Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, August 14, 2019

A federal judge on Wednesday rejected House Democrats' effort to put two key legal cases the Judiciary Committee is pursuing in its impeachment investigation before the same judge. The decision from DC District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell is a massive setback for the House Judiciary Committee in its effort to use the courts to obtain information from the Trump Administration.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Once again, Nadler and the rest of the Gang that Couldn't Shoot Straight fails spectacularly.

I have said it before, the Judiciary Committee is not going to succeed in trying to get criminal status on its investigation ordered even by a friendly Federal Judge without formally starting an impeachment inquiry. Unless and until that happens, the FRCP rules regarding civil subpoenas will remain in effect, and Executive Privilege will be difficult, if not impossible, to overturn.

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-08-14 06:39 PM | Reply

How about an old-fashioned, too obvious, almost impossible, yet quite attainable solution to Trump - Defeat him in 2020!

#2 | Posted by Spork at 2019-08-14 07:04 PM | Reply

Wow - shot down by an Obama judge...now you know the case had less than zero merit.

We know the Dems are not going to impeach - too scared of blowback. Also, there is about a 90% chance Trump is re-elected and if that happens, he will carry a GOP majority back into the House with him. The Dems window to impeach was already slammed shut. They needed to impeach immediately after the Mueller(Weisman) Report was released.

#3 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-08-14 11:37 PM | Reply

"Also, there is about a 90% chance Trump is re-elected"

Stock market crashing or don't you pay attention to little things like that?

#4 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-15 03:48 AM | Reply

Did CNN change the wording since you posted this, or did someone else? The current article lists it as a "procedural setback", not a "massive setback".

Wow - shot down by an Obama judge...now you know the case had less than zero merit.

[. . . ]

3 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-08-14 11:37 PM | Reply

This was a motion to join two cases. There was no ruling on the merits of either of the cases. The judge ruled the two cases, while superficially appearing related, weren't related enough to join.

I'm not sure how this is a "spectacular failure", either. Maybe I read a different article. Surely, joining the cases wasn't the end-all, be-all of winning either case, was it? Did I miss something?

#5 | Posted by StatsPlease at 2019-08-15 10:46 AM | Reply

#5 Trump's ----------- have no strategy other than lying, exaggerating and deflecting. Don't expect them to have a valid response to your post.

#6 | Posted by JOE at 2019-08-15 11:52 AM | Reply

Joe's out on ---------- patrol again, hoping to catch one in the act this time.

#7 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-15 11:56 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

#5

CNN must have changed it, since I just cut and pasted from the article.

It was a motion to relate the cases, which is ordinarily a minor procedural issue but in this instance the JC actively argued that the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure should apply because they kinda sorta maybe are conducting an impeachment investigation. Judge Howell, in writing, disagreed, stating that the McGahn subpoena is a civil matter, governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and unrelated to the Grand Jury case, which then means that claims of Executive Privilege will likely be upheld and McGahn probably won't be compelled to testify before Congress.

#8 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-08-15 06:39 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort