What Goes Around…

 

So, the Biden White House waived President Trump’s claims of executive privilege to permit the FBI to seize documents that Trump claimed privilege on.  If that seems odd, that a sitting president can overrule a former president on claims of privilege, well, it is.  But that’s what the DOJ did.  They found an end-run around the law, and used a pretext to violate Mr. Trump’s rights.

While I am angry about this, there is a silver lining in this dark cloud.  Sometime in January 2025, every claim of executive privilege held by the Biden White House, all its lawyers, all the DOJ memos, all that stuff — whoever wins for the GOP needs to waive every one of them and launch a scorched earth investigation of the Biden Administration.  Biden’s home should be raided (there’s already enough information to support a search warrant on Hunter and “The Big Guy’s” relationship with China).  Hunter’s house, car, and everything else should be ransacked and any drugs found should result in swift prosecution (there’s no prosecution coming in Delaware).

For too long, the GOP has been “the better man” in this co-dependent relationship, and when the possibility of retaliation existed, it didn’t happen because “that’s now how we are.”  That’s nonsense.  The way you stop traitors, corruptocrats, and Democrats (redundant, I know) is to prosecute and hold them accountable.  Even if you lose, you make them pay lawyers and make them spend their ill-gotten gains to stay out of jail.

I’m reminded of Kurt Russell’s line in Tombstone: “Tell them Trump is coming, and Hell’s coming with him!”

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 30 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    VDH talks about “Old Testament” and “New Testament” Republicans.  We need to be more “Old Testament” Republicans for the foreseeable future.  There is a purpose to making your enemies come to regret their previous positions and overreach.

    • #1
  2. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Anthony L. DeWitt: While I am angry about this, there is a silver lining in this dark cloud.  Sometime in January of 2025, every claim of executive privilege held by the Biden Whitehouse, all its lawyers, all the DOJ memos, all that stuff — whoever wins for the GOP needs to waive every one of them and launch a scorched earth investigation of the Biden Administration.  Biden’s home should be raided (there’s already enough information to support a search warrant on Hunter and “The Big Guy’s” relationship with China).  Hunter’s house, car, and everything else should be ransacked and any drugs found should result in swift prosecution (there’s no prosecution coming in Delaware).

    This assumes a level playing field. If a Republican president attempted the same thing, it would be shot down immediately by federal judges.

    • #2
  3. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Anthony L. DeWitt: For too long the GOP has been “the better man” in this co-dependent relationship, and when the possibility of retaliation existed, it didn’t happen because “that’s now how we are.”  That’s nonsense.  They way you stop traitors, corruptocrats, and Democrats (redundant, I know) is to prosecute and hold them accountable.  Even if you lose, you make them pay lawyers and make them spend their ill-gotten gains to stay out of jail.

    And I totally agree with this, but this assumes the existence of a very different kind of GOP.

    • #3
  4. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

     

     

    • #4
  5. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    I don’t know a great deal about the law of Presidential executive privilege, but it doesn’t strike me as strange that the current President would be the one to hold the privilege.

    We see this in other areas of legal privilege.  An example would be a corporate privilege — say the attorney-client privilege attaching to communications with the president of a corporation.  If the corporation is the client, then the corporation can waive the privilege, even if it has a new president.  Another example would be waiver of a deceased person’s privilege by the personal representative of the estate.

    The basic idea, as applied to Trump’s claims of privilege, is that the privilege attaches to the office of the President, not to the individual President.  I don’t know whether this is actually the law in this area.

    • #5
  6. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    Anthony L. DeWitt: For too long the GOP has been “the better man” in this co-dependent relationship, and when the possibility of retaliation existed, it didn’t happen because “that’s now how we are.”  That’s nonsense.

    Make them live to their own rules/standards.  

    • #6
  7. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t know a great deal about the law of Presidential executive privilege, but it doesn’t strike me as strange that the current President would be the one to hold the privilege.

    We see this in other areas of legal privilege. An example would be a corporate privilege — say the attorney-client privilege attaching to communications with the president of a corporation. If the corporation is the client, then the corporation can waive the privilege, even if it has a new president. Another example would be waiver of a deceased person’s privilege by the personal representative of the estate.

