I'm watching the Presidential Campaign Rally in Florida on Fox News now.

He is on a roll .... looking very Presidential.

Looking Very Strong and Articulate.

Make America Great Again =====> Keep America Great

Looks like the campaign slogan may change...

Judge rules House can pretty much subpoena anything they want on Trump, and refuses to stay ruling until appeal. His accounting firm has seven days to produce records.

Legal beagles, can they appeal before day seven and avoid turning over his private information for the world to dissect?

Shortly after the decision was made public, Trump told reporters outside the White House it would be appealed.

“It’s totally the wrong decision by, obviously, an Obama-appointed judge,” Trump said. Mehta was nominated to the bench in 2014 by President Barack Obama.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Judge rules House can pretty much subpoena anything they want on Trump, and refuses to stay ruling until appeal. His accounting firm has seven days to produce records.

Legal beagles, can they appeal before day seven and avoid turning over his private information for the world to dissect?

Well if Trump is eventually forced to release personal documents I hope he holds the dimwits that end up leaking them to the press personally responsible and extracts a few pounds of flesh.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Judge rules House can pretty much subpoena anything they want on Trump, and refuses to stay ruling until appeal. His accounting firm has seven days to produce records.

Legal beagles, can they appeal before day seven and avoid turning over his private information for the world to dissect?

When this country finally implodes and squares off against itself, I hope all these judges are only second in life to politicians to be removed 'permanently' from the planet. There is no greater threat to the future of this country than the current judiciary.

That judge's reasonings for his ruling sound like complete nonsense to me.

quote:

The judge continued: “It is simply not fathomable that a Constitution that grants Congress the power to remove a President for reasons including criminal behavior would deny Congress the power to investigate him for unlawful conduct—past or present—even without formally opening an impeachment inquiry."

Seriously? So Congress, absent any evidence of a crime, can without restraint go search for one until they find it. What else would one expect from a commie judge I suppose...

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
That judge's reasonings for his ruling sound like complete nonsense to me.

quote:

The judge continued: “It is simply not fathomable that a Constitution that grants Congress the power to remove a President for reasons including criminal behavior would deny Congress the power to investigate him for unlawful conduct—past or present—even without formally opening an impeachment inquiry."

Seriously? So Congress, absent any evidence of a crime, can without restraint go search for one until they find it. What else would one expect from a commie judge I suppose...

Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.

The Constitution no longer rules this country. The political party in charge of the judges interpreting the Constitution is ruling this country.

This is a sad time

I wouldn’t comply.

I’d start leaking all the dirt, the Congress critters and house stooges have committed. Affairs, sexual texts, dirty back room deals to screw over their constituents...every bad thing they have every done. Their taxes, their addresses, their kids getting onto fancy schools they couldn’t get into except for daddy’s name...I’d burn it all down.

So Barr appointed a prosecutor out of Connecticut. Doesn’t that mean any grand jury’s would be seated with Connecticut residents? The state that went heavily for Clinton? WTF.

Why not appoint a prosecutor from Texas and seat a GJ in Texas?

I heard a Fox interview with Bartiromo and a few other guests with Napolitano (I know) and he said this prosecutor may only be preparing a report - that is, he has no prosecutorial authority in the matter. Surely that’s bullshit. Nap said the LE community in DC sticks together.

I don’t buy the crap from Nap but what about the Connecticut GJ thing?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
That judge's reasonings for his ruling sound like complete nonsense to me.

quote:

The judge continued: “It is simply not fathomable that a Constitution that grants Congress the power to remove a President for reasons including criminal behavior would deny Congress the power to investigate him for unlawful conduct—past or present—even without formally opening an impeachment inquiry."

Seriously? So Congress, absent any evidence of a crime, can without restraint go search for one until they find it. What else would one expect from a commie judge I suppose...

His dishonor seems a political hack. Dishonor, with all disrespect intended, you can kiss it.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
I wouldn’t comply.

I’d start leaking all the dirt, the Congress critters and house stooges have committed. Affairs, sexual texts, dirty back room deals to screw over their constituents...every bad thing they have every done. Their taxes, their addresses, their kids getting onto fancy schools they couldn’t get into except for daddy’s name...I’d burn it all down.

That is perfection sir. Hope I live to see the day.

What the Mueller report tells us about Putin, Russia and Trump's election
BY PAUL RODERICK GREGORY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 05/21/19 02:00 AM EDT

THE HILL > https://thehill.com/opinion/wh...-and-trumps-election

Interesting article here.

Skipping to the end..... we find the conclusions:


"What does this all mean?

Real Kremlin insiders — not Steele’s anonymous “trusted officials” — reveal that Putin did not share the elation of his security officers and of the Russian people with respect to the unexpected election of Donald Trump. No conspiracy structure was in place. Putin had no idea how to create either a formal or a back channel to the Trump team, and he warned his oligarchs to get ready for more sanctions under Trump. He “suggested” that his oligarchs open up back channels, but his low expectation of success turned out to be correct.

Even The New York Times has admitted that the Steele dossier could be a Kremlin disinformation campaign to “hedge their bets and place a few land mines under Trump’s presidency as well.” Yet, the Times’ recognition of that does not answer why the Kremlin would sabotage the candidate it wanted so much to win.

As I have written on numerous occasions, Putin’s main objective in 2016 was to discredit U.S. democracy — to convince the Russian people that his flawed “managed democracy” was superior to the corrupt American electoral circus. He just might have a case with a make-believe dossier funded by the opposition candidate that has paralyzed the U.S. political system for more than two years."

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Judge rules House can pretty much subpoena anything they want on Trump, and refuses to stay ruling until appeal. His accounting firm has seven days to produce records.

Legal beagles, can they appeal before day seven and avoid turning over his private information for the world to dissect?

