Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

[Chomsky]

(CNN)The Justice Department told the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday afternoon that acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker would not appear at Friday's closely-watched oversight hearing unless he receives a written assurance he won't be served with a subpoena.

The threat for Whitaker not to testify comes after the House Judiciary Committee voted earlier Thursday to authorize a subpoena for Whitaker ahead of his Friday testimony — which House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler said he would use only if Whitaker did not appear or would not answer the committee's questions, including about conversations with the White House involving special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.

But the escalating dispute between Nadler and the Justice Department now raises questions about the likelihood of Whitaker appearing in what could be his only congressional testimony while leading the Justice Department, with William Barr on a path to be confirmed as the permanent attorney general by the Senate next week.

Source: (CNN) Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

Well, here we go. It seems it's beginning.

As the Dems won the House on election night 2018, I postulated that Trump & his administration would dig-in and resist Congressional appearances and subpoenas. We may be seeing the beginning of this. And I fear it could get extremely, extremely, ugly. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Threegoofs]

Source: (CNN) Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

Well, here we go. It seems it's beginning.

As the Dems won the House on election night 2018, I postulated that Trump & his administration would dig-in and resist Congressional appearances and subpoenas. We may be seeing the beginning of this. And I fear it could get extremely, extremely, ugly. I hope I'm wrong.

Weird that these guys are so afraid of testifying under oath when they are all totally innocent.

 

[NeverTrump]

Source: (CNN) Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

Well, here we go. It seems it's beginning.

As the Dems won the House on election night 2018, I postulated that Trump & his administration would dig-in and resist Congressional appearances and subpoenas. We may be seeing the beginning of this. And I fear it could get extremely, extremely, ugly. I hope I'm wrong.

I have no idea what he is saying here. What's the point of not getting it in writing? You have to refuse to appear to be Subpoenaed. Nothing he says made sense here. Unless he's just trying to appear to Trump that he is fighting on his side...

 

[Chomsky]

Weird that these guys are so afraid of testifying under oath when they are all totally innocent.

And they and theirs try to convince us that perjury and obstruction are not crimes.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

I have no idea what he is saying here. What's the point of not getting it in writing? You have to refuse to appear to be Subpoenaed. Nothing he says made sense here. Unless he's just trying to appear to Trump that he is fighting on his side...

He is probably delaying until Barr is approved.

 

[smallvoice]

Source: (CNN) Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

Well, here we go. It seems it's beginning.

As the Dems won the House on election night 2018, I postulated that Trump & his administration would dig-in and resist Congressional appearances and subpoenas. We may be seeing the beginning of this. And I fear it could get extremely, extremely, ugly. I hope I'm wrong.

If the House wants to play games, instead of conducting the real business of funding the Government and writing laws and such, I hope it gets really nasty. There is no need for any of this, from frivolous subpoenas, to kangaroo courts, to obstructing our government. None.

 

[smallvoice]

And they and theirs try to convince us that perjury and obstruction are not crimes.

So just who did that?

 

[Slyfox696]

I remember how insistent all Republicans were that Congress is oversight of the Executive Branch back when those partisan hacks like Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan were demanding Rosenstein turn over documents. I am sure Republicans will be equally insistent Whitaker sit down in front of the Democratic led Congressional committee for oversight...

 

[MovingPictures]

Source: (CNN) Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

Well, here we go. It seems it's beginning.

As the Dems won the House on election night 2018, I postulated that Trump & his administration would dig-in and resist Congressional appearances and subpoenas. We may be seeing the beginning of this. And I fear it could get extremely, extremely, ugly. I hope I'm wrong.

Hold him in contempt.

Time for these games to have consequences.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

If the House wants to play games, instead of conducting the real business of funding the Government and writing laws and such, I hope it gets really nasty. There is no need for any of this, from frivolous subpoenas, to kangaroo courts, to obstructing our government. None.

The House has voted to open the government numerous times for nothing in return.

 

[Rexedgar]

Welcome to the “slippery slope.” I wonder if there is an off ramp, not optimistic.

 

[Chomsky]

I have no idea what he is saying here. What's the point of not getting it in writing? You have to refuse to appear to be Subpoenaed. Nothing he says made sense here. Unless he's just trying to appear to Trump that he is fighting on his side...

