HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » In my opinion, Dems shoul...

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 12:28 PM

In my opinion, Dems should take a break and then subpoena

Whittaker. They need to set the tone and expectations for this hearing and all future oversight hearings. What is the downside? People need to be held accountable. In my opinion, the downside will be felt if they do not subpoena- we will look impotent and feckless.


Republicans will continue to run out the clock and play games- it's what they do. It's no secret. Time for messing around is over.

8 replies, 1423 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply In my opinion, Dems should take a break and then subpoena (Original post)
bpositive Feb 2019 OP
RockRaven Feb 2019 #1
bpositive Feb 2019 #2
former9thward Feb 2019 #3
NewJeffCT Feb 2019 #4
former9thward Feb 2019 #7
RockRaven Feb 2019 #5
former9thward Feb 2019 #6
theboss Feb 2019 #8

Response to bpositive (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 12:45 PM

1. Serving him with a subpoena would make for great television.

So would bringing in the Sergeant of Arms of the House and reminding Whitaker "That's who is going to be arresting you if you become the subject of a contempt citation."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RockRaven (Reply #1)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 12:52 PM

2. Like a referee at a soccer game

If they set the ground rules and tone early in the game i.e. red cards or yellow cards, the players tend to play within the rules.

Same idea here- let everyone know that we are not playing around.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RockRaven (Reply #1)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 02:26 PM

3. Eric Holder refused a subpoena.

No one arrested him. It doesn't work that way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #3)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 02:28 PM

4. the case did go to court

and Holder had to release the requested documents fairly quickly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewJeffCT (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 06:31 PM

7. Holder won in court.

Judge declines to hold Holder in contempt

https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2014/10/judge-declines-to-hold-holder-in-contempt-196650

The judge ordered some -- not all -- of the documents released to Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #3)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 02:31 PM

5. It does when a house of Congress exercises it's inherent contempt powers, instead of the

contempt of congress statute.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RockRaven (Reply #5)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 06:26 PM

6. When has that been done?

I will help you. 1935 was the last time it was used. It will not be used here.

Congressís Contempt Power and the Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RockRaven (Reply #5)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 06:34 PM

8. I don't think that power has been challenged in court this century

 

I think it would lose.

The courts hate enforcing congressional subpoenas as it becomes a situation of two co-equal branches putting itself in authority over the third. I can't imagine courts would uphold that power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread