Connect with us

Politics

Read Now: Trump and Steve Bannon Waive Executive Privilege they do not Have – 101 Latest News

Published

11 months ago

on

Trump and Steve Bannon Waive Executive Privilege they do not Have

#Trump #Steve #Bannon #Waive #Executive #Privilege

Steve Bannon.

 

Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon has agreed to testify before the congressional committee investigating the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol, and Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Bannon previously cited executive privilege as a reason to refuse the Committee’s subpoena. But he has changed that position after Trump sent a letter agreeing to waive the privilege if Bannon reaches an agreement with the Committee.

Inspired by Trump’s generous waiver, I hereby officially proclaim and declare that I am waiving the share of the spice revenue of Arrakis due to me as Sublime Padishah Emperor of the Known Universe! Are you not impressed by my generosity? If not, it might be because I’m not actually an Emperor, and do not actually have any spice revenue.

Much the same points apply to Trump’s “waiver.” Executive privilege is a power of the office of the presidency. Trump has not been president since January 20, 2021.  Since that date, he is no more the President of the United States than I am an Emperor. Therefore, he is no longer entitled to assert executive privilege.

The DC Circuit said exactly that  when it rejected Trump’s efforts to use executive privilege to shield White House documents from the January 6 Committee. In a January decision  refusing to block the release of the documents, the Supreme Court did not rule on the issue of former presidents’ privilege, but did conclude that Trump wasn’t entitled to assert executive privilege here, because he could not do so even if he were still in office. If that’s true of official White House records, it’s surely even more true of the testimony of a private citizen.

Even if he were still president, executive privilege would not give Trump the power to to restrict the testimony of private citizens. Executive privilege cannot extend to controlling people who aren’t part of the executive branch. If President Biden calls me up to discuss some issue (which he should do more often!), he can’t then use executive privilege to keep me from telling Congress about it.

Bannon was a White House employee back in 2017, until his acrimonious departure from the Trump administration. But he was a private citizen throughout the period covered by January 6 Committee investigation (late 2020 and early 2021).

It’s good that Trump lost the case over the release of the records, and that Bannon will have to testify. But it is unfortunate that the issue of former presidents’ supposed claims of executive privilege has not yet been fully resolved. The idea that such a privilege exists is a fallacious one, for reasons I summarized in my January post about the January 6 documents case:

If it exists at all (some scholars argue it does not), executive privilege is a power of the office of the presidency, and can only be wielded by the person who occupies the office at the time in question. Once he leaves office, he loses all the power and privileges associated with it, except perhaps those specifically extended by laws enacted by Congress (e.g. – pension rights and continuing security provided by the Secret Service). As the Court of Appeals opinion in this case explains, “the privilege, like all other Article II powers, resides with the sitting President.”

No one claims that a former president can continue to issue executive orders, receive ambassadors, or act as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He cannot keep on wielding any of those powers, even if he feels he needs to do so to prevent a successor from embarrassing him. The same logic applies to executive privilege. These are all powers of the office that expire as soon as the president’s term in office at ends. At that point, he has no more executive authority than any other private citizen.

I also addressed the standard rationale for allowing ex-presidents to wield the privilege – fear that otherwise their successors could authorize embarrassing revelations for political reasons, which in turn could in inhibit discussions with presidential advisers:

It’s true, as [Justice] Kavanaugh and others have pointed out, that this approach allows current presidents to release predecessors’ documents in ways that might embarrass the latter. Fear of such an eventuality might indeed inhibit current presidents’ deliberations with their advisers. But there are many things incumbent presidents can do that might embarrass predecessors, including reversing the latter’s policies in ways that make them look bad, blaming them for various problems, and so on. The possibility that such things might happen can potentially inhibit presidents from adopting various policies, as well as inhibit advisers from recommending a given course of action.

But the Constitution does not give former presidents any general power to block successors’ actions that might embarrass them. And, while fear of future embarrassment might sometimes inhibit good policies, it also can prevent bad ones. If future revelation of your activities in office might prove embarrassing, that may be because you’re doing something wrong!

Regardless, the Constitution does not grant executive privilege – or any other official power – to former presidents. Absent specific laws to the contrary, they should be treated as private citizens, on par with everyone else.

If potential embarrassment is enough to justify letting former presidents retain the power of executive privilege, why not other presidential powers, as well? To really protect himself against embarrassment after leaving office, perhaps a former president needs to retain control of the FBI and the CIA, so he can use those agencies to forestall unflattering revelations.

