SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (425593)12/14/2019 2:09:09 PM
From: Jamie153  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 542147
 
You seem to be suggesting that Congress doesn't have the authority to subpoena anyone unless the court first rules on it. This would be unique in American history. Courts seldom have to rule on a subpoena since everyone agrees they're legal (until now) and when they do rule they rule on the side that they're legal.

Schiff said it best. He says it took them eight months to get one ruling and then it was appealed which he says it might take another eight. A Congres sites for only two years so two rulings would be 16 months and this also assumes the crime is committed on the very first day Congress comes into session. What happens when the crime beings at the end of the first year (like right about now)? That crime would never get to the court in time to judicate the issue using the current standard.

But we don't have to use this standard. Previous courts fast-tracked impeachment lawsuits under Nixon and Clinton. This court is not.

So now let's look at Nixon. The suit was filed in April 1974 and decided July 1974.
en.wikipedia.org

SCOTUS is corrupt.

Regarding your statement that appears to suggest both sides are the same, you wrote, "Two points. I completely disagree that the Reps are now stacking the courts is because they are meaner, nastier than the Dems. You are simply asserting it; not arguing it. So I'll leave it as is."

It appears you're now saying the gop is corrupt.