Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Please stop criticizing Nadler for not arresting Lewandowski on the spot yesterday [View all]Baked Potato
(7,733 posts)57. True, true
They dont care
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
99 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Please stop criticizing Nadler for not arresting Lewandowski on the spot yesterday [View all]
StarfishSaver
Sep 2019
OP
No, I don't have the obsession, other people seem to, and that is what I am talking about.
Perseus
Sep 2019
#59
Thank you. Many here, including myself are very frustrated and we feel as if the evil thugs
Maraya1969
Sep 2019
#74
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
Once again, the voice of reason, but you're spoiling some people's fun!
The Velveteen Ocelot
Sep 2019
#3
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
"...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
So swearing an oath to tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth, and then refusing,
ancianita
Sep 2019
#79
Fair point. Yet, if Pelosi said it was contempt, inherent contempt, action could have been taken.
ancianita
Sep 2019
#82
" He probably ruined his chance at Senator." Never underestimate the stupidity of republican voters
Perseus
Sep 2019
#49
"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
Unlike New York City, the power of the federal governent extends to all US states and terrorities.
PoliticAverse
Sep 2019
#19
Repeated appeals can drag these matters out which is why you tend to see negotiated settlements
PoliticAverse
Sep 2019
#31
So it all sounds pretty hopeless ...like there really is no good way to hold witnesses accountable?
Amaryllis
Sep 2019
#37
You ignored the first part of that sentence: "the questions whether the person arrested is guilty"
StarfishSaver
Sep 2019
#65
The enforcement entity isn't the SA; his job is security of House members and order. But the
ancianita
Sep 2019
#80
Okay, she said ''held in contempt'' I said arrested. She did say ''then and there''
YOHABLO
Sep 2019
#86
No, actually, he couldn't have him arrested for refusing to answer questions.
StarfishSaver
Sep 2019
#91
Now you're channeling the right wing talking point that Dems had no need to call Lewandowski. Oy.
SunSeeker
Sep 2019
#96
Nope, you're stating your usual insults. It's not helping the Democratic cause.
SunSeeker
Sep 2019
#99