Or, he may be trying to limit his liability to one appearance. Then if/when subsequent fact-checking turn-up discrepancies, he can be immune from further subpoena (to further testify).

To be honest, I think the guy was an idiot to take the (acting A.G.) job. It's fraught with legal peril. I'd never put my family in possible jeopardy (through me) like that.

 

[Chomsky]

If the House wants to play games, instead of conducting the real business of funding the Government and writing laws and such, I hope it gets really nasty. There is no need for any of this, from frivolous subpoenas, to kangaroo courts, to obstructing our government. None.

I must remind you Congressional Oversight is a Constitutionally mandated.

 

[Fletch]

Weird that these guys are so afraid of testifying under oath when they are all totally innocent.

What is Whittaker guilty of?

 

[Tanngrisnir]

If the House wants to play games, instead of conducting the real business of funding the Government and writing laws and such, I hope it gets really nasty. There is no need for any of this, from frivolous subpoenas, to kangaroo courts, to obstructing our government. None.

Whew! You'll be REALLY relieved, in that case, the house is no longer doing anything that you're so worried about.

The Dems won control and the adults are back in charge.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

I must remind you Congressional Oversight is a Constitutionally mandated.

This is a poster that spreads lies about the "Hillary Uranium One deal" and probably thinks the Benghazi investigation was worthwhile. Completely disingenuous. Not surprising at all.

 

[trouble13]

Source: (CNN) Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

Well, here we go. It seems it's beginning.

As the Dems won the House on election night 2018, I postulated that Trump & his administration would dig-in and resist Congressional appearances and subpoenas. We may be seeing the beginning of this. And I fear it could get extremely, extremely, ugly. I hope I'm wrong.

Your not wrong. You can expect the Trump administration to be as cooperative as the Obama administration was under Republican oversight. Making things as difficult as possible is how they both play the game.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[smallvoice]

I must remind you Congressional Oversight is a Constitutionally mandated.

No, I'm fully aware of that mandate. You libs just need to get a grip on what you are "investigating". For example, we have a federal entity that has a responsibility to assure the tax law is followed. That said, I don't want congress looking at my tax forms. The IRS has already done it. This ploy is just to try to get a gotcha on the President.

 

[pilot16]

I must remind you Congressional Oversight is a Constitutionally mandated.

CNN was just saying earlier though that Whitaker could tie this up in the courts. How does that work? He just refuses or does he get some executive privliege?

 

[trouble13]

If the House wants to play games, instead of conducting the real business of funding the Government and writing laws and such, I hope it gets really nasty. There is no need for any of this, from frivolous subpoenas, to kangaroo courts, to obstructing our government. None.

Whst I would like to see is the DOJ to launch these style investigations on Schiff and Co.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Whst I would like to see is the DOJ to launch these style investigations on Schiff and Co.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Odd thing to wish for, since there's no rational basis for doing so.

 

[Chomsky]

Welcome to the “slippery slope.” I wonder if there is an off ramp, not optimistic.

The House Dems feel entirely mandated by the recent 2016 election, and Trump of course cares only about his base - who fully support him.

The underlying dynamics at work here, are the same as in the shutdown. Which is why I believe we will be repeating these scenarios ad nauseam, until the 2020 election occurs. The election will act as a referendum. Perhaps one of the bigger in our lifetimes.

 

[Mycroft]

Source: (CNN) Whitaker says he will not appear before House panel unless he gets guarantee he won't face subpoena

Well, here we go. It seems it's beginning.

As the Dems won the House on election night 2018, I postulated that Trump & his administration would dig-in and resist Congressional appearances and subpoenas. We may be seeing the beginning of this. And I fear it could get extremely, extremely, ugly. I hope I'm wrong.

This is all nothing but political maneuvers and posturing...on both sides. Both sides have their motives. It's nothing to get all riled up about.

 

[Threegoofs]

What is Whittaker guilty of?

I guess they’ll have to ask him.

But he clearly doesn’t want to be asked.

 

[trouble13]

I remember how insistent all Republicans were that Congress is oversight of the Executive Branch back when those partisan hacks like Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan were demanding Rosenstein turn over documents. I am sure Republicans will be equally insistent Whitaker sit down in front of the Democratic led Congressional committee for oversight...

Cant wait till he shows up with FBI lawyers who advise him not to answer any of there questions because of the ongoing investigations

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk