Judge James Boasberg Impeachment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of 'truth', under 2 usc 6228 the court must give notice to the 9 members of congress (Jim Jordan added) when collecting phone records. That didnt happen here and Boasberg must be suspended pending Impeachment or Indictment.

Activist judges polute the dmv and this sends a strong message to stay in their lane.

As much as dcum attacks, they can't refute the blantant abuse of power that Boasberg allowed.

Without going into the reasons Boasberg ordered a plane to turn around in March, Kilmar had a legal removal notice that dcum ignores.

He had a legal removal notice that eliminated El Salvador as a place where he could be removed, and those planes had dozens of others who spent months in a foreign torture prison, some for no reason at all. It’s insane to keep defending this unlawful and unAmerican act and absurd to try to impeach the judge who was trying to stop it.

Boasberg wasn't even trying to stop it. He was just trying to uphold basic due process and the bare minimum of court room standards. The administration affirmatively chose to lie in court and affirmatively chose to disobey straight forward judicial orders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

They are so allergic to it that maga snaps if anything smells of justice or ethical behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

The plane was not in international air space when the stay was given. The hearing itself was a due process hearing so it's nonesensical to claim that due process had occurred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

You do understand, do you not, that it only covers things like Senate provided communications devices. These subpoenas seem to have been directed topersonal devices, which are not covered by that section.

Nice try. Thanks for playing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

That's an affirmative obligation.

Where is there an affirmative obligation in 2 USC 6228? For your convenience, here is the notification provision.

"(c) Notification
Notwithstanding any other provision of law or rule of civil or criminal procedure, the Office of the SAA, any officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, and any provider for a Senate office that is providing services to or used by a Senate office shall not be barred, through operation of any court order or any statutory provision, from notifying the Senate office of any legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data of the Senate office that is transmitted, processed, or stored (whether temporarily or otherwise) through the use of an electronic system established, maintained, or operated, or the use of electronic services provided, in whole or in part by the Office of the SAA, the officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, or the provider for a Senate office."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

Phones weren’t tapped. He didn’t break the law. It’s all a bunch of horseshit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

That's an affirmative obligation.

Where is there an affirmative obligation in 2 USC 6228? For your convenience, here is the notification provision.

"(c) Notification
Notwithstanding any other provision of law or rule of civil or criminal procedure, the Office of the SAA, any officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, and any provider for a Senate office that is providing services to or used by a Senate office shall not be barred, through operation of any court order or any statutory provision, from notifying the Senate office of any legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data of the Senate office that is transmitted, processed, or stored (whether temporarily or otherwise) through the use of an electronic system established, maintained, or operated, or the use of electronic services provided, in whole or in part by the Office of the SAA, the officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, or the provider for a Senate office."

um... that refers to Senate offices and their official phone lines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

That's an affirmative obligation.

Where is there an affirmative obligation in 2 USC 6228? For your convenience, here is the notification provision.

"(c) Notification
Notwithstanding any other provision of law or rule of civil or criminal procedure, the Office of the SAA, any officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, and any provider for a Senate office that is providing services to or used by a Senate office shall not be barred, through operation of any court order or any statutory provision, from notifying the Senate office of any legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data of the Senate office that is transmitted, processed, or stored (whether temporarily or otherwise) through the use of an electronic system established, maintained, or operated, or the use of electronic services provided, in whole or in part by the Office of the SAA, the officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, or the provider for a Senate office."

um... that refers to Senate offices and their official phone lines.

Correct. And what was being questioned was where the earlier poster got this: "The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, if we are going to get into impeaching judges for lying, then lets just cut to the chase with respect to those who testified that Roe was settled law and those who are openly taking bribes from billionaires.

That would impeach Robert, Kavanaugh, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett and Thomas.

Thomas should be impeached for taking bribes to start with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this is the judge that is currently holding contempt hearings against the Administration for brazenly lying in court and blatantly violating judicial orders in the Abrego case.

I suspect that’s why they’re making up crap about Boasberg tapping phones, and calling for impeachment.

Not made up. The statue (2 usc 6228) clearly says the court must notify senators if phone records are collected.

As for Kilmar, he had due process, had notice of removal and an activist judge doesnt demand a plane return while in international air space.

You do understand, do you not, that it only covers things like Senate provided communications devices. These subpoenas seem to have been directed topersonal devices, which are not covered by that section.

Nice try. Thanks for playing.

Todays moving goalpost moment is brought to you by '"depends on what the definition of what 'is' is?"

[Anonymous]

...In approving the securing of telephone records of Republicans in Congress, Boasberg shattered the very rules of engagement between the coequal and “coordinate branches” that the same Boasberg has repeatedly raised in his investigation of the Trump administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:...In approving the securing of telephone records of Republicans in Congress, Boasberg shattered the very rules of engagement between the coequal and “coordinate branches” that the same Boasberg has repeatedly raised in his investigation of the Trump administration.

That's all a bald faced lie. You posted the exact wording of the statute and it obviously does not apply. Ironically, the brazen audacity of the lying is what got them in trouble with Boasberg the first time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:...In approving the securing of telephone records of Republicans in Congress, Boasberg shattered the very rules of engagement between the coequal and “coordinate branches” that the same Boasberg has repeatedly raised in his investigation of the Trump administration.

You are a plagiarizer. Kudos to you for being yet another incompetent MAGA thief, fool, fraudster and idiot.