Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[faberryman]

Maybe a day time TV show can have her on to describe "the cure". This could important information.

I wonder how you can prevent a relapse however.

That assumes you believe her. You can't have a relapse unless you've first been cured. I wouldn't believe Trump if he said he regrets being a narcissist. There is no reason to believe Marjorie Taylor Greene either.

[Robert Roaldi]

That assumes you believe her. You can't have a relapse unless you've first been cured. I wouldn't believe Trump if he said he regrets being a narcissist. There is no reason to believe Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Oh no none, I was just trying out to see absurd it would sound to give her the benefit of the doubt.

Must be a sad thing if your congressional rep is a nutcase and you need their help with something.

[MattBurt]

Oh no none, I was just trying out to see absurd it would sound to give her the benefit of the doubt.

Must be a sad thing if your congressional rep is a nutcase and you need their help with something.

Yeah, that's a terrifying thought. My district is represented by Lauren Bobert.

[athegn]

"He then matched those up with the astrological signs of the people currently in those roles and assigned performance reviews based on how well they matched"

Now I know why I never made CEO of my company; I believed in astronomy not  astrology!

[faberryman]

In what is a shocking, I say shocking, development, Trump declines to testify at the Senate trial next week. It is a blessing to all Americans.

https://apnews.com/article/house-dems-trump-testify-impeachment-8fd6b9f5724f48cc0f4e045ec8c37000

[digitaldog]

In what is a shocking, I say shocking, development, Trump declines to testify at the Senate trial next week. It is a blessing to all Americans.

https://apnews.com/article/house-dems-trump-testify-impeachment-8fd6b9f5724f48cc0f4e045ec8c37000

Subpoena time?

[faberryman]

Subpoena time?

If there is one thing we've learned over the past four years it is that Congressional subpoenas are not worth the paper they are written on.

[digitaldog]

If there is one thing we've learned over the past four years it is that Congressional subpoenas are not worth the paper they are written on.

But why?
I did find this; seems they should be effective (but then that's like saying Congress should be effective  )

The Supreme Court affirmed in Watkins v. United States that "[the] power of the Congress to conduct investigations is inherent in the legislative process" and that "[it] is unquestionably the duty of all citizens to cooperate with the Congress in its efforts to obtain the facts needed for intelligent legislative action. It is their unremitting obligation to respond to subpoenas, to respect the dignity of the Congress and its committees and to testify fully with respect to matters within the province of proper investigation."[12] Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas.

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States (1961),[13] a Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee's investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its chamber; second, the investigation must pursue "a valid legislative purpose" but does not need to involve legislation and does not need to specify the ultimate intent of Congress; and third, the specific inquiries must be pertinent to the subject matter area that has been authorized for investigation.

The Court held in Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund (1975)[14] that Congressional subpoenas are within the scope of the Speech and Debate clause which provides "an absolute bar to judicial interference" once it is determined that Members are acting within the "legitimate legislative sphere" with such compulsory process. Under that ruling, courts generally do not hear motions to quash Congressional subpoenas; even when executive branch officials refuse to comply, courts tend to rule that such matters are "political questions" unsuitable for judicial remedy. In fact, many legal rights usually associated with a judicial subpoena do not apply to a Congressional subpoena. For example, attorney-client privilege and information that is normally protected under the Trade Secrets Act do not need to be recognized.[15]

[Robert Roaldi]

Ms Greene was relieved of her committee duties today, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/04/marjorie-taylor-greene-house-vote-465855, although that article didn't specify on which committees she served. Or maybe she hasn't served on any yet, they're just acting pro-actively. If the system is anything like in Canada, representatives get extra pay for participation on committees, so she might lose the cash she might have received over and above her regular salary and perks.

From the article: << In a roughly five-minute speech, Greene distanced herself from her record of promoting conspiracy theories including QAnon, declaring, "I walked away from those things," and she said she did "regret" believing those falsehoods. >>

Up till now, I've associated the phrases "distanced" and "walk back" with barely concealed cynical journalistic reportage. Can adults just say, "I take it back" ?  Many politicians seem to.

In her testimony she also said that 9/11 and the school shootings were, in fact, real and not staged. From the article: << "School shootings are absolutely real. ... I also want to tell you 9/11 absolutely happened," Greene said in what many considered an extraordinary set of remarks for the House floor. >>

Extraordinary is right.

[kers]

Ms Greene was relieved of her committee duties today, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/04/marjorie-taylor-greene-house-vote-465855, although that article didn't specify on which committees she served. ...

In the Dutch news it says the comittees were about education and budget. 11 republicans voted against her and 199 supported her.