I fail to see how this is in any way enforceable. The arm of government responsible for enforcement IS the executive, who is going to enforce records being turned over if they decide not to comply? The judiciary is, in theory, equal in power to the other two branches anyway, and as such has no inherent authority over either to my mind, similar to how the president doesn't order the Congress to adopt certain laws and the Congress doesn't order judges to interpret things a certain way.

Today, our old friend Brennan speaks to the House Democrats about Iran, and the old nuclear agreement.

AP sources: Former CIA chief Brennan to brief Dems on Iran
By LISA MASCARO
May 19, 2019

AP > https://www.apnews.com/4d40602...4514842a336683d42096

Did his security clearance actually get revoked?

I thought so, but the AP story seems to question it.

From the article:
"The invitation to Brennan and Wendy Sherman, a former State Department official and top negotiator of the Iran nuclear deal, offers counterprogramming to the Trump administration’s closed-door briefing for lawmakers also planned for Tuesday on Capitol Hill. Democratic lawmakers are likely to attend both sessions."
.
.
"The president last year said he was revoking the former spy chief’s security credentials after Brennan was critical of Trump’s interactions with Russian President Vladimir Putin at a summit in Helsinki. Top national security officials often retain their clearance after they have left an agency as a way to provide counsel to their successors. It’s unclear if Brennan actually lost his clearance."

Glad to see the Prez has picked up on the strange goings-on at Fox News lately. Those Murdoch boys have a definite agenda!

At the Pennsylvania rally last night (UUUUUGE turnout BTW)
"What's going on with FOX? What's going on there? They're putting more Democrats on than you have Republicans. Something strange is going on at FOX! Something very strange. Did you see this guy last night? I did want to watch, you've always got to watch the competition if you call it that. And he was knocking the hell out of FOX and FOX is putting him on. Somebody is going to have to have to explain the whole FOX deal to me," Trump said.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
I wouldn’t comply.

I’d start leaking all the dirt, the Congress critters and house stooges have committed. Affairs, sexual texts, dirty back room deals to screw over their constituents...every bad thing they have every done. Their taxes, their addresses, their kids getting onto fancy schools they couldn’t get into except for daddy’s name...I’d burn it all down.

I'm yer huckleberry...

I've said for a while now Trump's biggest challenge is going to be from the media.
Not one in particular but all of them collectively "colluding".
Not to be taken lightly.
If Fox goes then we are in trouble.
I still think we will prevail this time.

In an Ultrafast Decision, An Obama Judge Immediately Rules That Trump May Not Block Congressional Harassment Efforts to Dig Into His Taxpayer Records

Congress has no authority -- none-- to conduct a criminal investigation.

That's an Executive branch function.

But even assuming that Congress may exercise its pretend "oversight" function and it needs Trump's tax records to do that -- how the hell can it demand his private taxpayer records when he was a private individual with no connection to the US government?

That's what they did -- they demanded his last eight years of tax records.

He's only been a president for two, and he was only running for president since June of 2015 or so.

So now the Congressional Democrats can just demand private citizen tax records when they want to conduct a lawless vigilante invasion of privacy?

Indeed, says another Obama appointee -- in record time, as Mark Levin pointed out.

A federal judge on Monday upheld a congressional subpoena seeking President Donald Trump’s financial records from an accounting firm, arguing that Congress is well within its rights to investigate potential illegal behavior by a president -- even without launching a formal impeachment inquiry.

U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta's ruling delivers a striking blow to the president's efforts to resist Democratic investigations, and is certain to give Democrats further legal basis to investigate Trump, his finances, and his presidential campaign.

In addition to upholding the House Oversight and Reform Committee’s subpoena to accounting firm Mazars USA for eight years of Trump's financial records, Mehta took the extra step of denying the president's request for a stay pending appeal.

In other words, he took the decision out of the hands of the Appeals Court by saying that the firm must turn over the records before the appeals court has had a chance to check his ruling.

Jay Sekulow, one of the president's personal attorneys, said: "We will be filing a timely notice of appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals."

But unless the Circuit Court issues its own emergency stay, then this appeal will be moot -- this Obama judge has rigged the game to get the records to Democrats before the appeal.

Meanwhile, Trump has directed his former WH counsel Don McGahn to ignore the Democrat congressional subpeona.

"The Department of Justice has provided a legal opinion stating that, based on long-standing, bipartisan, and Constitutional precedent, the former Counsel to the President cannot be forced to give such testimony, and Mr. McGahn has been directed to act accordingly," White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement sent to reporters.



The White House letter to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler was signed by Pat Cipollone, the current counsel to the president, citing the Justice Department’s advice based on executive privilege.

The DOJ's own Office of Legal Counsel wrote a memo declaring this to be their understanding of constitutional law.

In an opinion released Monday, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel ruled that former White House counsel Donald McGahn is "not legally required" to testify to Congress on matters related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report.

"The immunity of the President’s immediate advisors from compelled congressional testimony on matters related to their official responsibilities has long been recognized and arises from the fundamental workings of the separation of powers," the opinion stated.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/381402.php

With the economy and jobs doing so well, one hopes that those that crossed to vote for Trump and those that were undecided and voted for him are sickened and fed up with the DC game.

The ones we have to fear losing votes from probably are the far right folks who take everything literally such as the wall and don't vote since the walls not done, or some other promise that takes congress working with POTUS to finish. Won't be long they'll be singing their typical song.

Since it's simply power play by the left, they lost, they want it back badly and they'll hurt anyone that gets in their way that these voters and many more decide that they deserve to lose again, and again and again until the process is fixed.

I've seen some pretty crazy things politically over my life, nothing as vicious and vile as what congress is doing to interfere with the ability of the administration to work.

Not even Nixon was treated this badly.