Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 73 posts

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#61

Post by salawat »

dylan604 wrote: post #12
hypeatei wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/roger-stone-found-guilty-... > Stone was found guilty of obstruction of a congressional investigation, five counts of making false statements to Congress, and tampering with a witness

And then pardoned by Trump

...Were those judiciary findings or legislative? I don't actually think that the President can Pardon someone incarcerated by the Legislature.

Maybe the solution to all this mess is for Congress to finally flex the Sergeant-at-Arms position. While there is a delegation to the Department of Justice for efficiency sake, there technically isn't anything preventing the Legislature from doing it's own footwork.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#62

Post by BuckRogers »

collingreen wrote: post #58
BuckRogers wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is a funny take. I'm imagining you unironically telling yourself that ONLY immigration laws matter and you're happy the administration is breaking other ones.

[flagged]

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#63

Post by BuckRogers »

tombert wrote: post #59
BuckRogers wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I’m not sure what to tell you if you don’t understand the difference between an elected official actively and purposefully defying the constitution in order to directly weaken our institutions, and people wanting our immigration laws to be less strict.

You probably don't have to tell me anything, because I'd be right and you'd be wrong. "Wanting" immigration laws to be "less strict" (mass illegal immigration in the tens of millions, sensible) != breaking the law. The mental gymnastics people do to fit in with their chosen ideology is insane to see, worse when your mouths open up and try to explain these broken thoughts.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#64

Post by tombert »

BuckRogers wrote: post #63
tombert wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure what to tell you if you don’t understand the difference between an elected official actively and purposefully defying the constitution in order to directly weaken our institutions, and people wanting our immigration laws to be less strict.

You probably don't have to tell me anything, because I'd be right and you'd be wrong. "Wanting" immigration laws to be "less strict" (mass illegal immigration in the tens of millions, sensible) != breaking the law. The mental gymnastics people do to fit in with their chosen ideology is insane to see, worse when your mouths open up and try to explain these broken thoughts.

I didn't say that. I said it's not the same an elected official actively defying and trying to weaken constitutional law.

I'm not sure what kind of whataboutism gymnastics you're trying to pull.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#65

Post by jacquesm »

PearlRiver wrote: post #51
elfly wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right but who is going to prosecute? the Department of Justice?

You know you have to give Nixon credit he slinked away before it ended in a shoot out between the SS and the FBI on the White House lawn.

In a way that might have been preferable. It would raise the bar a bit. No doubt Trump is aware of what happened to Nixon and thought 'ok, so you can get away with it' and then realized that in this situation he could just completely ignore any kind of potential fall out. The thing that boggles the mind is that this could be fixed in 24 hours.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#66

Post by jacquesm »

autoexec wrote: post #32
josefritzishere wrote: post #3

That sounds like someone wants to hide the evidence.

That "someone" isn't just Trump. He's 80. He'll be lucky if he lives out the rest of his term. The odds of him still being alive 5 years after his presidency when his records could start to fall into the hands of the public are very very slim. I don't think this is for him and his many many crimes as much as it is being set up for those who will come after him and the many more crimes they have planned for the future…

They'll just replace him with the next stooge.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#67

Post by mindslight »

tombert wrote: post #64
BuckRogers wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You probably don't have to tell me anything, because I'd be right and you'd be wrong. "Wanting" immigration laws to be "less strict" (mass illegal immigration in the tens of millions, sensible) != breaking the law. The mental gymnastics people do to fit in with their chosen ideology is insane to see, worse when your mouths open up and try to explain these broken thoughts.

I didn't say that. I said it's not the same an elected official actively defying and trying to weaken constitutional law. I'm not sure what kind of whataboutism gymnastics you're trying to pull.

The kind of gymnastics where they're justified burning our society down because that society dared to give nominally equal rights to colored folks. Claiming it's about immigration law enforcement is just the same disingenuous smokescreen as the rest of their movement's appeals to lofty ideals.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#68

Post by dylan604 »

salawat wrote: post #61
dylan604 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then pardoned by Trump

...Were those judiciary findings or legislative? I don't actually think that the President can Pardon someone incarcerated by the Legislature. Maybe the solution to all this mess is for Congress to finally flex the Sergeant-at-Arms position. While there is a delegation to the Department of Justice for efficiency sake, there technically isn't anything preventing the Legislature from doing it's own footwork.

This Congress? Flex? Against this POTUS? Not going to happen.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#69

Post by BuckRogers »

mindslight wrote: post #67
tombert wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say that. I said it's not the same an elected official actively defying and trying to weaken constitutional law. I'm not sure what kind of whataboutism gymnastics you're trying to pull.

The kind of gymnastics where they're justified burning our society down because that society dared to give nominally equal rights to colored folks. Claiming it's about immigration law enforcement is just the same disingenuous smokescreen as the rest of their movement's appeals to lofty ideals.

>Claiming it's about immigration law enforcement is just the same disingenuous smokescreen

That’s not a claim. It’s the truth. You guys are totally lost.

Re: DOJ wants to scrap Watergate-era rule that makes presidential records public

#70

Post by tombert »

BuckRogers wrote: post #69
mindslight wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The kind of gymnastics where they're justified burning our society down because that society dared to give nominally equal rights to colored folks. Claiming it's about immigration law enforcement is just the same disingenuous smokescreen as the rest of their movement's appeals to lofty ideals.

>Claiming it's about immigration law enforcement is just the same disingenuous smokescreen That’s not a claim. It’s the truth. You guys are totally lost.

Again, even if I agreed with your take on immigration, it’s in no way equivalent to the guy with the nuclear codes actively avoiding the constitutional framework.

Feel free to keep going on about how horrible illegal immigration is if you want. You can keep mentioning it for hours, but it still won’t actually be a real response to anything I said.

Post reply on HN