has the power to request the president’s tax returns and returns of his businesses.


Philip Hackney, law professor, University of Pittsburgh
The statute provides that if the Ways and Means Committee chairman makes a written request, “the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified.” Chairman Neal made a written request specifying certain returns of President Trump. The IRS has an obligation to turn over the returns. Congress made tax returns private by statute but provided commonsense exceptions such as allowing a state agency a path to access returns when need is shown. It also made an exception for specific committees of Congress without regard to any need. It is appropriately using that exception in this instance.



And on and on and on


https://www.vox.com/2019/4/9/18296806/trump-tax-returns-congress-legal-experts

Google-foo is no substitute for the ability to read and comprehend source material, grasshopper.

Your hubris knows no bounds. Are you actually asserting that googling for confirmation is on par with the depth of knowledge and legal scholarship of HisArpy or the Colonel?

Calling other people idiots and bragging about how smart you are doesn't make any of that true, especially when you are very clearly demonstrating the opposite.

 

[bellisarius]

You had no idea who any of those were until you googled them except perhaps Reno.

I noticed that you didn't list the most recent two attorneys general. 50% of them were black. Why didn't you list the black guy as a brilliant legal mind? Are you saying he was a token appointment? That seems pretty racist to me.

You also didn't list former Attorney General William Barr. Nobody seem to have any problem with his legal scholarship or his professionalism when he was actually a serving Attorney General.

They're watching the whole Russian theme swirl down the commode so anyone, and I mean anyone, that's had anything to do with the investigation is "in on the conspiracy."

Barr, Mueller, Rosenstein, all of those bastards are out to conspire against them.

And Trumps approval ratings keep going up while the conspiracy media's ratings keep going down. You'd think someone would have a clue by now.

 

[cowslinger64]

Google-foo is no substitute for the ability to read and comprehend source material, grasshopper.

Your hubris knows no bounds. Are you actually asserting that googling for confirmation is on par with the depth of knowledge and legal scholarship of HisArpy or the Colonel?

Calling other people idiots and bragging about how smart you are doesn't make any of that true, especially when you are very clearly demonstrating the opposite.

I can read just fine... and unlike you posers that think you know something, I'm not a lawyer.. and it doesn't take a lawyer to post the opinions of people that are experts in their field. It also doesn't lessen the value of those opinions.



Once again, I did stuff today at work that none of you could do. So once again, that makes you an idiot. Right?

 

[Que]

You, as a master of nothing but driving people around care to offer your thoughts as though they carry any sort of weight whatsoever ask me that question.. the answer is:


You really are a partisan hack. If you don't think that is absolutely possible, you're dumber than I figured.


I think it's cute when you put on your big boy panties and run your mouth.

So, what you are saying is that you have no idea, then?

 

[Que]

I can read just fine... and unlike you posers that think you know something, I'm not a lawyer.. and it doesn't take a lawyer to post the opinions of people that are experts in their field. It also doesn't lessen the value of those opinions.



Once again, I did stuff today at work that none of you could do. So once again, that makes you an idiot. Right?

Opinions are like bellybuttons, everyone has one. Appealing to authority on a subject you, personally know nothing about is not very solid rhetorical ground. Any position you want to take on any issue has its share of "experts" supporting that position.

Being able to find an "expert" supporting your position who is advancing an argument that you are not equipped to understand is not a valid rhetorical device. If you cannot explain, in your own words, what it is that "your" so-called expert is asserting, you don't even have entree to debate. Not even in seventh-grade debate are they allowed to argue dueling citations.

You seem to get a lot of your self-worth being an overpaid union hack.

You really should quit discrediting yourself.

 

[bellisarius]

In all of this "conspiracy theory" bull shit being laid to rest something seems to be being glossed over. That being that investigations are firing up pointed in the other direction. It's about damn time.

 

[Que]

In all of this "conspiracy theory" bull shit being laid to rest something seems to be being glossed over. That being that investigations are firing up pointed in the other direction. It's about damn time.

I think it was smart for them to put off pursuing that vigorously until the Mueller report was able to show that there was no impetus for any of the underlying counterintelligence investigation or the subsequent Mueller investigation.

Have they tried to do it concurrently it would have been seen as an effort to distract and deflect from the Mueller probe. Now that the Mueller probe came up dry, it's obvious that there was never any reason for what they did.

Even the Papadopoulos thing they had an operative feed Papadopoulos with the idea that the Russians were going to release some information on Hillary Clinton had him repeat it to the Australians had the Australian repeat it back to the FBI in order to start the whole thing in the first place. The whole thing was circular.

I've always thought the whole reason that they were getting the Steele dossier together in the first place was because they assumed that Trump would bother to go after Hillary for her Russian connections and that was going to be their defense.

Lately all this information coming out about Biden's son and manafort style Ukrainian bribes suggest that this whole thing goes much deeper and much more corrupt.

 

[bellisarius]

Looking at the timeline, indictments, if any, should be coming down before the election.