Subpoena Contempt

Replied by koobookie on topic Subpoena Contempt

towermonkey wrote: Can you tell me what judicial enforcement authority specifically covers these subpoenas? In the Nixon SCOTUS case, it was specified that congress had subpoena authority in relation to an ongoing trial.

Subpoena power is one of the major precedents followed since the late 1780s but not codified until the case McGrain v. Daugherty (U.S. Jan 17, 1927 273 U.S. 135 (1927)) . Congress, since its inception had used subpoena powers to compel testimony under “common law” provisions, which formed the basis of the Constitution and were handed down by such principle documents as the Magna Carta and Acts of Parliament.


www.quora.com/Where-in-the-Constitition-...he-power-to-subpoena
17 Oct 2019 09:15 #11

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by ramage on topic Subpoena Contempt

" You will note that if a subpeona is issued the recipient has remedy to go to the court."
That is what is being done by Mr. Guiliani. Your attempt to classify, as contempt of Congress, the lawful use of legal remedies.
17 Oct 2019 09:33 #12

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by homeagain on topic Subpoena Contempt

From a LEGAL perspective a long and informative view.....click if you are curious,NOTE the date of the article.

www.lawfareblog.com/congressional-subpoe...own-between-branches
17 Oct 2019 10:31 #13

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by koobookie on topic Subpoena Contempt

I know it's CNN, so you may not believe it, but it has some interesting details.

In a recent letter to Congress, the White House argued that in the absence of a full House vote, the impeachment inquiry is “constitutionally invalid and a violation of due process.” In fact, there is no Constitutional or statutory requirement that the House take a full vote, and a federal Court of Appeals ruled just days after the White House’s letter that the House is not legally required to vote before issuing subpoenas in an impeachment inquiry.


www.cnn.com/opinions/live-news/elie-honi...-response/index.html
17 Oct 2019 11:36 #14

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by ScienceChic on topic Subpoena Contempt

Sondland's Opening Statement, he refers directly to having to be issued a subpoena in order to testify because the WH blocked his testimony last week when only a letter was issued.

Keep dancing around whether it's a letter or a subpoena, the bigger picture is that the White House is obstructing justice and this shouldn't stand or we'll have no checks and balances on those who abuse their power. How is that in any way good for the citizens, regardless of the party in power?

Saying that there has to be a formal vote for impeachment in order for this to be a "real" proceeding and to have legal ground is to not have read the Constitution. There are no defined rules on how the House has to carry the procedure forward, only that they have they authority to do so.
The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to justice, peace and brotherhood. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Your scars exist, but it’s your courage that defines you. ~Nalini Singh
The following user(s) said Thank You: koobookie
17 Oct 2019 15:05 #15

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by koobookie on topic Subpoena Contempt

Add to the subpoena contempt: - the "Phony Emoluments Clause."

Did our President just declare that a portion of the Constitution is phony?

Speaking to reporters in the White House Cabinet Room, Trump dismissed as “phony” a section of the Constitution that bars federal office holders from accepting gifts from foreign governments.

“You people with this phony Emoluments Clause,” he said.


www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/201...se-phony/4055162002/
21 Oct 2019 13:40 #16

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by ScienceChic on topic Subpoena Contempt

Not only is the White House obstructing justice trying to prevent witnesses from testifying and having to be ordered by the courts to turn over documentation that has been requested by Congressional subpoena, but Republican Congress critters think it's completely fine to break the law and barge into a SCIF with electronic devices for a purely political stunt. Several of those who participated yesterday are members of the committees who are holding the hearings and therefore they already have the right to attend the closed door hearings.

According to Napolitano on Fox & Friends this morning, he read the rules of the House and guess what? The Democrats are following the rules that were last changed and adopted by John Boehner and a Republican majority. The impeachment investigation of both Nixon and Clinton began with closed door testimony, akin to grand jury evidence collection.
video.foxnews.com/v/6097325158001/#sp=show-clips

I stand by my statement that these Congressional Republicans (those who participated yesterday) are man-babies whiners who should be censured and have their Top Secret clearances and committee assignments revoked. They are not behaving like the informed elected adults they should be, but rather children who are trying to distract the public from the rightful investigation that is happening as it should be and has been done before. Shame on them.
The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to justice, peace and brotherhood. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Your scars exist, but it’s your courage that defines you. ~Nalini Singh
The following user(s) said Thank You: koobookie
24 Oct 2019 15:13 #17

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Rick on topic Subpoena Contempt

If Trump had a secret server that he used for government business and decided to delete tens of thousand of emails which were under congressional subpoena, would that be considered "subpoena contempt"? This is a pretty easy one to answer is you have an honest bone in your body..
03 Nov 2019 10:21 #18

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by koobookie on topic Subpoena Contempt

Interesting how the Republicans are now demanding the whistle blower publicly testify, when the White House continues to defy subpoenas.

What's the latest spin phrase from the White House? Oh, yeah, "You can't put toothpaste back in the tube." The whistle blower just took the cap off the tube, and all the other testimony has squeezed the toothpaste out. The WH attempt to deflect their problems by pursuing the identity of the whistle blower is pathetic.
03 Nov 2019 11:58 #19

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by koobookie on topic Subpoena Contempt

Rick wrote: If Trump had a secret server that he used for government business and decided to delete tens of thousand of emails which were under congressional subpoena, would that be considered "subpoena contempt"? This is a pretty easy one to answer is you have an honest bone in your body..


Trump does have a secret server on which he stores "sensitive information." How do we know the White House isn't deleting tens of thousands of emails unless he complies with subpoenas?
03 Nov 2019 12:00 #20

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.473 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+