Down that road lies a pretty obvious slippery slope, one that would make a hash of the time-limited nature of presidential terms. That limitation is, of course, a key constitutional safeguard against the accumulation of power in a single person.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Read Now: Extra Bonus Quote of the Day – 101 Latest News

Published

5 hours ago

on

June 1, 2023

By

Quote of the Day

#Extra #Bonus #Quote #Day

“We are not interested in whether the allegations against Vice President Biden are accurate or not.”

— Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), on Fox News.


Continue Reading

Politics

Read Now: Sen. Tommy Tuberville's brother rebukes his racist sibling on social media – 101 Latest News

Published

6 hours ago

on

June 1, 2023

By

Sen. Tommy Tuberville's brother rebukes his racist sibling on social media

#Sen #Tommy #Tuberville039s #brother #rebukes #racist #sibling #social #media

They say the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, but apples do often roll in radically different directions: some end up in a rich and piquant Bavarian torte and others land in a McDonald’s pie that tastes like moist cardboard and appears destined for the quaggy, cankerous bowels of Donald John Trump. 

Similarly, siblings are often at opposite poles politically—and in numerous other ways. And these differences appear particularly stark when one sibling is a U.S. senator who continues to burnish his racist bona fides under the klieg lights of media scrutiny and the other is, well, not.

Such is the case with Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville and his brother Charles. Charles Tuberville, a Tulsa, Oklahoma-based singer, songwriter, and guitarist who’s played with notables such as B.B. King and Delbert McClinton, has taken note of Tommy’s frequent racist dog-whistling/vituperative vuvuzela-ing and is calling him out over his pig-ignorant comments.

RELATED STORY: Sen. Tuberville makes openly racist remarks on Don Jr.’s web show

AL.com:

The brother of U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville is speaking out on social media, saying he is “compelled to distance” himself from some of the lawmaker’s recent statements.

“Due to recent statements by him promoting racial stereotypes, white nationalism and other various controversial topics, I feel compelled to distance myself from his ignorant, hateful rants,” Charles Tuberville stated in a Facebook post.

“What I’m trying to say is that, I DO NOT agree with any of the vile rhetoric coming out of his mouth. Please don’t confuse my brother with me. Thanks, Charles Tuberville.”

Okay, so brothers often fight. That’s typical—and not really a big deal. And how bad can Sen. Tuberville’s public comments really be, huh? Well, we’ve researched this, and we now have an answer—and that answer is, “pretty fucking bad.”

For instance, in an interview last week on Donald Trump Jr.’s streaming show “Triggered,” Tuberville wondered aloud if teachers in the inner cities can even read. Because, you know, some sitting U.S. senators can barely read, and look how much they get paid for doing essentially nothing.

“The COVID really brought it out about how bad our schools are and how bad our teachers are, in the inner city. Most of them in the inner city, I don’t know how they got degrees,” Tuberville said. “I don’t know whether they can read and write. … And they want a raise. They want less time to work, less time in school. It’s just, we’ve ruined work ethic in this country. We don’t work at it anymore. We push an easy life.”

Yeah, imagine a country where a football coach who doesn’t know what the three branches of government are can just plop his ignorant ass into a U.S. Senate seat because he was endorsed by a shitty reality show host who spends the bulk of his morning tweeting obscenities on the toilet. That’s an education crisis of Brobdingnagian proportions. Also, if you’re trying to make a point about pervasive failures in our education system, maybe don’t start sentences with “The COVID.”

Of course, this isn’t the first time Tuberville has worn his racism on his sleeve. For instance, earlier this month, when asked if white nationalists should be allowed to serve in the military, he said, in reference to the Biden administration, “They call them that. I call them Americans.”

He then went on to elaborate, because why stop when you’re on a roll? “We are losing in the military so fast. Our readiness in terms of recruitment. And why? I’ll tell you why, because the Democrats are attacking our military, saying we need to get out the white extremists, the white nationalists, people that don’t believe in our agenda, as Joe Biden’s agenda. They’re destroying it.”

Yeah, I don’t know about you, but I really doubt that white nationalism makes our military stronger. How’s Vladimir Putin’s anti-woke army doing these days? 

And last October, in the run-up to the midterm elections, Tuberville had this to say of slavery reparations: “They’re not soft on crime,” Tuberville said in reference to Democrats. “They’re pro-crime. They want crime. They want crime because they want to take over what you got. They want to control what you have. They want reparation because they think the people that do the crime are owed that.”

Whoopsie. Looks like Tommy forgot his racist dogwhistle and was forced to trot out his Aryan airhorn. 

Many of us can sympathize with Charles, of course. Too many of us struggle to cope when family members—ignoring a coup attempt, bushels full of racism, overt mafia tactics, and literal calls to suspend the Constitution—go gaga each year over the return of their pumpkin-spiced Gotti. 