    The basic idea, as applied to Trump’s claims of privilege, is that the privilege attaches to the office of the President, not to the individual President. I don’t know whether this is actually the law in this area.

    It hasn’t been cleanly settled.  Their are some rulings  that hint at a prior president’s ability to exert privilege and others that suggest that the current president can reverse the prior president’s privilege claims.  It is actually normal that prior presidents uphold the privilege claims of the predecessors in order to not erode the over all power of the executive branch.    This would be an example of another “norm” that the anti-Trump side has cut down as part of their pursuit of the devil.

    • #7
  8. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t know a great deal about the law of Presidential executive privilege, but it doesn’t strike me as strange that the current President would be the one to hold the privilege.

    We see this in other areas of legal privilege. An example would be a corporate privilege — say the attorney-client privilege attaching to communications with the president of a corporation. If the corporation is the client, then the corporation can waive the privilege, even if it has a new president. Another example would be waiver of a deceased person’s privilege by the personal representative of the estate.

    The basic idea, as applied to Trump’s claims of privilege, is that the privilege attaches to the office of the President, not to the individual President. I don’t know whether this is actually the law in this area.

    Yes, and Biden has now revealed the danger of this theory of Presidential executive privilege. All the more reason that Trump 47 or DeSantis need to give it to Biden and all his subordinates harder and faster in 2025. We need to drive a change, likely a very quick Constitutional amendment, specifying that Presidential executive privilege rests in each presidential term for the records of that term and may only be waived by the president of that presidential term. The only way to force McConnell and Schumer, McCarthy and Pelosi, to rally the establishment and push through such a proposed amendment, followed by very quick ratification by the states, is for vengeance to be visited seven-fold on the Democrats’ president or presidents, along, perhaps, with a waiver or two of privilege for George W. Bush’s papers around GWOT, including the decision NOT to truly secure our immigration system. Stick it to Bush and Biden and you’ll have a constitutional amendment roll out of the Congress in a month or less.

    • #8
  9. RushBabe49 Thatcher
    RushBabe49
    @RushBabe49

    We could start now.  Every time Biden goes on vacation, we need to set up 24-hour pickets around wherever they are, and demonstrate, just like the Left is doing to Supreme Court justices.  Carry the signs, chant, make their lives miserable.  Never let them forget that we are here, and there are more of us than there are of them.

    But of course that will never happen, as we are all out earning our living to support our families.

    • #9
  10. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    #Benghazi.

    • #10
  11. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    We could start now. Every time Biden goes on vacation, we need to set up 24-hour pickets around wherever they are, and demonstrate, just like the Left is doing to Supreme Court justices. Carry the signs, chant, make their lives miserable. Never let them forget that we are here, and there are more of us than there are of them.

    But of course that will never happen, as we are all out earning our living to support our families.

    Well, and also, whoever demonstrates against the President will be subject to FBI abuse.

    • #11
  12. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Anthony L. DeWitt: For too long the GOP has been “the better man” in this co-dependent relationship

    I prefer to think of the GOP as “the battered wife” when it comes to “bipartisanship” . . .

    • #12
  13. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    We could start now. Every time Biden goes on vacation, we need to set up 24-hour pickets around wherever they are, and demonstrate, just like the Left is doing to Supreme Court justices. Carry the signs, chant, make their lives miserable. Never let them forget that we are here, and there are more of us than there are of them.

    But of course that will never happen, as we are all out earning our living to support our families.

    Let the discarded banana be symbol of Biden’s regime.

    • #13
  14. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    It hasn’t been cleanly settled.  Their are some rulings  that hint at a prior president’s ability to exert privilege and others that suggest that the current president can reverse the prior president’s privilege claims. 

    It is akin to attorney-client privilege for a president and his advisors.  That never ends, right?  

    • #14
  15. kedavis Inactive
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    DonG (CAGW is a Scam) (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    It hasn’t been cleanly settled. Their are some rulings that hint at a prior president’s ability to exert privilege and others that suggest that the current president can reverse the prior president’s privilege claims.

    It is akin to attorney-client privilege for a president and his advisors. That never ends, right?

    The issue seems to be whether the privilege exists for the individual holding the office, or for the office itself.

