Im actually kind of hoping the appeals in the case (i.e. Don Mcgahn) eventually reach the supreme court and the high court supports the constitution in that defying a congressional subpeona citing executive privilege is in and of itself obstruction of congress. But the way those are jammed up in the courts, i don't think the high court will make a blanket ruling so it will have a trickle effect.

Considering guys like that have gotten removed from their roles in a lot of cases, congress won't have a case for impeachment against anyone, and things will seemingly work themselves out in courts sorta after the fact.

Best case scenario is I think for any FUTURE president not to be able to defy a congressional subpeona, as is built into our constitution, but that people make their decision on trump in November.

I do have some faith that a good judicial precedent comes out of these dark and divisive times that shields us from a tyrannical ruler in the future. In this case, i think Lamar Alexander is right. It's improper but maybe doesn't rise to the level of impeachment. But on article 2, congress seems unwillong to protect its rights which is a dangerous precedent. That said, something must be ruled in the courts eventually to protect congress's duty of oversight. And it seems like that will be the case.

Historically America has to have an ugly moment to change. I think both sides being criminal makes a strong case for transparency across the board, and i think court decisions forthcoming will reflect that.