On the issue of how systems matter, here is what I posted earlier today on another forum:
This issue, similar to the Merrick Garland debacle, falls into one of the US Constitution’s “blind spots” or “weak spots” - there were areas where the Framers either could not imagine the level of exploitation and disregard for democracy that the modern GOP exhibits, or the Framers just assumed that other Constitutional checks and balances would work.
In this case, the Framers’ assumptions were justified for the first 230 years of the republic: no US President came even close to the colossal “FU CONGRESS!!!” issued by the Trump admin this year, until Trump. There was just an assumption that the President would cooperate with Congress, backed up by literally centuries of actual cooperation. And then, even in the face of Trump’s obstruction, the House then exercised the other Constitutional check and balance the Framers envisioned: they impeached Trump for obstructing Congress. The McGahn subpoena was not one of the subpoenas that Trump was impeached for, but it is extremely similar. And yet the Senate completely disregarded any self respect for Congress, any respect for the rule of law, and any respect for civilized governance and let Trump say “FU CONGRESS!!!” with impunity.
So there’s a partial Constitution failure here, a failure of imagination and assumptions, but the dramatically greater failure is that the GOP is simply openly and blatantly operating in disregard of democracy, proper governance and centuries of precedent.
Context - I don’t recall if I’ve posted on this here or on QT3 but I’ve been expecting this result for months: the Constitution simply does not make a clear enough case for this eventuality to overcome GOP-Judge bias. Just as the Constitution does not expressly require the Senate to give a Supreme Court nominee a vote on the floor, the Constitution does not expressly give Congress the power to have the Judicial branch enforce subpoenas for Congress (outside the context of a suit to enforce an existing law). It’s one of those bizarro legal results: there’s really no question that Congress COULD pass a law that would give it the power to issue subpoenas enforceable by the Judidicial branch (for example, the current subpoenas for Trump’s tax returns are authorized by an existing law) but Congress has not expressly done so in a way that impact people like McGahn or Bolton or Mulvaney, and the Constitution does not lay out the “inherent subpoena power” in words a third grader could understand (that’s why it’s “inherent” not “express”). That weakness in the Constitution is what has allowed GOP Judge’s to rule the way they have.
Sure, there are Trump Judges so bad they would rule that way even IF the Constitution was more clear, but just as with Garland, the limits of Constitutional framing created the opening that the GOP is driving through.
It’s sickening to me, but not, sadly, unexpected.