    • #15
  16. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    kedavis (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Scam) (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    It hasn’t been cleanly settled. Their are some rulings that hint at a prior president’s ability to exert privilege and others that suggest that the current president can reverse the prior president’s privilege claims.

    It is akin to attorney-client privilege for a president and his advisors. That never ends, right?

    The issue seems to be whether the privilege exists for the individual holding the office, or for the office itself.

    Correct.  The case law is pretty ambiguous for me a lay person to understand.   It appears in general that executive privilege claims are definitely able to be asserted by the current office holder, and may attach in certain circumstances to previous office holders.    The second part hasn’t been settled, primarily because almost all claims have been asserted, (or maybe accepted is a better term) by the successor administrations.  Biden and Garland really are breaking a norm.

    As far as I can tell attorney-client privilege would attach; however, the Jan 6 folks appear to have the novel theory that giving someone bad legal advice makes the attorney a co-conspirator.   This gives the prosecutors the ability to look at all of the attorney’s communications with all his clients.

    • #16
  17. Misthiocracy has never Member
    Misthiocracy has never
    @Misthiocracy

    Anthony L. DeWitt: So, the Biden White House waived President Trump’s claims of executive privilege to permit the FBI to seize documents that Trump claimed privilege on.  If that seems odd, that a sitting president can overrule a former president on claims of privilege, well, it is.  But that’s what the DOJ did.  They found an end-run around the law, and used a pretext to violate Mr. Trump’s rights.

    It doesn’t have to stick. They just have to make sure the Supreme Court doesn’t hear a challenge until after the mid-terms.

    • #17
  18. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Scam) (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    It hasn’t been cleanly settled. Their are some rulings that hint at a prior president’s ability to exert privilege and others that suggest that the current president can reverse the prior president’s privilege claims.

    It is akin to attorney-client privilege for a president and his advisors. That never ends, right?

    The issue seems to be whether the privilege exists for the individual holding the office, or for the office itself.

    Correct. The case law is pretty ambiguous for me a lay person to understand. It appears in general that executive privilege claims are definitely able to be asserted by the current office holder, and may attach in certain circumstances to previous office holders. The second part hasn’t been settled, primarily because almost all claims have been asserted, (or maybe accepted is a better term) by the successor administrations. Biden and Garland really are breaking a norm.

    As far as I can tell attorney-client privilege would attach; however, the Jan 6 folks appear to have the novel theory that giving someone bad legal advice makes the attorney a co-conspirator. This gives the prosecutors the ability to look at all of the attorney’s communications with all his clients.

    The lawless Democrats will chisel at any angle hoping to cleave the whole.  And it’s working.

    I get the office vs holder thing, but an office does not speak to an office — a person speaks to a person.  A person discharging the duties of office receives counsel on human decisions that come with the office, and from another human discharging another set of duties.

    It is ludicrous (although legally, there seems to be a sliver of support) to suggest that the protection adheres to the office.  It is not as though EP is a defense against the disestablishment of the office!

    Corporate analogies are as unhelpful here as trying to run the military like a business, or using the Toyota Production System in a creative endeavor.  Fundamental differences justify fundamentally different treatment.

    Where are the raids on Obama’s many homes?

    • #18
  19. Emmett C Stanton Coolidge
    Emmett C Stanton
    @EmmettCStanton

    Just waiving Biden’s executive privilege won’t be enough to solve the problem going forward, and he’s not likely to live long enough to feel the pain.  Waive Obama’s privilege, subpoena his advisors, dig around in the formerly privileged documents for a year or so, expose what needs to be exposed, and then offer to negotiate a legislative solution–but one limited to the then-incumbent president and successors.

    • #19
  20. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    We could start now. Every time Biden goes on vacation, we need to set up 24-hour pickets around wherever they are, and demonstrate, just like the Left is doing to Supreme Court justices. Carry the signs, chant, make their lives miserable. Never let them forget that we are here, and there are more of us than there are of them.

    But of course that will never happen, as we are all out earning our living to support our families.

    Well, and also, whoever demonstrates against the President will be subject to FBI abuse.

    More likely the IRS. 

