Which hunts? All of 'em...

Calvin is far, far, far more imaginative than Trump. He is even nicer to women. He has never tried to grab Susie's pussy. He is also much brighter, but what five year-old isn't?

The Washington Post - Comey gives up lawsuit challenging House subpoena, will testify

Former FBI director James B. Comey will appear voluntarily Friday before the House Judiciary Committee, which has agreed to withdraw a subpoena, Comey’s attorney said Sunday.

 

Comey agreed to sit for a voluntary interview on Friday ... “so long as the interview proceeds as a voluntary interview, an FBI representative will be present to advise concerning the disclosure of FBI information.”

 

Thomas G. Hungar, the general counsel for the Judiciary Committee, said Comey would be free to speak to reporters after his Hill appearance and to release a transcript, something that is typically available within a day.

 

Comey said he was willing to testify publicly but not behind closed doors.

 

"That’s what happened this weekend in Buenos Aires, where Trump attended the annual Group of 20 Summit.

He presided over the signing of a new trade pact with Canada and Mexico and agreed to calm his burgeoning trade war with China.

He offered pleasantries to world leaders he had previously attacked, shied away from headline-grabbing photo ops with controversial autocrats and signed onto the summit’s pro forma communique - something he conspicuously rejected at the G-7 summit earlier this year.

The storm looming over the White House - the special counsel investigation into the Trump camp’s alleged dealings with the Kremlin seems to be picking up pace - may have contributed to Trump’s relative meekness. ..."

VOX - Did Trump commit witness tampering by tweet?

Probably, but it’s complicated.

Witness tampering is a federal crime.

But it’s notoriously difficult to prove in court because you have to show that someone is acting with the specific purpose of obstructing an official proceeding.

There are several factors that collectively suggest President Trump might be credibly accused of “witness tampering” in the Mueller investigation:

 

 

1. President Trump’s praise for Roger Stone’s guts for vowing not to testify against President Trump.
2. President Trump’s scorn for Michael Cohen’s “flipping.”
3. President Trump’s dangling a potential pardon for Paul Manafort.

 

The full article is worth reading.

Sideface:

 

 

"That’s what happened this weekend in Buenos Aires, where Trump attended the annual Group of 20 Summit.

 

He presided over the signing of a new trade pact with Canada and Mexico and agreed to calm his burgeoning trade war with China.

 

He offered pleasantries to world leaders he had previously attacked, shied away from headline-grabbing photo ops with controversial autocrats and signed onto the summit’s pro forma communique - something he conspicuously rejected at the G-7 summit earlier this year.

 

The storm looming over the White House - the special counsel investigation into the Trump camp’s alleged dealings with the Kremlin seems to be picking up pace - may have contributed to Trump’s relative meekness. ..."

 

All the other leaders there look so happy because they know that what ever crap they do Trump will always look worse. They have the best deflector they could ever hope for.

Californians want to leave the US.

I cannot see that happening or Congress voting to allow States to secede.

MikeB4:

 

I cannot see that happening or Congress voting to allow States to secede.

 

You may be surprised to learn that it's not up to you. Congress doesn't need to approve it. The states themselves do. But what do you know? Here is how the Washington Post explains it:

"Amending the Constitution requires approval of the amendment by either 1) two-thirds of each branch of Congress or 2) two-thirds of states at a specially-formed constitutional convention, with the amendment then being ratified by three-quarters of the states. This is difficult enough that it has been done only 17 times in 227 years, excluding the passage of the Bill of Rights shortly after the Constitution itself was ratified."

Also, it could conceivably be done by treaty negotiations with senate and presidential approval. I imagine the president would probably be glad to see the back of California.

Doesn't surprise me at all I reside in Aotearoa. My understanding the US Supreme Court ruled that States to not have a right to secede from the Union as no right to do so is provided in the US Constitution  . If California does try it will be interesting.