I agree but worry I can’t find a serious legal person who thinks it would work though.
I’m reading this at the moment (Kushner inc by Vicky Ward). Good read although the lack of named sources is an issue. Her excuse is the usual ‘no one with any real gems is going on the record’ and its all very believable. I’m sure in a few years we’ll find out how accurate it is.
1 Like
Yeah, when my wife didn’t remember who Rick Perry was, I told her “Well, he was the governor of Texas, a former Presidential candidate, and I forget the third thing.”
9 Likes
I’m talking about what they talk about. She can keep passing random legislation, but when talking to reporters talk to them about impeachment lol.
Most famous for forgetting the name of the multi-billion dollar department he now heads which he promised to abolish during the campaign.
1 Like
I don’t care. Just do it.
Stop asking for permission first. Do things now, and let the courts stop you.
That’s what Trump said.
If your opponent has been playing Calvinball for 2.5 years sometimes the right move is to play Calvinball. We’re well past the point where it makes sense to stand on tradition.
Try and imagine how Abraham Lincoln would handle this situation.
2 Likes
- The power of a House of Congress to punish a private citizen who obstructs the performance of its legislative duties is not limited to the removal of an existing obstruction, but continues after the obstruction has ceased or its removal has become impossible. P. 294 U. S. 147.
Held in this case that the Senate had power to cite for contempt a witness charged with having permitted the removal and destruction of papers which he had been subpoenaed to produce.
The Act making refusal to answer or to produce papers before either House, or one of its committees, a misdemeanor (R.S. § 102) did not impair, but supplemented, the power of the House affected to punish for such contempt. P. 294 U. S. 151.
Punishment, purely as such, through contempt proceedings, legislative or judicial, is not precluded because punishment may also be inflicted for the same act as a statutory offence. P. 294 U. S. 151.
Where a proceeding for contempt is within the jurisdiction of a House of Congress, the questions whether the person arrested is guilty or has so far purged himself that he does not deserve punishment are questions for that House to decide, and which cannot be inquired into by a court by a writ of habeas corpus. P. 294 U. S. 152.
“A cache of emails obtained by the Dossier Center, which is a Russian opposition organization based in London, exposes the depth of foreign asset entanglement in Trump’s America at the precise moment that the president’s dealings with Ukrainian officials threaten to pull the Department of Justice and State Department into an unseemly impeachment fight.”
“The cache of emails that detail Veselnitskaya’s legal campaign and lobbying efforts in Washington, D.C., were shared with The Daily Beast by the Dossier Center, which is funded by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, one of Putin’s most prominent exiled critics, ” before adding, “The emails cannot be independently verified by The Daily Beast via a digital signature but elements contained within them including cell phone numbers, bank details, planning, email addresses, and hearing dates can be confirmed by cross-checking with subsequent court papers, lobbyist filings and other reporting.”
“New emails from the same cache, which includes messages from and to Veselnitskya and her aide and translator Murat Glashev, shed light on Veselnitskaya’s lobbying and legal campaign against the Magnitsky Act and appear to suggest that it may have been carried out in breach of another U.S. law and court orders,” the report continues. “Some of the emails suggest the breaking of an order put in place by a New York court to protect the identity of Gorokhov, a Russian witness who testified in a sealed deposition. His evidence was hidden amid fears of reprisals back home.”
Nancy is out there taking about bipartisanship, indulging INFRASTRUCTURE WEEK, scolding The Squad, embracing BS centrism and deflating the base by all but ignoring that we’re in a war with absolutely awful, irredeemable scum.
10 Likes
I don’t see how that makes my suggestions incorrect.
1 Like
The whole problem with Trump is his brazen lawlessness and his assumption the right wing court will just back him up.
You are suggesting the left simply does exactly the same thing.
Nancy still considers check-raising sandbagging and refuses to do it but also folds when the Republicans do it because they must have AA, every time.
5 Likes
Using inherent contempt to take Barr off the board is very much not the same thing. He is in active contempt and is using the DOJ in an incredibly lawless way. Congress has powers and those powers are not being respected at all by the DOJ. Relying on the DOJ to enforce the law isn’t working at all, and Barr is why that is happening.
2 Likes
I’m not saying be “brazenly lawless”, but I don’t think arresting people for flagrantly ignoring congressional subpoenas falls under that description.
It’s not the exact same thing because what the Dems should do isn’t necessarily against the law and they’re not intentionally breaking the law by doing it, they’re testing legal waters.
Trying to figure out the rules of the game by poking at loopholes isn’t the same as flipping the game board over and saying you win.
2 Likes
I don’t inherently disagree but wouldn’t the right say the exact same thing?
They were just testing legal waters with the Muslim ban, the refusal to let asylum seekers stay while awaiting hearing etc?
I just worry when our solutions start to look a lot like the very things we abhor about our opponents.
1 Like
To be clear I’m saying the right move here is to use inherent contempt to put Barr in a DC city jail until a court makes you release him or he complies with the many many subpoenas he’s obstructing right now.
We’re on much firmer legal ground than they are. They’re literally daring us to do it.
2 Likes