Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Opinion: Republicans who don't protect Trump's corruption will pay a very steep price
The Plum Line Opinion
Republicans who dont protect Trumps corruption will pay a very steep price
By Greg Sargent, Opinion writer covering national politics
May 20 at 4:23 PM
....
As Politico reports, the Justice Department is preparing a legal opinion justifying the move on executive privilege grounds. Its true, as Politico notes, that the long-standing position of presidential administrations in both parties, including that of President Barack Obama, has been that close presidential advisers have absolute immunity to congressional subpoenas, to preserve presidential prerogatives.
But in this case, the legal theory is being used as part of a much broader across-the-board strategy of maximal resistance to oversight on all conceivable fronts. Trump himself has openly confirmed this, vowing to fight all subpoenas, and weve also seen it applied in the administrations naked breaking of the law to keep Trumps tax returns secret.
Still, as Eric Columbus, who served as a lawyer in the Obama administration, points out, McGahn is a former employee of the White House, which means that if he wants to testify to Congress, he can.
But Trump has an answer to this problem, as the Times further reports:
Thats pretty remarkable: It is being discussed as a realistic possibility that Trump would threaten to destroy both McGahns career and the business prospects of his law firm if he honors a legitimate congressional subpoena designed to get to the bottom of an extraordinary accounting of alleged corruption and wrongdoing produced by a legitimate law enforcement investigation. ... That this was noted almost as a banal, unremarkable factor, observed with barely a raised Timesian eyebrow, is itself an indication of how low weve sunk here.
....
Greg Sargent writes The Plum Line blog. He joined The Post in 2010, after stints at Talking Points Memo, New York Magazine and the New York Observer. Follow https://twitter.com/theplumlinegs
Republicans who dont protect Trumps corruption will pay a very steep price
By Greg Sargent, Opinion writer covering national politics
May 20 at 4:23 PM
....
As Politico reports, the Justice Department is preparing a legal opinion justifying the move on executive privilege grounds. Its true, as Politico notes, that the long-standing position of presidential administrations in both parties, including that of President Barack Obama, has been that close presidential advisers have absolute immunity to congressional subpoenas, to preserve presidential prerogatives.
But in this case, the legal theory is being used as part of a much broader across-the-board strategy of maximal resistance to oversight on all conceivable fronts. Trump himself has openly confirmed this, vowing to fight all subpoenas, and weve also seen it applied in the administrations naked breaking of the law to keep Trumps tax returns secret.
Still, as Eric Columbus, who served as a lawyer in the Obama administration, points out, McGahn is a former employee of the White House, which means that if he wants to testify to Congress, he can.
But Trump has an answer to this problem, as the Times further reports:
If Mr. McGahn ... defies the White House, Mr. McGahn could not only damage his own career in Republican politics but also put his law firm, Jones Day, at risk of having the president urge his allies to withhold their business. The firms Washington practice is closely affiliated with the party.
Thats pretty remarkable: It is being discussed as a realistic possibility that Trump would threaten to destroy both McGahns career and the business prospects of his law firm if he honors a legitimate congressional subpoena designed to get to the bottom of an extraordinary accounting of alleged corruption and wrongdoing produced by a legitimate law enforcement investigation. ... That this was noted almost as a banal, unremarkable factor, observed with barely a raised Timesian eyebrow, is itself an indication of how low weve sunk here.
....
Greg Sargent writes The Plum Line blog. He joined The Post in 2010, after stints at Talking Points Memo, New York Magazine and the New York Observer. Follow https://twitter.com/theplumlinegs
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 2110 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Opinion: Republicans who don't protect Trump's corruption will pay a very steep price (Original Post)
mahatmakanejeeves
May 2019
OP
TeamPooka
(24,218 posts)1. Dear Leader will crush you if you don't love him enough. nt
poli-junkie
(1,002 posts)2. Isn't the Trump threats called obstruction of justice?????
Thekaspervote
(32,751 posts)3. Oh ..just like all the other careers dotard threatened to ruin?
Seems several have benefited from openly bucking his shit