midsouthracing.com Forum Index
Comp Cams
TCI
Dirty Girl Racewear Dirt Heads Crowley's Ridge Raceway
I-30 New Vision Your Ad
Your Ad George Kell Sign Co. Smileys Racing Products

 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Subscribe 
 

Rut roh
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    midsouthracing.com Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tilley88



Joined: 02 Jun 2015
Posts: 3246

PostPosted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
tilley88 wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
If there was nothing in this memo as PT wants us to believe and it does not have the type of information that the Congressman suggest.

Then you can guarantee that the dems would have made sure it was leaked to the public instead of fighting so hard as they did to keep it from the committee.

Dems fought for sometime to keep this and other memos from the Congressional committee. The agencies involved even ignored a court order to release the materials to congress.


Can we apply this same logic as to why the White House is exercising Executive Priviledge when it comes to Bannon having to answer questions about Russia/Comey? Let me guess, this is "different"


Did he?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-kelly/white-house-did-not-tell-bannon-to-invoke-executive-privilege-kelly-idUSKBN1F636G


Did Gannon answer questions or did he refuse? My point stands.

Quote:
Bannon's lawyer, Bill Burck, tells Jonathan Swan: "We were told by White House lawyers that Mr. Bannon was not authorized to speak about his time on the transition or in the White House until the Committee and the White House agreed on the proper scope of questioning. ... Perhaps [Kelly is] saying that the White House did not ask Mr. Bannon to invoke executive privilege in the formal legal sense."


Why did you change your original question?

You first asked WHY THE WHITE HOUSE is exercising executive privilege.

Then when your claim was debunked you change your question regarding Bannon answering questions.

Cannot change questions mid stream when the answer does not fit your agenda.


Tilley pointed out some new information that "executive priviledge" was not formally asked. However, the White House was attempting to impede the testimony of Bannon, which is my point and doesn't change anything. My question to you is still valid, so I will sit back and wait for your response on how the two situations are different. I fully expect you to either completely deflect or try to spin some bullsh!t like you normally do.


Like yo do?
_________________
When liberal heads explode, there's not much of a mess to clean up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeverTrustAMidget



Joined: 06 Oct 2007
Posts: 13253

PostPosted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tilley88 wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
tilley88 wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
If there was nothing in this memo as PT wants us to believe and it does not have the type of information that the Congressman suggest.

Then you can guarantee that the dems would have made sure it was leaked to the public instead of fighting so hard as they did to keep it from the committee.

Dems fought for sometime to keep this and other memos from the Congressional committee. The agencies involved even ignored a court order to release the materials to congress.


Can we apply this same logic as to why the White House is exercising Executive Priviledge when it comes to Bannon having to answer questions about Russia/Comey? Let me guess, this is "different"


Did he?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-kelly/white-house-did-not-tell-bannon-to-invoke-executive-privilege-kelly-idUSKBN1F636G


Did Gannon answer questions or did he refuse? My point stands.

Quote:
Bannon's lawyer, Bill Burck, tells Jonathan Swan: "We were told by White House lawyers that Mr. Bannon was not authorized to speak about his time on the transition or in the White House until the Committee and the White House agreed on the proper scope of questioning. ... Perhaps [Kelly is] saying that the White House did not ask Mr. Bannon to invoke executive privilege in the formal legal sense."


Why did you change your original question?

You first asked WHY THE WHITE HOUSE is exercising executive privilege.

Then when your claim was debunked you change your question regarding Bannon answering questions.

Cannot change questions mid stream when the answer does not fit your agenda.


Tilley pointed out some new information that "executive priviledge" was not formally asked. However, the White House was attempting to impede the testimony of Bannon, which is my point and doesn't change anything. My question to you is still valid, so I will sit back and wait for your response on how the two situations are different. I fully expect you to either completely deflect or try to spin some bullsh!t like you normally do.


Like yo do?


Like big time diversion. He made a specific claim and it was debunked so he just tries to hee and haw in an attempt to change the focus. love to watch liberal squirm when they are caught like a deer in the headlights.
_________________
,
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PV=nRT



Joined: 14 Jun 2012
Posts: 3618

PostPosted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
tilley88 wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
tilley88 wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
If there was nothing in this memo as PT wants us to believe and it does not have the type of information that the Congressman suggest.

Then you can guarantee that the dems would have made sure it was leaked to the public instead of fighting so hard as they did to keep it from the committee.

Dems fought for sometime to keep this and other memos from the Congressional committee. The agencies involved even ignored a court order to release the materials to congress.


Can we apply this same logic as to why the White House is exercising Executive Priviledge when it comes to Bannon having to answer questions about Russia/Comey? Let me guess, this is "different"


Did he?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-kelly/white-house-did-not-tell-bannon-to-invoke-executive-privilege-kelly-idUSKBN1F636G


Did Gannon answer questions or did he refuse? My point stands.

