Quote from: Viper1 on October 23, 2019, 06:33:20 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on October 23, 2019, 02:10:19 AM

that is pathetic and lazy

You're such a hypocrit. I've engaged with you on the subpoena thing including digging up all sorts of governmental documents to back up my arguments and then you turned around and said you wouldn't do the same just like a true keyboard warrior who is "pathetic and lazy". You're not interested in the facts, just spreading opinion to convince the sheep to your bias.

Quote from: TECSHARE on October 23, 2019, 02:10:19 AM

You claimed congressional subpoenas were not legal documents

You seriously have a reading comprehension issue or only see what confirms your own bias. That's not what I've said at all.

Quote from: TECSHARE on October 23, 2019, 02:10:19 AM

I clearly provided an example of past congressional subpoenas and compared them to the letters requesting information they are calling "subpoenas"

Once again, you failed to "prove" anything. I showed you that what you provided was for hearings and not for investigations etc. I also showed straight from the government site that the "form" is only a sample and is meant as a guide as to what should be in the subpoena. It could be written on toilet paper but as long as it had the correct information it would be valid. For someone who claims to know "the law" you're really dense when it comes to this. I then proved proof that committees have wide ranging powers to issue their own subpoenas, which they authorize all on their own through appropriate signatures. I've also provided a link to a senate handbook that presents an subpoena in the form of a letter. The letter from the whitehouse itself acknowledge what you claim isn't a subpoena, is actually a subpoena. I guess you're right though and all that stuff straight from the government is wrong.

The fact that you can Google unrelated an non-applicable court cases means nothing. Those cases were regarding a corporation and an individual, not impeachment of a president. One is the state vs a corporation and the other is the legislative vs the executive branch. That is a HUGE difference. It is not my fault you are too ignorant to realize what you think is evidence is a steaming pile of unrelated dog shit. You don't even have the most rudimentary knowledge of law and are just Googling random shit and vomiting it up thinking it means something.

Quote from: Viper1 on October 19, 2019, 12:53:21 AM

Their subpoenas are different. i.e. they're not the same as a legal subpoenas.

Really? Looks pretty clear to me you are saying congressional subpoenas are not legal subpoenas.

Once again, you have zero actual understanding of what you are arguing. I showed you straight form your OWN LINK an example of an ACTUAL SUBPOENA used in an ACTUAL IMPEACHMENT and then I showed you THE ACTUAL letters the house is calling a "subpoena". A subpoena has requirements of information to be included in order to be a subpoena. Nancy Pelosi can shit in a box and call it a subpoena, that doesn't make it a subpoena. I never said they couldn't issue subpoenas, I said they DIDN'T issue any actual subpoenas. No The White House doesn't acknowledge they are subpoenas.

"In letters to State Department employees, the Committees have ominously threatened without any legal basis and before the Committees even issued a subpoena that [a]ny failure to appear in response to a mere letter request for a deposition shall constitute evidence of obstruction."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/excerpts-white-house-letter-to-house-democrats-regarding-their-unconstitutional-inquiry/