Alito: what keeps congress from using the president as a “case study” in considering legislation (i.e. anti-corruption legislation)?
(This is a surprising question - he seems open to this idea though I may be misunderstanding)
Stooge: can’t empower Congress in that way, oppressive requests will follow - Jimmy Carter’'s peanut farm records could have been subpoenaed! (LOLOLOLOL)
I would expect that anybody voting in person will be walking through armed “protesters” to vote.
“Does Congress have any power to regulate the conduct of the President.”
Stooge: not very much, yes I know Nixon lost 9-0 but thats different because it was a narrow request, or something
All of these non-response responses are basically just the lawbro version of “I’m just hear to say words and get paid”.
Sotomayor: Counsel, there is a long history of Congress seeking and getting Presidential records. In prior cases we have said a subpoena is valid if there is a CONCEIVABLE LEGISLATIVE PURPOSE. There is a big problem with your argument that there is a higher standard to be applied to an investigative subpoena. Are you saying the foreign interference isn’t a valid purpose / irrelevant?
Stooge: mumbles
Sotomayor: we are talking about documents before he became president and POTUS doesn’t have to do anything - only the accounting firm. How can he have more protection before being president than during his presidency
Stooge: number of issues, rambles
Sotomayor: the cases you’re about to cite pertain to privilege and dont matter
Let’s not get caught up in the particulars.
Fair enough. I don’t like Biden’s prospects in a debate, though.
Kagan: congress and POTUS fight all the time. We’ve never addressed this because they have usually negotiated. Youre asking us to tip the scales in POTUS favor and make it impossible for congress to conduct oversight. Youre right, this isnt the last such case, which is exactly why we should reject your bullshit rule that POTUS has complete immunity from document production.
Stooge: unfortunate the house didn’t try to negotiate here (WHAT!!!)
Kagan: were not asking for executive records here, only records from when hes just a guy. There should be a lower, not higher, standard than for presidential records while in office
Stooge: theyre only asking now because hes president so he should get the presidential protection for prior records
Gorsuch: no substantial purpose? House says yeah, there is, ldo, why not defer to the House about their own business?
Stooge: lots of words, non-responsive
Gorsuch: sorry to interrupt but youre rambling, why isn’t this a substantial legislative purpose?
Stooge: congress hasn’t said what they’re looking for (lolololololol)
Thanks Riv
We got him?
Ok, but winning 40% of the vote is losing in a landslide. Having 50% support is a coin toss, but having 40% is a guaranteed loss.
Kavanaugh: Nixon standard - why not? How will your bs, invented standard work?
Stooge: can’t just assert broad purpose. If congress was deliberating over a specific statute they could potentially ask for presidential papers, but no way thats the case here
Let’s be really clear here… if they go 4-5 it’ll be opening the door for even a Biden to pack the court. These guys have a lifetime appointment and a lot of reason to want to at least maintain a facade of legitimacy. I’m expecting them to literally go 9-0 here. This argument is open and shut and they already did Trump his favor by agreeing to hear it and stalling the release of his financials a few months further.
Jen taub a good lawsis follow right now n
If so did they really do him a favor? Within reason I would think spring 2020 is a pretty bad time.
I don’t follow this stuff closely, but can’t they just vote 9-0 to uphold precedent, and then Trump just pulls the lol fuck you card once again and doesn’t hand anything over.
Why did they agree? If it is such a slam dunk?
To establish precedent?