    • #20
  21. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    We’re going to fix it?  Why on earth does anyone believe they’ll cheat on everything they can touch and let the elections proceed competitively?    Why not, we told them that the last election was honest, a little cheating here and there but basically honest.   Republicans are child’s play.  The only real question is what are we doing to do if they steal the election?  Wait to fix it during the presidential election?  Americans in both parties do not understand totalitarianism.   They’ve not consolidated power yet, but only because we have a few governors with guts. 

    • #21
  22. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Red states are the last line of defense . . .

    • #22
  23. Peckish Cedar Coolidge
    Peckish Cedar
    @PeckishCedar

    From general observation, I don’t think the Democrats think they will ever be held to account for anything.  We seem to assume this political game will be played according the same means they handled things in the past and the way we think the game will still be played in the future.  We play by the rules and they don’t.  We still think we will have our turn and somehow will start acting like them.  I hope we do have a turn (though hopefully we never act like them), but I think they think they can see their ultimate goal is in sight.  To take over and outlaw the opposition.  I expect we will see some very crazy and audacious moves in the upcoming months that are meant to ensure their desired outcome.  Mar-a-Lago and student debt forgiveness are all part of the same plan.  Outlawing us and appealing to the eternal adolescent to get their voters.  Once they eliminate the former, they won’t need the latter.  

    We are talking about ruthless, audacious people with no morals.  We keep talking about another Civil War.  Let’s look at the last one.  Although Robert E. Lee did have morals, he was the epitome of audaciousness in battle.  He fought circles around the Union generals who had larger numbers.  The generals became stupid and neutralized with fear of Lee and lost reputation.  The only way to beat Lee, who often knew his opponent better than they knew themselves, was to find a general who kept his eye on the solitary objective and gave no quarter.  Grant knew he could never defeat Lee by tactics, but he could by strategy.  He moved forward to Richmond (and Atlanta via Sherman) and dictated the terms of battle.  Grant immobilized Lee and dismantled the Confederacy.  Lee became superfluous.

    We need a leader who can keep his eyes on the ball and keep moving, ironically this time on the Swamp in Washington.   We also need to quit reacting to every news cycle.  This is all smoke and mirrors.   Polls that swing back and forth because Biden did this or that just prove we have an awful lot of people who have a short attention span and live in the moment: Sheep and Suckers.  We need to stand for something like adults and stick to it.  Using and living by the word “NO” is our best ammunition, but there seems to be a shortage of that ammo as well.  Sorry for my rambling.

         

    • #23
  24. kedavis Inactive
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    No worries, it was excellent rambling.

    • #24
  25. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Peckish Cedar (View Comment):

    I don’t think the Democrats think they will ever be held to account for anything. We seem to assume this political game will be played according the same means they handled things in the past and the way we think the game will still be played in the future. We play by the rules and they don’t. We still think we will have our turn and somehow will start acting like them. I hope we do have a turn (though hopefully we never act like them), but I think they think they can see their ultimate goal is in sight. To take over and outlaw the opposition. I expect we will see some very crazy and audacious moves in the upcoming months that are meant to ensure their desired outcome. Mar-a-Lago and student debt forgiveness are all part of the same plan. Outlawing us and appealing to the eternal adolescent to get their voters. Once they eliminate the former, they won’t need the latter.

    We are talking about ruthless, audacious people with no morals. We keep talking about another Civil War. Let’s look at the last one. Although Robert E. Lee did have morals, he was the epitome of audaciousness in battle. He fought circles around the Union generals who had larger numbers. The generals became stupid and neutralized with fear of Lee and lost reputation. The only way to beat Lee, who often knew his opponent better than they knew themselves, was to find a general who kept his eye on the solitary objective and gave no quarter. Grant knew he could never defeat Lee by tactics, but he could by strategy. He moved forward to Richmond (and Atlanta via Sherman) and dictated the terms of battle. Grant immobilized Lee and dismantled the Confederacy. Lee became superfluous.

    We need a leader who can keep his eyes on the ball and keep moving, ironically this time on the Swamp in Washington. We also need to quit reacting to every news cycle. Polls that swing back and forth because Biden did this or that just prove we have an awful lot of people who have a short attention span and live in the moment: Sheep and Suckers. We need to stand for something like adults and stick to it. Using and living by the word “NO” is our best ammunition, but there seems to be a shortage of that ammo as well. Sorry for my rambling.

