Chairman Nadler Issues Subpoena For White House Lawyer Don McGahn…

Speaker Pelosi and Judiciary Chairman Nadler ‘s ‘obstruction‘ impeachment plan relies heavily on the use of former White House legal counsel Don McGahn.  The importance of McGahn is why Weissmann and Mueller invested so much time and energy parsing questioning McGahn through more than 30 hours of testimony.

Today, Chairman Nadler has issued a subpoena for McGahn to appear before congress for testimony.  Interestingly Nadler puts the demand date as May 21st, 2019; this would be ahead of the date (May 23rd) he has established for Robert Mueller to appear.

(Link to Tweet)

With all of these dates firming up on the calendar, the launch of the ‘chosen’ 2020 DNC presidential candidate must be very close.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Election 2020, FBI, Legislation, media bias, Nancy Pelosi. Bookmark the permalink.

205 Responses to Chairman Nadler Issues Subpoena For White House Lawyer Don McGahn…

  1. Laramie Evan says:

    Why is Don McGahn testifying? Why is he quoted relaying anything in the Weissman/Mueller report?

    Did Trump waive the attorney-client privilege???

    Liked by 1 person

    • Laramie Evan says:

      Answering my own question. This from a WSJ article:

      “Mr. McGahn said that he had no choice but to reveal to investigators the president’s attempt to have Mr. Mueller fired because he was not protected by attorney-client privilege in his role as White House counsel, a post that exists to protect the presidency itself, rather than the president.”

      As any 1st year law student knows, this is utter and complete rubbish. Only the client can waive the attorney-client privilege. Only the client. Let that sink in.

      If Trump isn’t the “client” but only the “presidency” is, then who can waive the privilege (or, more accurately, refuse to waive it)? Only an inanimate office of the presidency? Balderdash!

      This confirms that McGahn is the traitor. There’s no two ways about it. Any lawyer — and I are one — understands that you can’t reveal client communications like this.

      McGahn needs to be disbarred. This is a blatant and obvious disregard of very basic ethical rules.

      Liked by 21 people

      • DeAnna Vaughn says:

        Deep State probably has dirt on McGahn. He’s likely being blackmailed to help support the impeachment effort of the Dems. This has the same MO as Justice Roberts calling the Obamacare fine a “tax”.

        Liked by 3 people

        • jeff montanye says:

          and that was two years before antonin had his scaliattack at cibolo creek. what if a week before hillary clinton told both holder and lynch, separately, that if they played their cards right they’d get named to the supreme court. a week later it made more sense. also what might happen if they didn’t.

          Like

      • Lester Smith says:

        Did he sing or did he compose? Did he receive immunity to pay for his songs?

        Like

        • PVCDroid says:

          I think McGahn will say it was a case of misinterpretation. Trump was not trying to eliminate the SC but felt Mueller had too many conflicts of interest and wanted him specifically replaced. If McGahn was after Trump, he would have provided the ammo to SC previously.

          Liked by 1 person

      • oldumb says:

        The president, in charge of the Office of the President, decline any executive privilege. That meant McGahn, was free/obligated to answer questions as well as turn over documents and copious notes from every meeting with the president.
        Not a traitor, doing as he was told.

        Like

        • L_dave says:

          That’s not necessarily true. The president could waive executive privilege and disclose communications between himself and other WH staffers while preserving attorney-client privilege with McGahn.

          Like

          • oldumb says:

            But he did not preserve ANY privilege with anyone – at all. Fact. As I said they even provided the notes, that rudy said would take 15 hours to read.

            Like

            • jeff montanye says:

              they just cannot believe the old, orange p grabber is less corrupt than they are and than bush, mccain, romney, . . . .

              Like

    • spoogels says:

      Trump can block it.

      On the other hand Trump already waived privilege in allowing him to testify to Mueller.

      But can attorney client privilege still hold for:
      1. a different questioner?
      2. A different venue ie Congress?
      3. He already testified?

      What happened to those who ignored subpoenas in the last 2 years from a GOP majority Congress?

      Liked by 2 people

    • CHenie says:

      SD pointed out that McGhan was “WH counsel” not Counsel to the President-I suppose there’s a difference. Man-they were lined up to shive DJT the day he stepped into the WH. Trump couldn’t wait to get to work and get things done-so he had to have some positions filled and took some bad advice-INTENTIONAL bad advice-the DS took advantage of Trump’s eagerness.

      Like

    • Phil Bacon says:

      Read the Trump TRO filing. It has a lots of citations on the powers of Congressional committees to execute subpoenas, namely it must be based on a legislative interest and not merely to disclose for the sake of embarrassment. And, if it is for investigative or law enforcement purposes, it is outside the power of Congress.

      Don’t know what the Nadler action was based upon, but I haven’t picked up any indication of legislative intent.

      Liked by 1 person

    • sat0422 says:

      If this is all the House of Representatives has to do, continue a witch hunt and not engage in productive business of governing for the people, by the people, then it is time to do a “lock out” of the halls of Congress. This crap has been going on for years now and if any American can’t see the danger they pose to the general population, then we are truly going down to the basement to be taken care of by our government. Be afraid but support Trump and the Constitution.

      Liked by 2 people

      • jeff montanye says:

        perhaps patience is in order. doubt this will play better with a substantially innocent trump than it did with a substantially guilty bill clinton. he was impeached, disbarred and paid damages, and still picked up seats, very uncharacteristically, in the next by election.

        bring it on. just be sure not to muddy the prosecutions of the (very large) “small group” that must proceed properly.

