SOMETHINGS I WOULD EXPECT OF TRUMP

[formula_2002]

fyi

United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that resulted in a unanimous decision against President Richard Nixon, ordering him to deliver tape recordings and other subpoenaed materials to a federal district court. Mar 16 2019

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

fyi

United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that resulted in a unanimous decision against President Richard Nixon, ordering him to deliver tape recordings and other subpoenaed materials to a federal district court. Mar 16 2019

FYI...An apple is an apple and orange is an orange....Quit implying they're the same....Foolishness.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

fyi

United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that resulted in a unanimous decision against President Richard Nixon, ordering him to deliver tape recordings and other subpoenaed materials to a federal district court. Mar 16 2019

FYI, due to criminal indictments of his aides. The tapes were to be used in the criminal trial against his aides. The Court did not order the tapes to be turned over for Congressional oversight purposes.

On July 24, 1974, a unanimous Court (with Justice Rehnquist not taking part due to a prior role in the Nixon administration) ruled against the President. Chief Justice Warren Burger said that the President didn’t have an absolute, unqualified privilege to withhold information.

“We conclude that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial,” Burger said [emphasis added]

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/...states-v-nixon

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

FYI...An apple is an apple and orange is an orange....Quit implying they're the same....Foolishness.

Comparing apples to oranges and calling the same seems to be the prevailing logic of people with certain political leanings.

I guess they failed compare and contrast logic in school.

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Comparing apples to oranges and calling the same seems to be the prevailing logic of people with certain political leanings.

I guess they failed compare and contrast logic in school.

My point.

"The Court held that a claim of Presidential privilege as to materials subpoenaed for use in a criminal trial cannot override the needs of the judicial process if that claim is based, not on the ground that military or diplomatic secrets are implicated, but merely on the ground of a generalized interest in confidentiality. Nixon was then ordered to deliver the subpoenaed materials to the District Court. "

[formula_2002]

imho
Trump does not know the body and spirit of the US constitution.
He governs based on his understanding of corporate law.

"they are going to impeachment me for that!!"

"we do it to other countries" .That alone disseminates our countries strategies to other counties

[Tom]

And the DNC operates on the basis of it's own agenda, whether it is legal or not, and when it is not, the choose to ignore enforcing the laws, ie, sanctuary cities.

What is your point?

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

My point.

"The Court held that a claim of Presidential privilege as to materials subpoenaed for use in a criminal trial cannot override the needs of the judicial process if that claim is based, not on the ground that military or diplomatic secrets are implicated, but merely on the ground of a generalized interest in confidentiality. Nixon was then ordered to deliver the subpoenaed materials to the District Court. "

True. However, Congressional oversight is not a criminal hearing and there is no needs of the judiciary.

My point the Court decision is not applicable to asserting executive privilege, as to materials for use in a Congressional hearing.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

imho
Trump does not know the body and spirit of the US constitution.
He governs based on his understanding of corporate law.

"they are going to impeachment me for that!!"

"we do it to other countries" .That alone disseminates our countries strategies to other counties

Policy decisions are not grounds for impeachment. BTW the President understands the law and the spirit of the Constitution.

How about you give us an example, where the President does not understand the body and the spirit of the Constitution?

[Show Me the Wire]

Formula, so we are clear about points. Your original posting about executive privilege concerned congressional powers and the separation of government.

For your review:

Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
Executive privilege
Executive privilege is the right of the president of the United States and other members of the executive branch to maintain confidential communications under certain circumstances within the executive branch and to resist some subpoenas and other oversight by the legislative and judicial branches of government in pursuit of particular information or personnel relating to those confidential communications.
The right comes into effect when revealing information would impair governmental functions. Neither executive privilege nor the oversight power of Congress is explicitly mentioned in the United States Constitution.

However, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that executive privilege and congressional oversight each are a consequence of the doctrine of the separation of powers, derived from the supremacy of each branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.I need to get a better understand of that. Seems to me its like two knights jousting

Your next post about executive privilege concerned the interplay of the executive branch and the criminal process of the judicial branch.

Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
My point.

"The Court held that a claim of Presidential privilege as to materials subpoenaed for use in a criminal trial cannot override the needs of the judicial process if that claim is based, not on the ground that military or diplomatic secrets are implicated, but merely on the ground of a generalized interest in confidentiality. Nixon was then ordered to deliver the subpoenaed materials to the District Court. "


You contradicted your original stated goal, by the above post, about better understanding executive privilege and oversight by the congress. Understand?

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Policy decisions are not grounds for impeachment. BTW the President understands the law and the spirit of the Constitution.

How about you give us an example, where the President does not understand the body and the spirit of the Constitution?

here is just a quick two

"they are going to impeachment me for that!!"



"we do it to other countries" .That alone disseminates our countries strategies to other counties

If you don't know where those phrases come from, you are not just listening.

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Formula, so we are clear about points. Your original posting about executive privilege concerned congressional powers and the separation of government.

For your review:

Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
Executive privilege
Executive privilege is the right of the president of the United States and other members of the executive branch to maintain confidential communications under certain circumstances within the executive branch and to resist some subpoenas and other oversight by the legislative and judicial branches of government in pursuit of particular information or personnel relating to those confidential communications.
The right comes into effect when revealing information would impair governmental functions. Neither executive privilege nor the oversight power of Congress is explicitly mentioned in the United States Constitution.

However, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that executive privilege and congressional oversight each are a consequence of the doctrine of the separation of powers, derived from the supremacy of each branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.I need to get a better understand of that. Seems to me its like two knights jousting

Your next post about executive privilege concerned the interplay of the executive branch and the criminal process of the judicial branch.

Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
My point.

"The Court held that a claim of Presidential privilege as to materials subpoenaed for use in a criminal trial cannot override the needs of the judicial process if that claim is based, not on the ground that military or diplomatic secrets are implicated, but merely on the ground of a generalized interest in confidentiality. Nixon was then ordered to deliver the subpoenaed materials to the District Court. "


You contradicted your original stated goal, by the above post, about better understanding executive privilege and oversight by the congress. Understand?

I feel you are shooting buck shot.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

I feel you are shooting buck shot.

Why? You think comparing the interplay between the executive branch and the judicial branch results in the same interplay between the executive branch and the congressional branch.

If any body is spraying buck shot it is you.

Okay, you easily, found the decision about executive privilege not being used to impede criminal proceedings in the judicial process.

How many decisions did you find about executive privilege not being used to impeded congressional hearings?

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Why? You think comparing the interplay between the executive branch and the judicial branch results in the same interplay between the executive branch and the congressional branch.

If any body is spraying buck shot it is you.

Okay, you easily, found the decision about executive privilege not being used to impede criminal proceedings in the judicial process.

How many decisions did you find about executive privilege not being used to impeded congressional hearings?

I'm going to leave this threat I started. I have made my case, you yours, now its all up to the full body of Americans.

We have a democracy, if we can keep it.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

I'm going to leave this threat I started. I have made my case, you yours, now its all up to the full body of Americans.

We have a democracy, if we can keep it.

You could have just said you were wrong. No harm in that.