So? If that’s the stipulation, then what is the Court (or Trump) worried about?https://twitter.com/baseballcrank/status/1285228136439914497 …
1. Of course it is understandable that political actors would want to pursue a political objective. 2. The Vance case is different. It's a law enforcement purpose, and the Court upheld that rather than remanding for further inquiry.
-
-
The Court already invented a new standard for congressional subpoenas of a president’s records, in this case records that normal presidents produce voluntarily before taking office, as a matter of course. Now it’s slow walking efforts to meet those standards. Ok, understood.
-
Normal presidents produce those voluntarily as part of political campaigns. They do lots of things in political campaigns that do not thereby become proper subjects for a Congressional subpoena.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.