But imagine if your name were dragged through the mud on a daily basis like Charles’ is. You’d want to speak up, too. Thanks for letting us know what a shitheel your brother is, Charles. We get it. Oh, do we ever. But it’s nice to know not everyone in the Tuberville clan is quite as Klannish as Tommy.

Check out Aldous J. Pennyfarthing’s four-volume Trump-trashing compendium, including the finale, Goodbye, Asshat: 101 Farewell Letters to Donald Trump, at this link. Or, if you prefer a test drive, you can download the epilogue to Goodbye, Asshat for the low, low price of FREE.   

Continue Reading

Politics

Read Now: Karen Ocasio-Cortez: AOC Fumes Over Parody Account, Is Immediately Mocked – 101 Latest News

Published

6 hours ago

on

June 1, 2023

By

Karen Ocasio-Cortez: AOC Fumes Over Parody Account, Is Immediately Mocked

#Karen #OcasioCortez #AOC #Fumes #Parody #Account #Immediately #Mocked

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) felt the need to have a meltdown over a Twitter feed serving as a parody account of the congresswoman. Despite the fact that it is clearly labeled “parody,” the far-left socialist demanded action be taken.

She tweeted about the account on Tuesday, advising her followers that the policy statements released by the parody account are “false” and that she and her crack staff of cybersleuths are “assessing” how to move forward.

“FYI there’s a fake account on here impersonating me and going viral. The Twitter CEO has engaged it, boosting visibility,” she claimed. “It is releasing false policy statements and gaining spread.”

“I am assessing with my team how to move forward. In the meantime, be careful of what you see.”

The only thing missing from AOC’s statement is the word ‘Ackchyually’ and an admission that her real name is Karen. It’s also worth noting that the only reason she’d feel compelled to tell followers about a parody account they probably hadn’t heard of prior to this is because the parody looks an awful lot like reality.

RELATED: AOC Exposed: TPI’s Rusty Weiss Cracks Open Her False Claims After She Smack Talks Elon Musk

AOC Mocked For Calling Out Parody Account

The parody account operating in such stealth that AOC felt the need to warn her followers has the following handle: “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Press Release (parody).”

The account also has a short bio: “Saying the quiet part out loud. (parody).”

It has a blue check which indicates they are a subscriber, while AOC’s actual Twitter profile has a gray checkmark which indicates it is a verified government account.

Aside from labeling itself a “parody” twice and having different checkmarks, how is the average Ocasio-Cortez fan supposed to tell the difference? It’s a mystery …

AOC was mocked mercilessly by Twitter users who posted their own version of her tweet calling out the parody account.

Others pointed out that, being clearly labeled a ‘parody’ account, the AOC imposter is not violating Twitter’s terms of service and there isn’t much the devout socialist can do about it.

And others noted that maybe the problem isn’t the parody account itself, maybe it’s the congresswoman who constantly sounds like a parody.

But perhaps the best digs came from the parody account itself, as they continued to pummel her with comical tweets.

“I can’t believe people would think these parody tweets are from our office when they are clearly fake,” they wrote. “Come on y’all you know I would never say something as stupid as that.”

“FYI … I have no problem with parody accounts – just the ones that make fun of me,” they also tweeted.

RELATED: Elon Musk Nukes AOC for Complaining About Having to Pay $8/Month for ‘Blue Check’ Status

Elon Musk Engaged

AOC’s rage over Elon Musk engaging with the parody account stems from a tweet on Monday in which they parodied the fake romance between her and the Twitter chief.

“This might be the wine talking, but I’ve got a crush on @elonmusk,” they wrote.

Musk replied with a fire emoji.

That fire emoji tweet from Musk earned 1.8 million views. AOC calling out the parody account thus far has 29.6 million views.

Ironically, she did more to amplify the account than Musk did. By far. It’s the Streisand Effect.

Elon Musk and Ocasio-Cortez have been engaged in a Twitter spat for some time. It’s been a classic story of a cat and mouse romance – she, an impressionable former bartender with the intellectual heft of a pre-teen, he a shy billionaire.

AOC even sent a playful public message to Musk suggesting he had censored her on Twitter, all while dining on some lip-smacking good chicken nuggets.

Oh, that sultry vixen.

Musk has been ever the gentleman, even suggesting the couple go Dutch on their social media dates.

The parody account added another tweet which was semi-believable making it quite an effective piece of work.

“After brainstorming with my staff – I’m going to push Congress to make it illegal to joke, laugh, or make fun of me,” they wrote. “Parody should be illegal.”

Sounds real, doesn’t it?

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”


Continue Reading

Latest