The Trump Subpoena: Crisis or Opportunity?

Liberty Nation ^ | October 16, 2022 - 7:30 am | Tim Donner

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Should he or shouldn’t he? Should Donald Trump comply, ignore, stonewall – or flip the narrative – on the climactic demand of the January 6 Committee? Will the Trump subpoena, transparently timed for maximum effect in the waning days of the midterm election campaign, serve as another – and perhaps final – nail in the former president’s political and legal coffin? Or might it actually, ironically – and much to the horror of Democrats far and wide – achieve the opposite?

This was a classic October surprise in the fine tradition of the George W. Bush DWI revelation in 2000, Trump’s gross locker room-style video in 2016, and the Hunter Biden laptop story suppressed by big media in 2020 – only this time, it was perpetrated against a person not even on the ballot. But anyone paying attention to the months-long, scrupulously orchestrated Jan. 6 narrative rolled out by Trump’s enemies would likely not be taken aback by either the subpoena or the unanimous vote in favor of it. At the same time, the nation also witnessed the continued cowardice of Democrats in presenting as the face of the committee not one of their own, but an outlying Republican, despised by most in her own party and beaten to a pulp in a GOP primary – in a state where her father and family name were gold.

Indeed, Liz Cheney’s latest sanctimonious shilling benefitting the same Democrats against whom she has fought for her entire adult life until Trump came along, is yet another reminder of how she is, to say the least,...

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Didn’t mean to copy the ad. Should have looked first.

[DesertRhino]

If he ignores them, he wins.
If he sets the terms (live TV) and attends... ask Megan Kelly how that works out.

He is a TV expert, Kinzinger and Cheney are morons.

[Jim W N]

Anybody know the date for Trump to appear required on the subpoena?

[DesertRhino]

There is no path for the communists to win this LOL.

[BigEdLB]

Foreigners who think the Jan 6 hearing was so great doesn’t understand how illegal it was. The minority/opposition should be able to name who they want on the committee to question witnesses. Their members were disallowed and Pelosi got to name two anti trump RINOs. I have to hold my fire for now because a couple of these folks who thought the Jan 6 was so great have been helpful in my music stuff.

[TChad]

Dear Donald Trump,

Please don't get arrested.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

They hired a TV producer to orchestrate a one-sided made-for-TV movie out of it, complete with selective/deceptive editing.

[Chode]

Live, or kick rocks...

[plain talk]

I don’t see an upside for Trump in actually testifying. The dems will set perjury traps for him in such settings.

I think what Trump is doing is publicly stating he wants to testify knowing full well that his preconditions and the dems preconditions will not be reconciled.

So I see the thing dragging out in court.

[A Navy Vet]

Stonewall or just don't appear. What are the dem/socialists going to do after we take the House? All Trump needs is 2 months with legal wrangling and then its all moot. This entire TDS kangaroo court will be dismantled, or legally processed out. I can't wait to see the look on Liz Cheney's face.

For that matter, I can't wait to see the look on the faces of all the House socialists as they look for new lobbying/media/corporate/education jobs. I'd bet that behind closed doors they are talking about the best paying jobs amongst themselves, and/or they already have positions lined up. They know what's coming.

[NoLibZone]

The J6 protestors are American heroes. We should name streets, parks, hospitals and schools after them.

[Lower Deck]

The Trump Subpoena: Crisis or Opportunity?

Doesn't matter. It isn't going to happen.

[Lower Deck]

Anybody know the date for Trump to appear required on the subpoena?

No subpoena has been issued yet so no.

[Political Junkie Too]

Foreigners who think the Jan 6 hearing was so great doesn’t understand how illegal it was. The minority/opposition should be able to name who they want on the committee to question witnesses. Their members were disallowed and Pelosi got to name two anti trump RINOs.

Unfortunately, the Rules of the House of Representatives (117th Congress) allows Pelosi to do what she did. (Underlining mine)

RULE I
The Speaker

Committee appointment
11. The Speaker shall appoint all select, joint, and conference committees ordered by the House. At any time after an original appointment, the Speaker may remove Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner from, or appoint additional Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner to, a select or conference committee. In appointing Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner to conference committees, the Speaker shall appoint no less than a majority who generally supported the House position as determined by the Speaker, shall name those who are primarily responsible for the legislation, and shall, to the fullest extent feasible, include the principal proponents of the major provisions of the bill or resolution passed or adopted by the House.

Pelosi rejected McCarthy's picks and substituted her own. Where she violated the "spirit of the rule" was in removing the "principal proponents" like Jim Jordan and Jim Banks and replaced him with Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger who were hardly proponents.

Pelosi will argue that she complied "to the fullest extent feasible," because McCarthy's picks were going to be disruptive, despite that being what "proponents" are expected to do.

-PJ

[Susquehanna Patriot]

I would argue that there is a separation of powers issue. He was POTUS on January 6th, the office is not subservient to Congress. This will go to the courts if the the ballots cast (s)elects the demonkkraps to continue control of the House in 2022.

[A Navy Vet]

The irony of them cheating their way into the WH and Biteme’s/Handlers economy killing policies when they had more money with Trump, they didn’t realize people vote from their wallets. Guess, they forgot Clinton’s simple message, “It’s the economy, stupid.”

[Political Junkie Too]

If I were President Trump, I would defy the subpoena citing separation of powers. They are subpoenaing him for actions taken while President, and he was a coequal officer of the United States. He has no obligation to justify his actions as President in compelled testimony to Congress. That's what impeachment is for.

I'm sure it would go to court, but it wouldn't be heard until after the mid-terms and Trump's base would be energized by the defiance. His best strategy is to run out the clock.

He should decline to appear citing separation of powers, make the committee take him to court, let the mid-term elections happen, let Congress take its Thanksgiving and Christmas recesses, and the let the Committee expire when the new Congress is sworn in on January 3.

Democrats may argue that the subpoena is not legislation, and that the subpoena itself doesn't expire when the Congress does. The Department of Justice cannot do anything to President Trump regarding the subpoena until he actually fails to appear. If the Committee cannot set a date after Trump exercises his due process rights, and then the committee expires with the end of the 117th Congress, then the subpoena becomes moot.

-PJ

[Susquehanna Patriot]

I made the same separation of powers argument a couple of posts before yours. Thus far I have not seen any mention of this in the leftist media. They need to be very careful what the ask for, else obozo could be subpoenaed for General Flynn, spying on Trump, and a whole lot more.

The demonkkraps best outcome is optics for their bosses in the leftist media to spin ... that Trump resists and wins in a “radical right wing SUpreme Court”, ... they’ll say this shows he is a criminal in hiding, filibuster needs to be ended (if they are re-(s)elected to control the Senate in 2022), and the court need to be packed to prevent the continued degradation of [our democracy].

[Kathy in OC]

I guess you think Clinton shouldn’t have testified in Monica Lewinsky matter?