Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
This article wasn't approved by the admins, so it would normally only be available to TotalFark subscribers. However, because some TotalFarkers have upvoted this submission, we're letting you see it. Posting new comments is still only available to TotalFark subscribers.

If you are a paid TotalFark subscriber, you must have cookies enabled in your browser. You can reset your cookie by logging in.

(The Hill)   Judges: Why should TFG get executive privilege when the Current Guy has waived it? TFG lawyers in Jim Carrey voice: "Because these documents are devastating to our case?"   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, President of the United States, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, former president, Democratic Party, Supreme Court of the United States, George W. Bush, district court judge  
•       •       •

451 clicks;  Favorite

15 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-11-30 6:13:15 PM  
"Clark argued that when Congress was creating the law, it debated how to avoid instances "where the archivist could be susceptible to possible pressure from the incumbent president to release embarrassing and inappropriate material concerning a predecessor or rival," saying that the lawmakers' intent behind the law was relevant in Trump's case.

That is not a reason to classify material. In fact in every training on the subject I have ever taken that is listed as a glaring misuse of the classification system and grounds to challenge something being classified.

I realize executive privilege is not the same as classification but all the same, "it could embarrassed someone rich and powerful" is a really shiatty reason to prevent the release of information.
 
2021-11-30 6:19:51 PM  
The lawyers then crumpled the document into a ball and exclaimed "A GOOSE!"
 
2021-11-30 8:51:16 PM  
Dump is 400 pounds of rotting carp that was left in the Arizona desert for a week in August, and he doesn't even know it.

He's nobody now.  He couldn't even carry a tiny fraction of the dignity and respect that the office of the presidency afforded him into his life as a private citizen.

He's a shart.

Sad.
 
2021-11-30 9:11:48 PM  
Burn him
 
2021-11-30 9:18:31 PM  
I'm surprised that their argument isn't simply that ex-Presidents are still addressed as "Mr. President" or "President" so therefore they should still have executive privilege.
 
2021-11-30 9:29:37 PM  
I actually think former Presidents should be allowed to invoke executive privileged for advice they received while President.  Of course, it would have to be advice related to their official duties and not breaking the f$cking law but that is another story.

Other countries have similar provisions like Canada which has something called Cabinet confidence.  When properly invoked it allows the Prime Minister to get frank and unvarnished advice without concern for how it will be spun politically.  The confidentiality does not disappear after the party leaves office nor should it.
 
2021-11-30 9:30:27 PM  

runwiz: I'm surprised that their argument isn't simply that ex-Presidents are still addressed as "Mr. President" or "President" so therefore they should still have executive privilege.


That is a stupid protocol.  I always hated it.
 
2021-11-30 9:50:53 PM  

markie_farkie: Dump is 400 pounds of rotting carp that was left in the Arizona desert for a week in August, and he doesn't even know it.

He's nobody now.  He couldn't even carry a tiny fraction of the dignity and respect that the office of the presidency afforded him into his life as a private citizen.

He's a shart.

Sad.


He's managed to instill himself as a pretender though. One who would burn this country to the ground and kill everyone in it in order to usurp the current government. And that's terrifying. Thank god he's such a stupid, cowardly, dipshiat.
 
2021-11-30 10:23:07 PM  

mrshowrules: I actually think former Presidents should be allowed to invoke executive privileged for advice they received while President.  Of course, it would have to be advice related to their official duties and not breaking the f$cking law but that is another story.

Other countries have similar provisions like Canada which has something called Cabinet confidence.  When properly invoked it allows the Prime Minister to get frank and unvarnished advice without concern for how it will be spun politically.  The confidentiality does not disappear after the party leaves office nor should it.


I'm okay with that, so long as there can be a Special Master (Or similar) to review it and determine what is or isn't legitimate advice, like what they do with lawyers.
 
2021-11-30 10:40:10 PM  

runwiz: I'm surprised that their argument isn't simply that ex-Presidents are still addressed as "Mr. President" or "President" so therefore they should still have executive privilege.


And for pretty much that exact potential ambiguity, I consider such treatment of former office holder a grievous error of protocol norms. Ex government office holder Smith ought never be referred to as "dogwasher Smith" but only "former dogwasher Smith", except if re-elected to the office or at their eulogy.
 
2021-11-30 11:36:07 PM  

Bootleg: mrshowrules: I actually think former Presidents should be allowed to invoke executive privileged for advice they received while President.  Of course, it would have to be advice related to their official duties and not breaking the f$cking law but that is another story.

Other countries have similar provisions like Canada which has something called Cabinet confidence.  When properly invoked it allows the Prime Minister to get frank and unvarnished advice without concern for how it will be spun politically.  The confidentiality does not disappear after the party leaves office nor should it.

I'm okay with that, so long as there can be a Special Master (Or similar) to review it and determine what is or isn't legitimate advice, like what they do with lawyers.


That's the thing.  It needs to be properly invoked at the time.  Not just a universal shield to protect criminal activity.
 
2021-12-01 12:35:19 AM  

markie_farkie: Dump is 400 pounds of rotting carp that was left in the Arizona desert for a week in August, and he doesn't even know it.

He's nobody now.  He couldn't even carry a tiny fraction of the dignity and respect that the office of the presidency afforded him into his life as a private citizen.

He's a shart.

Sad.


And yet he still commands a vast zombie army.
 
2021-12-01 12:41:36 AM  
 
2021-12-01 12:50:11 AM  

runwiz: I'm surprised that their argument isn't simply that ex-Presidents are still addressed as "Mr. President" or "President" so therefore they should still have executive privilege.


I'm waiting for the time when the lawyer goes all out and starts talking about the fringes on the flag in the courtroom.
 
2021-12-01 12:52:06 AM  
Oh? "Constitutional harm to the executive branch" in what way exactly?
Because isn't that the question the January 6th commission is asking? And why they're asking?

They're definitely on to something. It was just last week I believe, the commission stated this needs to be wrapped up and laid out in the open, in order to ensure the safety and security of the upcoming 2022 2024 elections."
 
Displayed 15 of 15 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.