[faberryman]

Apropos of cancel culture, David Hogg, Parkland shooting survivor and outspoken critic of gun rights advocates, who you may remember seeing Marjorie Talylor Greene stalk and harass as he walked on the Capitol grounds, is considering forming a pillow company to run Mike Lindell aka the MyPillow Guy out of business. I'm not sure the idea will work. What sentient Democrat would currently buy a pillow from the MyPillow Guy? I don't think we would see too many Republicans cross over and buy a pillow from David Hogg. Just what we need: a Democratic pillow company and a Republican pillow company.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/david-hogg-launching-pillow-company-put-mypillow-out-business-n1256817

[faberryman]

But why?
I did find this; seems they should be effective (but then that's like saying Congress should be effective  )

The federal appeals court held earlier this year that congress couldn't use the courts to enforce its subpoenas against executive branch employees, which is who congress usually subpoenas. As far as ordinary citizens go, since subpoenas are enforced through the courts, subpoenaed parties can drag the process out interminably. If congress ultimately prevails, the subpoenaed party can take the 5th. Think about it. Congress subpoenas Trump to testify at the impeachment trial. He refuses. Months if not years later, Congress prevails in the courts. Trump shows up and takes the 5th. Obviously a complete waste of time. So the other alternative is for the subpoenaed party to skip the refusal and stall tactic in the courts, and just show up and take the 5th. Answering questions with "I don't remember" is also an effective ploy. Have you ever seen a video of a Trump deposition. "Who? Me? Huh? When? Oh. I don't remember." Then the lawyer gives Trump a document to refresh his recollection, to which Trump responds: "I can't read this. I don't have my glasses with me."

[Robert Roaldi]

The federal appeals court held earlier this year that congress couldn't use the courts to enforce its subpoenas against executive branch employees, which is who congress usually subpoenas. As far as ordinary citizens go, since subpoenas are enforced through the courts, subpoenaed parties can drag the process out interminably. If congress ultimately prevails, the subpoenaed party can take the 5th. Think about it. Congress subpoenas Trump to testify at the impeachment trial. He refuses. Months if not years later, Congress prevails in the courts. Trump shows up and takes the 5th. Obviously a complete waste of time. So the other alternative is for the subpoenaed party to skip the refusal and stall tactic in the courts, and just show up and take the 5th. Answering questions with "I don't remember" is also an effective ploy. Have you ever seen a video of a Trump deposition. "Who? Me? Huh? When? Oh. I don't remember." Then the lawyer gives Trump a document to refresh his recollection, to which Trump responds: "I can't read this. I don't have my glasses with me."

On TV cop shows, the police and prosecuting attorneys always feel righteously upset if the bad guy gets off on a technicality. The situation is always presented as if the system is preventing the good guys from protecting the public.

[jeremyrh]

Obviously why we have elections.

True enough but in the meantime what do people do if they need to know where Elvis is hiding, or whatever else they thought she knows the answer to?

[Robert Roaldi]

True enough but in the meantime what do people do if they need to know where Elvis is hiding, or whatever else they thought she knows the answer to?

If people vote the wrong person into office, they are going to suffer the consequences.

Imagine how African Americans felt during the Jim Crow era, and many of them probably didn't get a chance to vote for anyone.

But this does seem like a different kind of issue. Millions of people believe in pure fantasy, and the more you try to address this the more their beliefs seem to harden. I keep thinking of the book Fantasyland by Kurt Andersen, it's a good but depressing read.

[faberryman]

On TV cop shows, the police and prosecuting attorneys always feel righteously upset if the bad guy gets off on a technicality. The situation is always presented as if the system is preventing the good guys from protecting the public.

Getting off on a technicality is usually an indicia of someone screwing up.

[faberryman]

True enough but in the meantime what do people do if they need to know where Elvis is hiding, or whatever else they thought she knows the answer to?

Check the internet?

[digitaldog]

The federal appeals court held earlier this year that congress couldn't use the courts to enforce its subpoenas against executive branch employees, which is who congress usually subpoenas.

But despite Trump's language of who he is (45th, not former president), is he an executive branch employees?
Yes, it's a pointless attempt and yes, it would take months or years to enforce though the courts. At this point, I'm not sure the impeachment is even worthwhile doing but I agree, what Trump did deserves impeachment and some in congress should do their duty to do so. But more attention directed at "the Donald"? I'd rather not see that.
Stuck again between a rock and a hard place. 

[digitaldog]

Just caught this too:

Trump hopes to skip his impeachment trial. Democrats should subpoena him.
The Senate has ways of making him talk.
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/trump-hopes-skip-his-impeachment-trial-democrats-should-subpoena-him-n1256824

As Raskin noted in his letter to Trump, "the Supreme Court held just last year that you were not immune from legal process while serving as President — so there is no doubt that you can testify in these proceedings."

Second, the Senate has all the power it needs to guarantee Trump's cooperation — whether he wants to give it or not. The body's rules for impeachment trials state that the Senate has the power to "compel the attendance of witnesses" and "to enforce obedience to its orders, mandates, writes, precepts, and judgements." That same power is granted to Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who will preside over the trial in his role as Senate president pro tempore.

[faberryman]

Just caught this too:

Trump hopes to skip his impeachment trial. Democrats should subpoena him.
The Senate has ways of making him talk.
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/trump-hopes-skip-his-impeachment-trial-democrats-should-subpoena-him-n1256824

Of course I could be wrong, but I think there is zero probability that the Senate will invoke its so-called inherent subpoena power, and send the Senate sergeant-at-arms down to Mar-A-Lago to cuff Trump and haul him up to the witness stand for next week's trial. Is it theoretically possible? Yes. Is it going to happen? No. I do think, however, that there is a good chance that the House Managers will whip up a video compilation of Trump's greatest hits to show at the trial that should be fun to watch. I am dubious that it will change any votes. If 45 Republicans have already voted that the trial itself is unconstitutional, why would they vote to convict him? As I mentioned before, I think it is a blessing we won't have to see or hear from him.