It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Legal Experts Agree Democrats Subpoena Asks Attorney General Barr To Violate Law

page: 1
41
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+22 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 06:44 AM
link   
www.oann.com...


Witnesses brought to Capitol Bill by Democrats recently delivered a blow to the party’s rhetoric on the attorney general. Republican Congressman Kelly Armstrong grilled legal experts Wednesday about the subpoena issued to William Barr by the House Judiciary Committee. When pressed on the issue, the witnesses agreed that the subpoena asks Barr to violate the law in order to comply.


I bet Fat Jerry didn't like this one bit. perhaps a consolation bucket of chicken is in order. I think most with some sense knew this, as the law about why the redaction's were made is pretty clear. But the fact that the dims had such a public display of idiocy does make for good TV. I wonder what this does for the contempt charge? Should Nadler be held in contempt for trying to force someone to break the law? Asking because I really don't know, but it sure would be a nice turn of events.

Stay classy left.




posted on May, 17 2019 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

Witnesses brought to Capitol Bill....


I bet Fat Jerry didn't like this one bit.


Help a Brother out, who are 'Capitol Bill' and 'Fat Jerry'?

As for breaking the law, give each of those Lennies in Congress a rabbit and let George take care of them.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 06:53 AM
link   
So now the opinion of legal experts matter? It didn't seem that way when 300+ legal experts said that Trump was guilty of obstruction of justice.


+32 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It helps to read the OP.

The legal experts were the democrats own witnesses brought in to testify on the matter.


+2 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Fat Jerry is Jerry Nadler. Trump nick-named him that back when he was doing real-estate deals in NYC and Nadler was just a city council dude who didn't like Trump. He is now in a position to get some pay back and use his position to enact some revenge on Trump. He didn't choose to go the high road and thank trump for enticing him to get a tummy tuck and loose a bunch of pounds.

The other guy, Capitol Bill, he's just "that guy". Don't be "that guy".


+10 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

They have the right to do whatever is in their power to charge Trump for his high crimes and misdemeanors. Why aren't they going to go after him? Perhaps their case isn't as strong as they originally said?



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

Ouch.




posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
So now the opinion of legal experts matter? It didn't seem that way when 300+ legal experts said that Trump was guilty of obstruction of justice.


300+ legal experts...wait how many of those legal experts are there? Also 300+ legal experts with no agenda?

BTW is that how american Justice works now? 300+ "experts" can just find someone guilty?



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

Honestly, I don't think Trump should be charged and I think subpoenaing Barr is idiotic. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy that it was just a week or so ago that this site didn't think the opinions of legal experts held any weight.


+11 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: watchitburn

Honestly, I don't think Trump should be charged and I think subpoenaing Barr is idiotic. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy that it was just a week or so ago that this site didn't think the opinions of legal experts held any weight.


They don't. But when you call in a legal expert to a hearing, and you ask that expert the tough questions, you had better know the answers ahead of time, the dims did not. They got their ass handed to them. Which is why this particular incident is funny and thread worthy. I get how you would try to see it through a different lens, but this does make me smile.


+8 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:31 AM
link   
300 Legal Experts spouting their biased opinion to the news, meaningless.

Legal experts under oath actually having to tell the truth, has some meaning.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:39 AM
link   
Let's just cut through all of the guff when it comes to the Democrats accusing Barr of committing crimes (supposedly lying to Congress), being Donald Trump's personal lawyer (instead of a rule-of-law, and proper, AG) because he found that the POTUS had not "colluded" or criminally obstructed the Muller investigation, and have held him in "Contempt of Congress".

They are not concerned about the actual legal factitude of these accusations, as (mostly all) lawyers, they thenselves know these charges are absurd.

This is all about, for public consumption, trying to impune his character - and delegitimizing him and the office he holds - because they know there are a lot of Democrats, Republican never-Trumpers and Deep State operatives who are in for a world of hurt once the DoJ's investigation results start rolling in, under Barr's watch.

Their only defence, as they are going to face a mountain of evidence on a broad array of fronts, is to try to claim that all of the accused are being persecuted by a corrupted AG. Not going to work...and they are scared bug-eyed.

