Justice sotomayor said, look, even though the commission may have made commissioners may have made disparaging comments about religion, this was assessed by other entities, by courts, and there was no need to say that the context here affected t case. That these two individuals did face discrimination and it should be read as that. So they were the only two that broke off, but as i say, Justice Kennedy, i think he wanted to caution everyone in the courtroom, and probably anyone reading this opinion, that this is a very small step in the case of these particular men. Again, Justice Ginsburg and sotomayor said otherwise, but i think it really opens the door to what would come next from the next case. I would just add one other thing, Justice Kennedy noted that in 2012, when this had happened, colorado was not
is interesting, how this is going to play out over the next six months or so. And i said, well, explain. He said, well, is going to bed by republicans as an effort for freedom, for
Charge. The truth is in the history of this republic, theres never been a single party fraudulent Impeachment Process deployed against a president like the one thats being used against donald trump. Thats whats unprecedented here. Its not the claim that a president doesnt want to turn over witnesses or documents. That, as weve said many times today, is actually quite common. And by the way, lets remember it needs to be noted again that President Trump has consistently cooperated with this congress in fulfilling its oversight you are listening to one of the many hours of todays very Historic House Judiciary Committee hearing on the articles of impeachment against president donald trump. Our live continuing coverage will take place over this hour and further hours as needed. But we want to let you know how were going to cover this. Were keeping an eye on this hearing. We have reason to believe there could be a vote on the current amendment soon. The committees obviously been going full s
A single party fraudulent Impeachment Process deployed against the president like the one being used against donald trump. Thats whats unprecedented here. Its not the claim that a president doesnt want to turn over witnesses or documents. That as we said many times today is actually quite common. By the way, lets remember, noted again, President Trump has consistently cooperated with this congress in fulfilling its oversight and investigation responsibilities. I noticed the statistics this morning when we started, there were 25 Administration Officials that testified before the House Oversight this year and 25 at the House Judiciary Committee. At the start of the Impeachment Inquiry the white house produced more than 100,000 pages of documents to the oversight committee. In spite of their allegations, the democrats know President Trump has a lawful cause to challenge the subpoenas because they involve direct wln are
communications between high ranking advisors and a president. Thats ve
november will remember this christmas present. it goes back even further. if we want to talk about the sanctity of subpoenas, why do the majority we draw withdraw from the kauffmann suit? they could have stayed with that in court. no, it s a waste of time, we woerc won t do it. don t hand me high and mighty comments about process, it is about congress being petulant, we don t want what we don t want because we want it now. february of this year, acting attorney whittaker, remember this? many of you here wrote about this. they were trying to get acting attorney general whittaker here because they were trying to make political points as the year got started because there was nothing rolling yet. mueller hadn t happened and couldn t talk about it except in
panel and talk about the major news today. the impeachment, all of the things happening on the hill, we will continue to follow the house judiciary hearing as they get ready for a vote on articles of impeachment. right now, doug collins the ranking member from georgia. they could of had this and still stayed in court, it it s just a waste of time, not going to do it. don t hand me these high and mighty arguments about process, this is not about obstructing congress, it s about congress being petulant. and saying we don t want what we want, we wanted it now i can take you back to february, acting attorney general would occur here because they were trying to make political points before as the year got started because there was nothing rolling yet, mueller hadn t happened so they couldn t talk about it, bill barr wasn t sworn in yet and one week before bill barr was sworn in, we