Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, October 08, 2019

Noah Feldman: A New York judge says the president can be subpoenaed, investigated and maybe even prosecuted while in office. A federal district judge in New York has held that the Manhattan district attorney may subpoena Donald Trump's tax records as part of a criminal investigation.

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.

Trump is creating the laws that will take him down. This is why people prefer to act like gentlemen and not animals.

#1 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-10-08 04:32 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"If a House or Senate of the president's party protects him against impeachment and removal, then we could be faced with the horrifying prospect of a criminal president remaining in office." - fta

#2 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-10-08 04:37 PM | Reply

"criminal president remaining in office"

They're okay with that, because in their minds Hillary and Biden would be even more criminal.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-08 04:39 PM | Reply

They're okay with that, because in their minds Hillary and Biden would be even more criminal.

You're giving them far too much credit as "thinkers".

They're OK with a criminal in office because that's still better than Hillary or Biden in any form.

#4 | Posted by jpw at 2019-10-08 05:09 PM | Reply

The Second Circuit will agree with the lower court judge under the limited circumstances of this case. I have less faith in our Supreme Court which has been stacked with partisan operatives. I could honestly see what appears to be a very clean cut case going 5-4.

#5 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-08 05:21 PM | Reply

I have less faith in our Supreme Court which has been stacked with partisan operatives. I could honestly see what appears to be a very clean cut case going 5-4.

#5 | Posted by JOE

I wouldn't count Chief Justice John Roberts being 100% on Trump's side in this. I suspect, based on some of his votes and comments since Trump was elected, that he does NOT want history to look unkindly on the "Roberts' Court" 50 years from now.

OCU

#6 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-10-08 05:37 PM | Reply

#6 Yeah, i meant 5-4 in either direction. Which would still be disgraceful imo considering the issues at play here.

#7 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-08 06:01 PM | Reply

And Obama left office needing to render a justice to be confirmed.

#8 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-10-08 07:12 PM | Reply

I have less faith in our Supreme Court which has been stacked with partisan operatives. I could honestly see what appears to be a very clean cut case going 5-4. #5 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-08 05:21 PM
When you claim 'stacked by partisans' would you be so kind as to tell me which party selected the member you see being the '5' in that 5-4 decision? Is it a Democrat appointed judge who might weigh it differently than every other Democrat appointee, or is it a Republican appointee who might weigh it differently than every other Republican appointee?

#9 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-10-09 08:21 AM | Reply

Run for your life Don... ... ... . They are going to get you this time.

#10 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-10-09 11:40 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

tell me which party selected the member you see being the '5' in that 5-4 decision?

For someone who just claimed yesterday that he reads threads before commenting, you sure don't seem to have digested #7.

#11 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-09 12:04 PM | Reply

The Second Circuit will agree with the lower court judge under the limited circumstances of this case. I have less faith in our Supreme Court which has been stacked with partisan operatives. I could honestly see what appears to be a very clean cut case going 5-4.

#5 | POSTED BY JOE

Don't count on it. Expect more likely a 8-1 against the President if not a 9-0. The only one I'd be concerned about is Kavanaugh both because of his take on investigations of the President and his hatred of the Dems.

#12 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-10-09 12:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#12 I'd love for you to be right.

#13 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-09 12:31 PM | Reply

tell me which party selected the member you see being the '5' in that 5-4 decision?
For someone who just claimed yesterday that he reads threads before commenting, you sure don't seem to have digested #7.
#11 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-09 12:04 PM

I absolutely digested it, which is why I questioned it. Are you of the belief that any liberal judge is going to vote in opposition to the other 3 liberal judges?
The point being that the judges nominated by Democrats are almost certainly going to vote in a manner consistent with your claim of stacked with partisan operatives.
While the same cannot be honsetly said of the judges nominated by Republicans.

#14 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-10-09 01:04 PM | Reply

#14 I said "partisan operatives" as applicable to all sides of the court. That the conservatives are occasionally less partisan does not make them non-partisan.

I'm sorry you are so triggered by anything anyone says about conservatives. Maybe you could take a break from your taxpayer-funded pettifogging to soothe your owie.

#15 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-09 01:30 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