Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (397676)	7/10/2008 1:10:45 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575616

Are you saying this body elected by the American people is no longer legal; that its word does not have to be obeyed? I'm saying that anyone who understands the topic understands that when a subpoena is issued for someone who believes they are subject to an exception for privilege that the way you challenge it is to not show up. There is nothing "illegal" about it.

To: tejek who wrote (397676)	7/10/2008 1:14:45 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1575616

you are clueless

To: tejek who wrote (397676)	7/10/2008 1:25:00 PM
From: HPilot	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575616

The subpeona was issued by Congress. Are you saying this body elected by the American people is no longer legal; that its word does not have to be obeyed? Because, dude, that's treason! A difference of opinion is never treason. Besides you would have to show intent to harm the country in any event. Where in the constitution does it say that Congress can subpoena former aids to get the goods on the President? I think the SCOTUS has prior ruling that says that they cannot do this if the President claims Executive Privilege. No that's not in the constitution, but a new law passed by SCOTUS.