Won't bring it all over. Dummies ain't got over their hangover yet.
Steve Many numbers starts us off, small bonfire:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199268steve2470 (31,385 posts)
Session's stonewalling: Does this DOJ document bear upon it ?
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/confidentiality-attorney-general’s-communications-counseling-president
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1982/08/31/op-olc-v006-p0481_0.pdf
I'm thinking IF it does.... Sessions will seize upon it. Any comments ? Hopefully this document doesn't provide him cover or I just found the wrong one.
FlightRN (87 posts)
2. We need our DU legal eyes to look at this
I hope the Trumpsters don't plaster this all over Twitter.
Although it's hard to find any two lawyers that seem to agree on anything that is being said or done by this admin on a daily basis. It's very confusing.
Paging Laaserhaus!!
steve2470 (31,385 posts)
4. agree about the legal eyes
I'm sure Trump, his minions and willfully ignorant supporters have already found this. Any competent law school student could find it, if I did with a Google search.
Paging Laazerhaus.
marylandblue (467 posts)
3. It probably works against him
It doesn't automatically give him the privilege he asserted. In fact it implies that there is no blanket assumption that all communications are automatically privileged unless the President says otherwise.
New DU internet lawyer.
Next bonfire:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199245No replies.
Next bonfire:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199211OP:
orangecrush (1,629 posts)
Rep. Adam Schiff: Congress May Use Litigation to Compel Jeff Sessions to Answer Questions
Rep. Adam Schiff: Congress May Use ‘Litigation’ to ‘Compel’ Jeff Sessions to Answer Questions
JUSTIN BARAGONA JUN 13, 2017 6:07 PM
"After being pressed by Blitzer if he meant they’d hold Sessions in contempt, Schiff noted that Congress would do what was necessary to get answers.
“Well, I think the process would be negotiation with the White House,” the Democratic lawmaker stated. “We’re going to demand answers to this. We’re going to subpoena him to come back, if necessary, and if he doesn’t answer, and we’re not satisfied with the claim of privilege, then we’ll take whatever steps are necessary to compel.”
He added, “That may ultimately result in litigation, but we need to get these answers.”
Blitzer wanted a definitive answer, however, and pushed him some more, leading Schiff to say that Congress would hold Sessions in contempt if he continued to refuse to answer questions, but that they’d also go to the White House to see if he’s invoking executive privilege."
Video at link.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-adam-schiff-congress-may-use-litigation-to-compel-jeff-sessions-to-answer-questions/amp/
Translation - "We're not done with him yet."
I seem to recall contempt of congress don't hold any water any more thanks to obumbles.
Got a few bites:
Madam45for2923 (3,863 posts)
1. F*cking A!!!
Trump is toast!
Eliot Rosewater (4,352 posts)
2. Great, clear to all of us is the WH is guilty, Sessions is guilty, or they wouldnt risk a
constitutional crisis to cover their guilty asses.
Trump will sit back and watch the country devolve into a civil war where many millions of us die BEFORE he does the right thing.
He will NEVER do the right thing, so we need ONE patriot in the GOP to do so.
OMG!!!!! We gonna have a war!!!!
orangecrush (1,629 posts)
4. What conversations with Trump
Is Sessions refusing to reveal?
All of them?
Eliot Rosewater (4,352 posts)
5. Exactly. Why would there be ANY he is afraid to reveal if there is no THERE there?
Ask obumbles.
Next bonfire:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199210No replies:
Baitball Blogger (25,869 posts)
Sessions came across like a weasel.
I'm seeing a pattern. Those who are refusing to answer questions all seem to understand Trump's grand demand for loyalty. They know he hates leakers so they are trying to stay in his good standing by weaseling through the investigations. Most know they have no legal standing to do it, but they do it anyway. And you know the supporters think they're Oliver North.
I think we are seeing the edge of the anti-government movement that permeates many of the red counties.
obumbles anyone?
Babbleon sis chimes in, no replies:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199200 babylonsister (154,021 posts)
The Most Damning Parts of Jeff Sessions Very Bad Day
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/06/jeff-sessions-senate-hearing-russia-stonewalling/
The Most Damning Parts of Jeff Sessions’ Very Bad Day
”The American people have had it with stonewalling.”
Inae Oh
Jun. 13, 2017 5:52 PM
Senators on Tuesday grilled Attorney General Jeff Sessions during a Senate intel committee hearing for refusing to discuss his conversations with President Donald Trump.
“The American people have had it with stonewalling,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said. “Americans don’t want to hear that the answers to relevant questions are privileged and off limits or that they can’t be provided in public, or that it would be ‘inappropriate’ for witnesses to tell us what they know.”
“General Sessions has acknowledged that there is no legal basis for this stonewalling,” the senator added.
“Sen. Wyden, I am not stonewalling,” Sessions pushed back. “I am following the historic policies of the Department of Justice.”
Sessions grew visibly angry when the Oregon senator then suggested there may be troublesome factors behind his recusal from the Russian interference investigation.
“Why don’t you tell me?” Sessions said, raising his voice. “There are none Sen. Wyden. There are none. I can tell you that for absolute certainty. This is a secret innuendo being leaked out there about me and I don’t appreciate it.”
The testy exchange was quickly followed by intense lines of questioning from Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Sen. Angus King (I-Me.), both of whom described Sessions’ appearance as an attempt to avoid providing substantive answers to the ongoing probe. The senators specifically portrayed Sessions’ continued justification for his silence—executive privilege—as problematic.
“You are obstructing that congressional investigation by not answering these questions,” Henrich said, telling Sessions his silence on the issue “speaks volumes.”
“You can’t have it both ways,” King said, as Sessions struggled to explain how he can invoke executive privilege, even though Trump has yet to assert it.
When Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) asked if there was any written policy to support his continued refusal to answer questions about his private conversations between him and the president, Sessions again appeared to stumble.
“I’m not able to be rushed this fast,” he said. “It makes me nervous.”
Throughout the hearing Tuesday, Sessions repeatedly defended his silence as a part of the Justice Department’s “longstanding policy” to decline commenting on private conversations between him and the president. Sessions started the hearing by defiantly denying any “collusion” between him and Russian officials.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199196No replies
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199192no replies
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029199188no replies
Damn! It is like all the dummies are asleep or Session's senate session was a bust. This is really weird.
