• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ex White House Counsel Don McGahn

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
62,822
Reaction score
52,372
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?
 
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?

The same as everyone else, if we go down were taking you with us.

It is an entire administration that is operating under the rule of assured mutual destruction...
 
Ultimately, Don McGahn has picked the side he wants to fight the war with. And he has not switched teams despite talking to Mueller. Remember, he was the one who set the strategy for the two far right wing Supreme Court Justices and all the other Federalist Society judicial picks. And I have not seen any mea culpa apologies from him in the last few months.
 
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?

The House doesn't want information from him regarding his affairs as a private citizen, they want information on what he did as an executive branch employee, including deliberations and being the legal representative for the White House, 2 instances of privilege may exist---client/lawyer and executive privilege.

Your argument is simple minded at best.
 
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?[/QUOTE Client-attorney privilege? Classified information control? Executive privilege? Just off the top of my head.
 
The House doesn't want information from him regarding his affairs as a private citizen, they want information on what he did as an executive branch employee, including deliberations and being the legal representative for the White House, 2 instances of privilege may exist---client/lawyer and executive privilege.

Your argument is simple minded at best.




My post consisted of three questions. What “argument” am I making?

If the President gave his “permission” for McGahn to “cooperate” with Mueller, how can privilege be exercised now?

Again, you haven’t addressed the question(s), at all. What authority, what power do they exercise over a private citizen at this point? Simple is as simple does.....doesn’t get much more simple....
 
My post consisted of three questions. What “argument” am I making?

If the President gave his “permission” for McGahn to “cooperate” with Mueller, how can privilege be exercised now?

Again, you haven’t addressed the question(s), at all. What authority, what power do they exercise over a private citizen at this point? Simple is as simple does.....doesn’t get much more simple....
They can't stop him.

Well, they can try to stop him, but the courts will eventually rule for the House.

Something is either executive privilege or it isn't. There's no sorta kinda category to it. By allowing McGahn and others to speak to Mueller, in order to avoid a Trump interview with the SC, the WH waived privilege to the things McGahn testified about.
 
My post consisted of three questions. What “argument” am I making?

If the President gave his “permission” for McGahn to “cooperate” with Mueller, how can privilege be exercised now?

Again, you haven’t addressed the question(s), at all. What authority, what power do they exercise over a private citizen at this point? Simple is as simple does.....doesn’t get much more simple....

Your argument is that he is a private citizen. He is not just a private citizen. Even when explained to you, you can't seem to grasp that there are legal, constitutional protections.
 
Your argument is that he is a private citizen. He is not just a private citizen. Even when explained to you, you can't seem to grasp that there are legal, constitutional protections.

I await your explanation so that i can ‘grasp’ it.
 
I await your explanation so that i can ‘grasp’ it.

He provides legal advice to the President, he also has deliberations and reasoning behind the execution of EOs and other details regarding carrying out laws. As such a good deal of the information he has been given is not needed by the House and that is per the "narrow" definitions of current executive privilege.
 
The House doesn't want information from him regarding his affairs as a private citizen, they want information on what he did as an executive branch employee, including deliberations and being the legal representative for the White House, 2 instances of privilege may exist---client/lawyer and executive privilege.

Your argument is simple minded at best.

Your response is simply wrong, at best: first, attorney-client does not apply (he's White House counsel, not Trump's attorney); second, both attorney-client, had it applied, and executive privilege have already been waived. Once waived, they cannot be reasserted.
 
The House doesn't want information from him regarding his affairs as a private citizen, they want information on what he did as an executive branch employee, including deliberations and being the legal representative for the White House, 2 instances of privilege may exist---client/lawyer and executive privilege.

Does executive privilege make the executive branch immune to congressional scrutiny?
 
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?

McGhan testified to Mueller for 30 hours. If he had something negative to say about Trump outside of whats already in the report, dont you think Mueller would have put it in there?
 
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?

He may be under post employment restrictions, which he would have been informed of and for which there will be documentation.

when I retired from a federal regulatory agency, I was briefed on my post employment restrictions, having to do with constraints against my representing a private business before the agency for about 2 years, I guess to prevent the “revolving door” phenomenon.
 
