General Discussion

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

28. I agree

Sat Sep 25, 2021, 09:29 AM

Sep 2021

I don't think any judge will go along with a claim that these communications deserve any protection under executive privilege since the communications at issue had nothing to do with his duties as president and were probably criminal in and of themselves.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Will the four subpoenaed witnesses "take the 5th"? [View all] kentuck Sep 2021 OP

Who are they gojoe12 Sep 2021 #1

This message was self-deleted by its author kentuck Sep 2021 #2

They would be these guys... Ohioboy Sep 2021 #6

These are the four people who have been subpoenaed by the Jan 6 commission Escurumbele Sep 2021 #7

Or will they even show up? ananda Sep 2021 #3

That is the first question to be answered Sherman A1 Sep 2021 #8

Nope, not going to show up blueinredohio Sep 2021 #58

Also my thinking. They need to put teeth in these subpoenas. ananda Sep 2021 #62

Joe Biden is president, gab13by13 Sep 2021 #4

Trump can also claim executive privilege StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #17

So long as it isn't related to the investigation...? kentuck Sep 2021 #26

I agree StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #28

They will all say "make me"! ashredux Sep 2021 #5

Mark Meadows will show up and answer questions KS Toronado Sep 2021 #9

Echoes of Alexander Butterfield! RVN VET71 Sep 2021 #12

That would be interesting since he has the strongest claim of the four for executive privilege StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #60

Hasn't Steve Bannon already testified several times? FakeNoose Sep 2021 #66

👍 Joinfortmill Sep 2021 #68

The cowards will not show BlueJac Sep 2021 #10

Democrats are like the Colonial soldiers against the Americans in the Revolutionary war. johnthewoodworker Sep 2021 #11

Even one year ago I would have berated your use of "Republican/Nazi" RVN VET71 Sep 2021 #13

Exactly which "antiquated laws" are Dems fighting with, which ones do you think should they ignore StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #27

If Ds are serious and they don't show up or claim executive privileges Tadpole Raisin Sep 2021 #14

If they don't show up, there's no need for the Sergeant-at-Arms to get involved StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #19

Thanks. Though rarely done I thought the Sergeant At Arms could arrest and detain people who Tadpole Raisin Sep 2021 #29

Trying to use the Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest people is very complicated and probably won't ever work StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #48

We still hear some Congressmen talking about "inherent contempt"... kentuck Sep 2021 #49

Yes. It's a lot of blustering that doesn't mean anything. StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #51

When does Merrick Garland enter the game? kentuck Sep 2021 #15

If they defy the subpoena and don't have valid grounds (executive privilege or 5th Amendment) StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #20

Thanks for that info. kentuck Sep 2021 #22

Bannon will be taking a fifth of vodka Aviation Pro Sep 2021 #16

"If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" keithbvadu2 Sep 2021 #18

They can't invoke executive privilege StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #21

So, it appears their options are either to testify or to take the Fifth. kentuck Sep 2021 #23

This isn't a criminal matter so Trump being charged isn't an issue StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #24

I would hope that would be the case. kentuck Sep 2021 #30

The courts have proven to be pretty fair in these cases StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #33

That's my fear; that this will end up in court and take a year or two to process. Midnight Writer Sep 2021 #32

I don't think it will take anywhere near that long StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #34

A lot of us are skeptical of the justice system's ability to move quickly. kentuck Sep 2021 #37

I understand. But in reality, the courts have moved very quickly and fairly in most of these cases StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #39

The Don McGahn case left a bad taste in our mouths... kentuck Sep 2021 #41

That was one case and yes, things are very different now StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #43

'C' lark Sep 2021 #25

Is that when it is referred to the DOJ... kentuck Sep 2021 #31

I hope so and I hope it's done behind some vertical bars. lark Sep 2021 #35

Merrick Garland probably won't be publicly involved in this at all StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #36

But wouldn't Garland have to give his approval.. ? kentuck Sep 2021 #38

Not necessarily StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #40

This seems like it would be a very high profile and "politically prickly" case...? kentuck Sep 2021 #42

That's why I said that it's possible that the US attorney would seek Garland's approval StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #44

Is there an instance where you could see him getting publicly involved? kentuck Sep 2021 #45

I don't see him ever getting publicly involved in a contempt of Congress prosecution StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #50

What if they subpoenaed Donald Trump? kentuck Sep 2021 #55

If he refused without exerting a privilege, yes, that would be a big deal StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #59

I say a little rendition trip to a black site in the mideast and a little waterboarding Hotler Sep 2021 #46

They won't show up Bettie Sep 2021 #47

They may do that to test the resolve of the Committee. kentuck Sep 2021 #52

Is the committee issues a contempt of Congress citation, the U.S. Attorney will no doubt enforce StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #53

I'll believe it when I see it Bettie Sep 2021 #54

I think you are an example of how much many people have lost faith in our Justice System. kentuck Sep 2021 #56

In my opinion, our justice system and our government only works Bettie Sep 2021 #57

Recommended. H2O Man Sep 2021 #61

If they show up... kentuck Sep 2021 #64

The 1/6 Committee has the Trumpers over a barrel meow2u3 Sep 2021 #63

You broke it down like a lawyer StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #65

👍 Joinfortmill Sep 2021 #67