Trump’s DOJ argues it’s ‘impossible to say’ if courts were right to give Congress Watergate docs

1
An attorney representing the Department of Justice on Tuesday left a federal judge stunned after they argued courts may have been wrong to hand over Watergate documents to Congress in 1974.

As reported by Politico’s Darren Samuelsohn, DOJ attorney Elizabeth Shapiro argued that Congress is not within its rights to demand grand jury information from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Chief United States District Judge Beryl Howell pressed Shapiro over whether she also believed it was wrong for courts to force the release of Watergate grand jury materials to Congress during the impeachment inquiry for former President Richard Nixon.

“Shapiro at first said it was ‘impossible to say’ what happened in 1974 was wrong,” Samuelsohn reports. “Shapiro then said if the same Watergate road map case came today there’d be a ‘different result’ because the law has changed since 1974. She said the judge wouldn’t be able to do the same thing absent changes to the grand jury rules and statutes.”

“Wow, okay,” Howell replied, according to Samuelsohn. “As I said, the Department is taking an extraordinary position.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/judge- ... gate-docs/

If you sling enough BS at a wall some of it is bound to stick.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Trump’s DOJ argues it’s ‘impossible to say’ if courts were right to give Congress Watergate docs

2
If you can’t prove a point, then inject doubt into everything. A Nihilistic tactic that rarely works in a court of law.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Trump’s DOJ argues it’s ‘impossible to say’ if courts were right to give Congress Watergate docs

4
SubRosa wrote: Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:49 pm Ah, if only Perry Mason was on the T-rump prosecution team...

SR

(I know...)
Rudy thinks he is Perry Mason
Speaking to The Daily Beast last month, the day before he nixed the trip, Giuliani said that he was briefing the president on his progress in Ukraine. He also noted that, based on their private conversations, he believed he had the full blessing of President Trump to keep digging on any actions Biden had taken. He mocked critics who accused him of “going after poor Joe.”

“The answers lie in Ukraine,” Giuliani insisted then. “This is what a defense lawyer does… I’m going after it like a hound dog.”

At the time, he compared his investigative jaunt to the kind of work done by Perry Mason, a fictional lawyer-detective from the 1950s and ’60s TV series.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-giu ... estigators
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Trump’s DOJ argues it’s ‘impossible to say’ if courts were right to give Congress Watergate docs

5
No matter what the shithead in the White House, and his surround gang of fascists claim, the Constitution is very simple and clear on the House's power of Impeachment:
Art I Section 2 Paragraph 3 wrote:The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
That's it! Everything else is garbage and I think, even THIS SCOTUS, will rule that way. Remember--even the most conservative justices (ie, Rehnquist) unanimously ruled for the Congress, not Nixon.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Trump’s DOJ argues it’s ‘impossible to say’ if courts were right to give Congress Watergate docs

6
Different times, Chief District Judge John J Sirica had a strong part to play in Watergate and the trials and made decisions that could be different now. DOJ was weak, AG John Mitchell was part of the cover up. Sirica was a Republican but it wasn't a hyper-partisan era like today. The Nixon and Clinton impeachments are examples of the impeachment process, judges are different and the public support is different.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests