General Discussion

Perseus

(4,341 posts)

53. If you don't mind, can you list the names of those who have been held in contempt?

Wed Sep 18, 2019, 10:39 PM

Sep 2019

And if a litigation is going on in the courts to validate the contempt? How long ago did McGhan refuse to appear? Is he one of them?

If you have links can you please share them? I am sure a lot of us would like to know. I have to confess that I have not seen anything of the sort in the news.

Thank you

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

99 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Please stop criticizing Nadler for not arresting Lewandowski on the spot yesterday [View all] StarfishSaver Sep 2019 OP

Stop getting in the way mcar Sep 2019 #1

😂 we can do it Sep 2019 #9

This is a very unfair comment, I will tell you why Perseus Sep 2019 #44

What does Biden have to do with this? StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #45

I have to assume you read the post I answered to and you read mine completely Perseus Sep 2019 #47

I've read that post and yours. That's why I asked the question StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #54

No, I don't have the obsession, other people seem to, and that is what I am talking about. Perseus Sep 2019 #59

As I said. You have a weird obsession with Biden and Pelosi ... StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #61

As I said, your only argument seems to be the insult Perseus Sep 2019 #63

Yep. cwydro Sep 2019 #71

Yep. Ironic huh? SunSeeker Sep 2019 #76

Huh? mcar Sep 2019 #48

Which part don't you understand and I will try to clarify it for you Perseus Sep 2019 #55

Thank you. Many here, including myself are very frustrated and we feel as if the evil thugs Maraya1969 Sep 2019 #74

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Firestorm49 Sep 2019 #90

Thanks for this Bettie Sep 2019 #92

Ok, so: hold in contempt sharedvalues Sep 2019 #2

Did you read my whole post? StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #4

Also this.... chowder66 Sep 2019 #20

Exactly StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #24

That's a good thread others should read and consider. Pacifist Patriot Sep 2019 #64

She has a blog where she turns her tweets into an article. chowder66 Sep 2019 #67

Yes it is worth it. sharedvalues Sep 2019 #26

The issue isn't so much whether it's worth it to use it StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #28

Someone needs to be made an example of sharedvalues Sep 2019 #30

True StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #32

How many people have been subpoenaed and have not complied? Perseus Sep 2019 #46

The Committee has held people in contempt and has gone to court for enforcement StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #51

If you don't mind, can you list the names of those who have been held in contempt? Perseus Sep 2019 #53

Barr and Ross have been held in contempt StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #58

How about McGhan and Hope? Perseus Sep 2019 #60

Not necessarily Lew azureblue Sep 2019 #56

Once again, the voice of reason, but you're spoiling some people's fun! The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2019 #3

Punched in the mouth would have been better but gldstwmn Sep 2019 #33

Good post. Yes, Wm Barr would have to prosecute the people's Hortensis Sep 2019 #5

I like that idea, although there might be problems with collection. The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2019 #6

I would think exacting a fine would be the easiest. And court has less power. LiberalFighter Sep 2019 #14

inherent contempt (which would be prosecuted by Congress itself) is different than the criminal PoliticAverse Sep 2019 #10

Thanks StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #11

"...except the ones he was told not to answer under executive privilege..." tableturner Sep 2019 #36

I agree the executive privilege claim is bogus, but once it's invoked, it's not contempt StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #38

Fine...then vote for contempt by the proper party, and get this process going! tableturner Sep 2019 #40

Interesting responses. I never make the mistake of Hortensis Sep 2019 #15

Lawrence was wrong StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #21

So swearing an oath to tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth, and then refusing, ancianita Sep 2019 #79

Lying under oath isn't the contempt StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #81

Fair point. Yet, if Pelosi said it was contempt, inherent contempt, action could have been taken. ancianita Sep 2019 #82

I think you're right about Berke but I wonder StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #83

This message was self-deleted by its author StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #88

He shat on himself and his family honor Baked Potato Sep 2019 #7

" He probably ruined his chance at Senator." Never underestimate the stupidity of republican voters Perseus Sep 2019 #49

True, true Baked Potato Sep 2019 #57

"never been established whether the Sergeant-at-Arms jurisdiction extends beyond Capitol grounds." PoliticAverse Sep 2019 #8

The fact that it may have happened in the past doesn't mean it was valid and StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #12

The fact that something has happened in the past and had been accepted as legally valid... PoliticAverse Sep 2019 #13

It's an argument. That's all. StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #17

Unlike New York City, the power of the federal governent extends to all US states and terrorities. PoliticAverse Sep 2019 #19

The House Sergeant-at- Arms isn't the federal government StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #23

Agree here on Lewandowski BUT just wondering after this thread bluestarone Sep 2019 #16

That would have to be done by a court StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #18

Ultimately the courts. For (85 pages) more on this issue, see... PoliticAverse Sep 2019 #22

WOW so much to read TY BUT bluestarone Sep 2019 #27

Repeated appeals can drag these matters out which is why you tend to see negotiated settlements PoliticAverse Sep 2019 #31

Nadler did the best he could gldstwmn Sep 2019 #25

there is a lot of misinformation JI7 Sep 2019 #29

And, unfortunately, some of this misinformation continues to be spread StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #34

I ask myself MsLeopard Sep 2019 #35

Very well put. You have clarified the frustration of many Democrats Perseus Sep 2019 #52

+1 SunSeeker Sep 2019 #77

+1 Bettie Sep 2019 #93

So it all sounds pretty hopeless ...like there really is no good way to hold witnesses accountable? Amaryllis Sep 2019 #37

Not hopeless at all StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #39

I don't think you understand Inherent Contempt peaverok Sep 2019 #41

100% agree! tableturner Sep 2019 #42

Thank you for this Ferrets are Cool Sep 2019 #43

I understand it very well StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #50

"cannot be inquired into by a court by a writ of habeus corpus." Hermit-The-Prog Sep 2019 #62

You ignored the first part of that sentence: "the questions whether the person arrested is guilty" StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #65

I've read the whole case multiple times Hermit-The-Prog Sep 2019 #66

Then you should know that the Court didn't rule as you suggested StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #68

I didn't suggest, I quoted the ruling Hermit-The-Prog Sep 2019 #72

We agree on that StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #73

So the the headline should read...... Hotler Sep 2019 #69

Yes indeed. cwydro Sep 2019 #75

That's what I said azureblue Sep 2019 #70

+1 SunSeeker Sep 2019 #97

The enforcement entity isn't the SA; his job is security of House members and order. But the ancianita Sep 2019 #80

And time drags on. Firestorm49 Sep 2019 #78

It was reported that Pelosi believed Lewandowski should have been arrested YOHABLO Sep 2019 #84

That's not what she was reported as saying StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #85

Okay, she said ''held in contempt'' I said arrested. She did say ''then and there'' YOHABLO Sep 2019 #86

A contempt citation requires a vote StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #87

Nadler could have had Lewandowski arrested for refusing to answer questions. SunSeeker Sep 2019 #89

No, actually, he couldn't have him arrested for refusing to answer questions. StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #91

No actually, we need to stop saying we can't do things. SunSeeker Sep 2019 #94

They don't need Lewandowski to confirm the Mueller Report. StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #95

Now you're channeling the right wing talking point that Dems had no need to call Lewandowski. Oy. SunSeeker Sep 2019 #96

Actually, I'm channeling the law StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #98

Nope, you're stating your usual insults. It's not helping the Democratic cause. SunSeeker Sep 2019 #99