     

    Very true. If the democrats are like the Clanton Gang, the gOpE seeks to fight them with:

    (which is also a complete fraudulent ‘effort’ anyways because they secretly don’t want to win)

    When the battle is worth fighting, you have our current situation where the American-loving voters are disgusted with the Apple Dumpling gOpE and finally say enough is enough and they bring in Wyatt Earp, and whatever Hell he is bringing with him!

     

     

     

    • #25
  26. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Peckish Cedar (View Comment):

    [Snip]

    Don’t apologize, Hoss.   Expand on it and make it a post!

    • #26
  27. Anthony L. DeWitt Coolidge
    Anthony L. DeWitt
    @AnthonyDeWitt

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t know a great deal about the law of Presidential executive privilege, but it doesn’t strike me as strange that the current President would be the one to hold the privilege.

    We see this in other areas of legal privilege. An example would be a corporate privilege — say the attorney-client privilege attaching to communications with the president of a corporation. If the corporation is the client, then the corporation can waive the privilege, even if it has a new president. Another example would be waiver of a deceased person’s privilege by the personal representative of the estate.

    The basic idea, as applied to Trump’s claims of privilege, is that the privilege attaches to the office of the President, not to the individual President. I don’t know whether this is actually the law in this area.

    Except, the presidency is not a corporation, the privilege is the Presidential executive privilege which attaches to the advice and all documents of the president himself.  But, if this really is the law, then, again, it should be used to shatter the secrecy of all prior presidential papers.  Nothing should be held back.  It is, after all our government.

    • #27
  28. Anthony L. DeWitt Coolidge
    Anthony L. DeWitt
    @AnthonyDeWitt

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t know a great deal about the law of Presidential executive privilege, but it doesn’t strike me as strange that the current President would be the one to hold the privilege.

    We see this in other areas of legal privilege. An example would be a corporate privilege — say the attorney-client privilege attaching to communications with the president of a corporation. If the corporation is the client, then the corporation can waive the privilege, even if it has a new president. Another example would be waiver of a deceased person’s privilege by the personal representative of the estate.

    The basic idea, as applied to Trump’s claims of privilege, is that the privilege attaches to the office of the President, not to the individual President. I don’t know whether this is actually the law in this area.

    Yes, and Biden has now revealed the danger of this theory of Presidential executive privilege. All the more reason that Trump 47 or DeSantis need to give it to Biden and all his subordinates harder and faster in 2025. We need to drive a change, likely a very quick Constitutional amendment, specifying that Presidential executive privilege rests in each presidential term for the records of that term and may only be waived by the president of that presidential term. The only way to force McConnell and Schumer, McCarthy and Pelosi, to rally the establishment and push through such a proposed amendment, followed by very quick ratification by the states, is for vengeance to be visited seven-fold on the Democrats’ president or presidents, along, perhaps, with a waiver or two of privilege for George W. Bush’s papers around GWOT, including the decision NOT to truly secure our immigration system. Stick it to Bush and Biden and you’ll have a constitutional amendment roll out of the Congress in a month or less.

    Agree completely.

     

    • #28
  29. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Anthony L. DeWitt (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t know a great deal about the law of Presidential executive privilege, but it doesn’t strike me as strange that the current President would be the one to hold the privilege.

    We see this in other areas of legal privilege. An example would be a corporate privilege — say the attorney-client privilege attaching to communications with the president of a corporation. If the corporation is the client, then the corporation can waive the privilege, even if it has a new president. Another example would be waiver of a deceased person’s privilege by the personal representative of the estate.

    The basic idea, as applied to Trump’s claims of privilege, is that the privilege attaches to the office of the President, not to the individual President. I don’t know whether this is actually the law in this area.

    Except, the presidency is not a corporation, the privilege is the Presidential executive privilege which attaches to the advice and all documents of the president himself. But, if this really is the law, then, again, it should be used to shatter the secrecy of all prior presidential papers. Nothing should be held back. It is, after all our government.

    That grinding sound you hear is the staff at the Obama repository shredding mountains of documents 

    • #29
  30. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    That grinding sound you hear is the staff at the Obama repository shredding mountains of documents

    It worked for Killary. Nobody cared.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.