Quote:
Bannon's lawyer, Bill Burck, tells Jonathan Swan: "We were told by White House lawyers that Mr. Bannon was not authorized to speak about his time on the transition or in the White House until the Committee and the White House agreed on the proper scope of questioning. ... Perhaps [Kelly is] saying that the White House did not ask Mr. Bannon to invoke executive privilege in the formal legal sense."


Why did you change your original question?

You first asked WHY THE WHITE HOUSE is exercising executive privilege.

Then when your claim was debunked you change your question regarding Bannon answering questions.

Cannot change questions mid stream when the answer does not fit your agenda.


Tilley pointed out some new information that "executive priviledge" was not formally asked. However, the White House was attempting to impede the testimony of Bannon, which is my point and doesn't change anything. My question to you is still valid, so I will sit back and wait for your response on how the two situations are different. I fully expect you to either completely deflect or try to spin some bullsh!t like you normally do.


Like yo do?


Like big time diversion. He made a specific claim and it was debunked so he just tries to hee and haw in an attempt to change the focus. love to watch liberal squirm when they are caught like a deer in the headlights.


I called it!! You chose to go full deflection. I understand because this was really this is really your only choice since I put a pretty good b!tch slap on you.



Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mudslinger47



Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 10603
Location: Central Coast of Ca

PostPosted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
tilley88 wrote:
PV=nRT wrote:
NeverTrustAMidget wrote:
If there was nothing in this memo as PT wants us to believe and it does not have the type of information that the Congressman suggest.

Then you can guarantee that the dems would have made sure it was leaked to the public instead of fighting so hard as they did to keep it from the committee.

Dems fought for sometime to keep this and other memos from the Congressional committee. The agencies involved even ignored a court order to release the materials to congress.


Can we apply this same logic as to why the White House is exercising Executive Priviledge when it comes to Bannon having to answer questions about Russia/Comey? Let me guess, this is "different"


Did he?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-kelly/white-house-did-not-tell-bannon-to-invoke-executive-privilege-kelly-idUSKBN1F636G


Did Gannon answer questions or did he refuse? My point stands.

Quote:
Bannon's lawyer, Bill Burck, tells Jonathan Swan: "We were told by White House lawyers that Mr. Bannon was not authorized to speak about his time on the transition or in the White House until the Committee and the White House agreed on the proper scope of questioning. ... Perhaps [Kelly is] saying that the White House did not ask Mr. Bannon to invoke executive privilege in the formal legal sense."


Why did you change your original question?

You first asked WHY THE WHITE HOUSE is exercising executive privilege.

Then when your claim was debunked you change your question regarding Bannon answering questions.

Cannot change questions mid stream when the answer does not fit your agenda.


Tilley pointed out some new information that "executive priviledge" was not formally asked. However, the White House was attempting to impede the testimony of Bannon, which is my point and doesn't change anything. My question to you is still valid, so I will sit back and wait for your response on how the two situations are different. I fully expect you to either completely deflect or try to spin some bullsh!t like you normally do.


I don't know how to put this with out damaging your snowflake outlook, but you're wrong...White House did not use executive Privilege and Bannon can't... so your wrong on both...citing an LA Times article....
_________________
Schmit Samiches for all the libs!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PsychoTrack



Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Posts: 11858

PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My understanding of that hearing was that Bannon DID try to use the 5th on the very first question. He was promptly schooled how the 5th works and how he could not use it for anything having to do with the campaign or the transition. He also tried to claim Executive Privilege and again he and his lawyer were schooled on how and when that could be used. At that point he just clammed up and refused to speak another word. His actions have been described by several as being "contemptuous". I don't think that the FBI, the Special Counsel or anyone from the congressional investigations will like being toyed with. LOCK HIM UP!!!!!!

And the investigations continue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
_________________
Common folk embrace religion. Wise ones reject it. Rulers find it useful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tilley88



Joined: 02 Jun 2015
Posts: 3246

PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PsychoTrack wrote:
My understanding of that hearing was that Bannon DID try to use the 5th on the very first question. He was promptly schooled how the 5th works and how he could not use it for anything having to do with the campaign or the transition. He also tried to claim Executive Privilege and again he and his lawyer were schooled on how and when that could be used. At that point he just clammed up and refused to speak another word. His actions have been described by several as being "contemptuous". I don't think that the FBI, the Special Counsel or anyone from the congressional investigations will like being toyed with. LOCK HIM UP!!!!!!

And the investigations continue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


Your understanding? Lol. Iím sure you can provide a link to back that up. Am I right?
_________________
When liberal heads explode, there's not much of a mess to clean up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PsychoTrack



Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Posts: 11858

PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 1:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Read up on it, tillyjo.

And the investigations continue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
_________________
Common folk embrace religion. Wise ones reject it. Rulers find it useful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    midsouthracing.com Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group