Sen. Lindsey Graham asks the Supreme Court to block a subpoena from an Atlanta grand jury investigating 2020 election interference

[Scott]

 

CNN  — 

Sen. Lindsey Graham asked the Supreme Court on Friday to block a subpoena from the Atlanta-area special grand jury investigating efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.

The South Carolina Republican filed the emergency request at the high court after the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a lower-court judge on Thursday that the grand jury could seek his testimony.

Graham maintains that his efforts in Georgia after the 2020 election were legislative activities protected by the Speech or Debate Clause of the US Constitution.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/21/politics/lindsey-graham-supreme-court-appeal/index.html

[Scott]

Troll post and replies removed.  

[Chomper Higgot]

Here’s the thing that matters.

 

Graham is not the target of the Investigation, he’s being called to give evidence against the target.

 

The target is Trump.

 

What has Graham to lose, go in, take the oath, tell the truth.

 

Unless of course he fears some kind of reprisal from Trump.

[riclag]

If the scotus refuses Graham request and lets the 11th circuit ruling stand , thats a good thing! 
Immunity from debate in the constitution which he’s using as a grounds not to testify lets many of these politicians on both sides escape being accountable( other than election)for their accusations and actions.

 

Imop Need a Supreme ruling

”only” if it helps preserve the rights under the constitution! 

Congressional members have enjoyed over the years a great amount of lead way for their speech  and actions while conducting duties.. 

 “In order to enable and encourage a representative of the public to discharge his public trust with firmness and success, it is indispensably necessary that he should be protected from the resentment of every one however powerful to whom the exercise of that liberty may occasion offense”.

https://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1952042500

 

Edited October 22, 2022 by riclag

[placeholder]

19 minutes ago, riclag said:

If the scotus refuses Graham request and lets the 11th circuit ruling stand , thats a good thing! 
Immunity from debate in the constitution which he’s using as a grounds not to testify lets many of these politicians on both sides escape being accountable( other than election)for their accusations and actions.

 

Imop Need a Supreme ruling

”only” if it helps preserve the rights under the constitution! 

Congressional members have enjoyed over the years a great amount of lead way for their speech  and actions while conducting duties.. 

 “In order to enable and encourage a representative of the public to discharge his public trust with firmness and success, it is indispensably necessary that he should be protected from the resentment of every one however powerful to whom the exercise of that liberty may occasion offense”.

https://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1952042500

 

The courts ruled that for obvious reason what Graham was doing had nothing to do with his legislative duties. He was assisting a Presidential candidate. What has that got do do with actually legislating?

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, riclag said:

If the scotus refuses Graham request and lets the 11th circuit ruling stand , thats a good thing! 
Immunity from debate in the constitution which he’s using as a grounds not to testify lets many of these politicians on both sides escape being accountable( other than election)for their accusations and actions.

 

Imop Need a Supreme ruling

”only” if it helps preserve the rights under the constitution! 

Congressional members have enjoyed over the years a great amount of lead way for their speech  and actions while conducting duties.. 

 “In order to enable and encourage a representative of the public to discharge his public trust with firmness and success, it is indispensably necessary that he should be protected from the resentment of every one however powerful to whom the exercise of that liberty may occasion offense”.

https://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1952042500

 

There’s always a first time.

 

And Riclag, I whole heartedly agree, for the very reasons you state.

[onthedarkside]

Justice Thomas agrees to halt Graham testimony in Georgia election probe

 

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday granted Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) request to temporarily shield the South Carolina Republican from testifying in probe of alleged pro-Trump election interference in Georgia.

 

The move comes after Graham on Friday filed an emergency request to Thomas, who handles matters arising from Georgia, and follows a ruling by a lower appeals court declining to halt Graham’s testimony before a Fulton County, Ga., special grand jury.

 

The court this weekend requested a response from Fulton County, which is due on Thursday, so it is likely the Supreme Court will act again in the case soon. Thomas has the option to handle the application himself or refer the matter to the full court.

 

(more)

 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3701807-justice-thomas-agrees-to-halt-graham-testimony-in-georgia-election-probe/

 

 

[bendejo]

Can we now openly admit SCOTUS has become politicized, or must we keep up the charade that it is not?

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, onthedarkside said:

Justice Thomas agrees to halt Graham testimony in Georgia election probe

 

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday granted Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) request to temporarily shield the South Carolina Republican from testifying in probe of alleged pro-Trump election interference in Georgia.

 

The move comes after Graham on Friday filed an emergency request to Thomas, who handles matters arising from Georgia, and follows a ruling by a lower appeals court declining to halt Graham’s testimony before a Fulton County, Ga., special grand jury.

 

The court this weekend requested a response from Fulton County, which is due on Thursday, so it is likely the Supreme Court will act again in the case soon. Thomas has the option to handle the application himself or refer the matter to the full court.

 

(more)

 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3701807-justice-thomas-agrees-to-halt-graham-testimony-in-georgia-election-probe/

 

 

Justice Thomas, he who’s wife was herself directly  involved in trying to overturn the election result.

 

Impeach Justice Thomas on grounds of corruption and perverting the course of Justice.

[HaoleBoy]

They say leave it to the person's constituents, but this isn't right.  These Senators and Congress people have far reaching affects for all Americans when they are part of high profile committees.  All Americans should be able to send emails directly to all Congressional people, but can not.

This goes for both sides especially the leaders in the House - Pelose and McCarthy - and in the Senate - Schumer, McConnell.

 

Thomas should have recused himself due to his political activist wife.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Justice Thomas, he who’s wife was herself directly  involved in trying to overturn the election result.

 

Impeach Justice Thomas on grounds of corruption and perverting the course of Justice.

Here’s the law ‘Justice’ Thomas broke in plain sight:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/455

[riclag]

6 hours ago, HaoleBoy said:

They say leave it to the person's constituents, but this isn't right.  These Senators and Congress people have far reaching affects for all Americans when they are part of high profile committees.  All Americans should be able to send emails directly to all Congressional people, but can not.

This goes for both sides especially the leaders in the House - Pelose and McCarthy - and in the Senate - Schumer, McConnell.

 

Thomas should have recused himself due to his political activist wife.

Some disagree! For instance, J.Turley constitutional professor argues, its his wife not his (thomas)activists opinions !

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/are-justice-thomas-and-judge-jackson-polar-opposites-on-recusals

I agree with Turley.

Anyways,Grahams request Is goin to the SCOTUS for all to decide I believe .

Edited October 25, 2022 by riclag