        Like

  2. Blind no longer says:

    So many corrupt never Trump bastards to despise… How does one pick whose #1? McGahn is probably best buds with George Conway! I wonder if he came with a Reince Preibus recommendation? That would make sense -rhino establishment all the way! Maybe even Mitch McConnell.

    Liked by 6 people

    • De Oppresso Liber says:

      Every damn one of these impeachment “leaders” should be prosecuted for TREASON just as much as the coup plotters themselves. These impeachment efforts are nothing more than a continued effort to remove our duly elected president because their initial coup plot failed. ALL TRAITORS should receive e TRAITOR’s fate – a noose at the gallows.

      MAGA!

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Zorro says:

    McGahn can only testify to the same things he said in the Weissmann Dossier. He can’t contradict it. So it will be yet another round of innuendo, accusations, and impeachment talk.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Austin Holdout says:

    More than a month out because the media will hype it for a month as the key to impeachment. They could do it next week if it wasn’t a publicity stunt. Looks like they’re not going impeachment OR no impeachment following today’s big pow wow. They’re just going to draw out the innuendo ad nauseum.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Mark McQueen says:

    I’d like to know what Treepers think the odds are of Articles of Impeachment being introduced in the House. I say less than 5%.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Blind no longer says:

      I think they go for it Mark. They may go full bore psycho lunatic by June, just to prove they can! The derangement is REAL!

      Liked by 6 people

      • If AG Barr indicts any Dem for any charge, they will go full-tilt bozo against PDJT. Pelosi and Schumer will be collateral damage and will lose their leadership positions.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sherri Young says:

        No way that Al Green will sit down and shut up about impeachment. Hasn’t he dropped articles of impeachment into the hopper about three times already?

        Liked by 3 people

      • CHenie says:

        There intent, of course, is to inflict max damage to the POTUS-haven’t heard from Barr-oh, that’s right, now we’re waiting on the IG report while the Dems go wild.
        Oh and what about the “Criminal Referral letter” Nunes sent to Barr-it was nothing more than “we really need to chat about this , you know, when you get a chance.”

        Until proven otherwise Barr is DS-remember the Senate confirmed Barr-so there was either a deal cut or Barr lied to them and is goingto prosecute the offenders. I think it’s the former.

        Like

    • huecowacko says:

      Much greater, they’ve got a script and they’ll stick to it.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Cane Hunter says:

      Agree Mark

      This is all for show. 4 years of impeachment talk only in the hopes of convincing the electorate that Trump is bad; and who could possibly support a president who spent his entire first term “almost” getting impeached

      Liked by 3 people

    • A Moderate Man says:

      I say there is a 85% chance they will put forth Articles of Impeachment… then after that they will be swallowed by the kraken!

      Liked by 2 people

    • aarmad says:

      They will introduce impeachment in the house, it will come much farther down the road. They have way too many hearings to do before they do impeachment. When it gets close to the 2020 election, then you will see them ramp up impeachment. Probably around this time next year.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. John Rawls says:

    According to Mueller, when Trump asked McGahn to correct the record, Trump might have obstructed his own possible obstruction. Mueller has a bird’s brain.

    Like

  7. Hopper Creek says:

    Like MY President said to Nancy,
    ” TWO can play this game.” ….Timing is Everything……

    Liked by 3 people

    • Lester Smith says:

      One forgets trump has had to deal with much tough shit bags as a developer in New York. He has had to navigate unions the mob and so on. The democrats are Bush league compared to the bastards trump has had to deal with all his life. Not only has trump survive but he has prospered. Let the dems keep their shit up their in for one hell of a surprise. Trump has the gas and the lighter. The dems have the wood and paper. Trump is going to torch these bastards.

      Liked by 5 people

  8. Carrie says:

    An earlier post mentioned that Mueller had access to Flynn through McGahn. So it looks like McGahn was in on this from the get go. So if Bossie recommended McGahn, who else did he recommend? Who did McGahn recommend for positions? Are there any Strozk texts yet to be uncovered that mention McGahn? Who in the Mueller crew is he linked to and how? There are still some threads there that need to be found so we can see more of the bad actors…

    Liked by 2 people

  9. The Devilbat says:

    I think it’s pretty clear that the democrats are in for a number of yuge and very nasty surprises. The tide has turned and these idiots have no idea as to what is about to hit them.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Annie says:

    I’ll be SHOCKED if Mueller gives sworn, public testimony. SHOCKED.

    Also: what good lawyer, having given 30 hours of transcribed testimony previously, would then agree to give sworn, public testimony – AGAIN? What’s that saying about the lawyer who represents himself? He has a fool for a client?

    None of this makes any sense – legally – for them – to do. Or maybe I’m just not corrupt enough.

    Like

  11. CHenie says:

    On the one hand the Dems have no other choice than to proceed on this path-they never expected Cankles to lose-on the other hand they have no other choice.

    Master Decepticon Mitch has been quiet-nothing unusual there-he’s GOT TO GO Kentucky.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. bluecat57 says:

    Just doing that so Trump envokes Executive Privilege and they can they say “Trump evoked Executive Privilege in the Russia investigation. (I’m checking my spelling. I’m American but since I use a UK voice, love that accent, my spell checker is as confused as I am.)

    Like

  13. 6x47 says:

    McGahan, if he appears, should simply assert attorney/client privilege and executive privilege to every single question he is asked. Stonewall like Peter Strzok without that smirking snake dance.

    Like

  14. Zippy says:

    Take every one of these subpoenas to court, all the way to the SCOTUS if needed. I’ll bet they will all be found to have no standing because this all boils down to nothing less than this:

    “Show me the man, and I’ll find you the crime.” – Lavrentiy Beria, head of Joseph Stalin’s secret police

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s