General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAppeals court rules McGahn must testify
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled Friday, 7-2, that McGahn must appear and testify, but the court left open the question of what questions the former close adviser to Trump will be required to answer from House Judiciary Committee lawmakers.
The Trump administration could ask the Supreme Court to step in to put the ruling on hold, which would head off the political spectacle of McGahn being called before a Democrat-led congressional panel before the November election.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/07/appeals-court-rules-mcgahn-must-testify-392562
spanone
(135,795 posts)AllaN01Bear
(18,016 posts)spanone
(135,795 posts)malaise
(268,726 posts)Rec
MFGsunny
(2,356 posts)UTUSN
(70,652 posts)leftieNanner
(15,070 posts)But you know IT will kick it upstairs to Beer Boy and Co.
Let's get McGahn in the hot seat!
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)I'm not an attorney, but it has always been my understanding one cannot appeal just because you don't like the verdict. There must be a procedural error.
Yet they do this all the time. 🤬
Wednesdays
(17,321 posts)there has to be a Constitutional issue, IIRC.
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)That is what I thought. But they could file & wait forever for SCOTUS to reject. 🤬
iluvtennis
(19,837 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Well, that right there is a distinct possibility - if not a probability.
I'm going to put off celebrating until McGahn is actually in front of the House Judiciary Committee.
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)he would just take the 5th. However, Dems should make him do that on TV
Harker
(13,988 posts)"The Mob takes the 5th!"
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)to read the Mueller report into the record and the HUGE amount of McGahn testimony in there.
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)year to decide this case. More troublesome is the fact that 2 judges apparently had a different view. The DOJ was in court arguing that a congressional subpoena of an executive branch official should not be enforced is a disgrace. DOJ needs a good cleaning out.
mjvpi
(1,387 posts)Normally Id recommend a probiotic, but with Baby Face Barr in charge, Id say we start with a wire brush. I wont accept sweeping the past under the rug for the sake of healing the country. There is so much that needs to be reconstructed. Not vindictive but, in no uncertain terms, accountable.
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)Same with tax case. Took forever! 🤬
Lonestarblue
(9,958 posts)Justice is not served when it takes more than a year to get a simple response that should have taken no more than six weeks. And the two judges that dissented should be asked what Constitutional principle they were upholding when the Constitution specifically designates the House to serve as a check and balance. How exactly are they to do this if their subpoenas can just be ignored?
If this goes to the SC, they will just put it off until after the election. I do not think we will see any McGahn testimony anytime soon.
dchill
(38,453 posts)Talk about a ship that has already sailed!
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,767 posts)bluestarone
(16,872 posts)POSTPONING rather than deciding anything!
abqtommy
(14,118 posts)to tRUMP could result in a "political spectacle"?