Does executive privilege make the executive branch immune to congressional scrutiny?

The definition of executive privilege is rooted in deliberations and advice given by associates to the President. Especially when it is the WH counsel who is offering legal advice. Please show me where I argued executive privilege makes the Executive immune to Congressional scrutiny?
 
Your response is simply wrong, at best: first, attorney-client does not apply (he's White House counsel, not Trump's attorney); second, both attorney-client, had it applied, and executive privilege have already been waived. Once waived, they cannot be reasserted.

/derp

White House counsel offers legal advice on executive branch decisions. Waiving privilege in one matter doesn't waive it in all matters.
 
/derp

White House counsel offers legal advice on executive branch decisions. Waiving privilege in one matter doesn't waive it in all matters.

Sorry YOU had a derp moment there. ;)

While it is true that waiver on one matter doesn't waive all matters, it applies to the issues that are covered by previous discussions. That's really not the issue here, is it? This is a blanket denial of access. Nothing justifies that, does it?
 
The House doesn't want information from him regarding his affairs as a private citizen, they want information on what he did as an executive branch employee, including deliberations and being the legal representative for the White House, 2 instances of privilege may exist---client/lawyer and executive privilege. Your argument is simple minded at best.

Course might be a bit of locking the barn door after the horse got out... he did extensive interviews with Mueller without any invoking executive privilege. Team tRump is worried about the video tape for the upcoming election. What was said to Mueller will be exposed- HOW it is exposed is the worry now... :peace
 
Sorry YOU had a derp moment there. ;)

While it is true that waiver on one matter doesn't waive all matters, it applies to the issues that are covered by previous discussions. That's really not the issue here, is it? This is a blanket denial of access. Nothing justifies that, does it?

For one thing, Trump didn't waive Executive privilege in all things.
You could say he waived it when he didn't demand an early look at the Mueller Report.
He allowed McGahn to be interviewed by Mueller but Mueller was part of the Executive Branch. Neither Laurel nor Hardy are.
 
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?

Trump was very transparent to the Mueller investigation. He did not use Executive privilege, once, even though, by law, he had this right. He had to right to fire Mueller and put someone else in. Trump knew he was innocent, so he let the rigged process reach a conclusion without using Executive privilege.

The collusion delusion should now be done, since he did everything the Democrats asked, including not using his Constitutional power. But since the Democrats are not showing any good faith, in the conclusions of their own stacked investigation, there is no need to be a nice guy, anymore. Being nice and cooperative does not matter to the angry two-faced Democrats.

Trump is starting to play hardball, using his Constitutional right to exert Executive privilege. He does not have to jump hoops for angry Democrats and fake news. Nothing will satisfy them, other than him resigning. Trump has gotten sick of being a guy nice, to dumb angry people. Now it is time to go on the offensive, and dope slap them. This change of strategy, is part of a larger offense, that will begin by show the roar of the Democrats, is nothing but fake power coming from a corrupt paper tiger.
 
The House doesn't want information from him regarding his affairs as a private citizen, they want information on what he did as an executive branch employee, including deliberations and being the legal representative for the White House, 2 instances of privilege may exist---client/lawyer and executive privilege.

Your argument is simple minded at best.

LOL! The WH waived privilege, full stop. It's gone, it's not coming back and twump has no legal ground to stand on. Zero.
 
What authority does the White House have over Don McGahn? What power do they have to coerce McGahn to ignore a subpoena? McGahn is a private citizen, right?

He also is a lawyer who was White House counsel for President Trump. Both Executive Privilege and attorney-client privilege apply. He can not testify to ANYTHING having ANYTHING to do with President Trump or the Executive branch of government without President Trump's consent.
 
LOL! The WH waived privilege, full stop. It's gone, it's not coming back and twump has no legal ground to stand on. Zero.

That is as false as is possible.
 
That is as false as is possible.

LOL! IOW, it's not even remotely false, since in fact the WH waived privilege. Once that's done, there is no reasserting of it. His testimony is now in the public record, and that just KILLS you.

Yay!
 
Back
Top Bottom