The hammer is about to fall (though it may take some time, at the speed the FBI/DOJ move) on:

1) Fraud(s) perpetrated on the FISA Court
2) Illegal leaks (Comey, Clapper, Brennan..better lawyer up!)
3) illegal unmasking of U.S. citizens caught up in surveillance operations
4) Incompetence and illegalities involved in the Clinton email scandal investigation (Espionage Act violations)
5) Pay-for-play in the Clinton State Department (and the Clinton Foundation)
6) the Uranium One deal...
7) Democrat (actual) collusion with Government officials in Ukraine
8) Democrat (actual) collusion with Russia, via the UK
9) Clinton (actual) Obstruction of Justice in destroying emails, hard drives and mobile phones under subpoena
10) Clinton and DoJ Obstruction of Justice related to the infamous tarmac meeting

I don't know how broad and deep this will all go (will it go all the way to Obama, for example?)...I don't know if the malfeasance will be restricted to Obama Executive Branch people - or if it will leak over to Congressmen and Senators (of both Parties) - but, mark my words, a lot of people are going to lose their jobs (many senior people already have) and quite a few are going to go to jail.

About the dumbest thing the Democrats have done recently (and there is a very long list!), is to threaten to put the Attorney General in handcuffs and throw him in jail over the phony Contempt charges. That's a little like squaring up with Mike Tyson and saying, "I'm gonna punch you in the nose...whatddya gonna do about it?"

Lights out...



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

The Barr subpoena was nothing but political grandstanding, which both sides are guilty of, at times, for the sole purpose of advancing a narrative.

Trying to charge him with contempt, however, is a whole other matter. I find the dems position very hypocritical, in light of the statements made when Holder was in a similar situation.

At far as the "legal experts" go, unless there is settled case law that shows otherwise, opinions are like.......well you know the saying.

The only opinions that matter are the ones held by the majority of the SCOTUS, and, if it goes that far, it will likely be after the 2020 election, and after the whole Russia charade house of traitorous officials have been exposed.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Why is it that when armies of legal experts and law professors call-out a myriad of Trump's actions as violating the law all you Trumpkins just wave it off as false news and Deep State actors? Yet when you find experts questioning actions by Democrats and people on the left all of a sudden it's legit?


+2 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: jtma508
Why is it that when armies of legal experts and law professors call-out a myriad of Trump's actions as violating the law all you Trumpkins just wave it off as false news and Deep State actors? Yet when you find experts questioning actions by Democrats and people on the left all of a sudden it's legit?


did you notice this was at a hearing on the house floor? Did your armies of legal experts testify in the same place?

The funniest part, is the idiot left called this witness as their expert, then allowed the wrong question to be asked, that could only be answered the correct way. Which shoots the contempt charge in the face. in....the....face.
edit on 17-5-2019 by network dude because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: jtma508
Why is it that when armies of legal experts and law professors call-out a myriad of Trump's actions as violating the law all you Trumpkins just wave it off as false news and Deep State actors? Yet when you find experts questioning actions by Democrats and people on the left all of a sudden it's legit?


Because one is driven by hate for Trump, and political bias, and the other is based on the constitution, and settled case law.

Can you guess which is which?

Look, I get why some ppl do not like Trump's brash personality, but he is the duly elected president, and the office itself deserves respect.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

whoosh

That is not the point. The point is, the DNC's own legal experts told them they were full of crappola. Believe them or not.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 08:28 AM
link   
double of the day
edit on 5/17/2019 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Did you ever notice that Nadless and Co. Keep talking about the Barr Subpoena, but none of them bring up that it still needs voted on by the whole House and passed before it can even be legally challenged?

It's nothing right now.

It's a talking point.




posted on May, 17 2019 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

So, the report was redacted because of ongoing investigations, a legal requirement. The dims want Barr to unredact and commit a crime under threat of charging Barr with a different crime.

So, if I tell you to go commit X crime or I am going to charge you with Y crime, under the law that is called extortion. If more than one party is is instructed to commit X crimes under threat by multiple entities to be charged with Y crime, that is called racketering.

So, the dims by that analogy are involved in felonious crimes including extortion and racketering.

So, the dims are the new mafia?

Cheers - Dave



new topics

top topics



 
41
<<   2 >>

log in

join