- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
DOJ will not prosecute AG Garland for contempt of Congress
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:43 pm
DOJ sent an email to Majority Leader this afternoon…..
There’s a big fricking surprise…..no, not corrupt at all.
Video Interview of Biden is soooo friggin bad, Garland won’t provide it to CONGRESS, who has the right to see it.
There’s a big fricking surprise…..no, not corrupt at all.
Video Interview of Biden is soooo friggin bad, Garland won’t provide it to CONGRESS, who has the right to see it.
This post was edited on 6/14/24 at 2:45 pm
14
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:44 pm to IT_Dawg
I thought no one was above the law?
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:44 pm to IT_Dawg
Couldn't Congress vacate the contempt charges against Manafort and Bannon as a result of this?
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:44 pm to IT_Dawg
quote:
DOJ will not prosecute AG Garland for contempt of Congress
DOJ has never prosecuted an executive branch official for refusing to produce material that the WH has asserted privilege over.
They were never going to start doing that now, and the GOP doesn't want them to start doing that either.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:45 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Couldn't Congress vacate the contempt charges against Manafort and Bannon as a result of this?
No. Congress has no ability to vacate DOJ charges.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:45 pm to IT_Dawg
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:46 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
DOJ has never prosecuted an executive branch official for refusing to produce material that the WH has asserted privilege over.
Didn’t Trump assert privilege over confidential documents?
No one is above the law though…
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:47 pm to IT_Dawg
quote:
Didn’t Trump assert privilege over confidential documents?
Huh?
No, Donald Trump did not assert privilege over any documents that Merrick Garland or DOJ has that Congress is asking for.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:48 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Couldn't Congress vacate the contempt charges against Manafort and Bannon as a result of this?
You mean Peter Navarro not Manafort.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:50 pm to GumboPot
quote:
You mean Peter Navarro not Manafort.
The answer is an unequivocal 'No' regardless.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:50 pm to Indefatigable
Also, in almost every case, the DOJ doesn’t prosecute because the executive agency or person will make an agreement to provide the document or testify
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:51 pm to IT_Dawg
Time for the Committee to lay it out in front of the American public.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:52 pm to IT_Dawg
Here is my shocked face..
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:52 pm to IT_Dawg
quote:
the DOJ doesn’t prosecute because the executive agency or person will make an agreement to provide the document or testify
Garland did testify. He has to testify.
Again, the DOJ and the Executive has always taken the position that the contempt statute does not apply to executive branch officials who withhold documents after the WH claims executive privilege.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:53 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
The answer is an unequivocal 'No' regardless.
I get our point but couldn't congress pass a resolution nullifying the subpoena and file an amicus with the court requesting the judge to vacate the charges based on new info and circumstances and list the information and circumstances in the amicus brief?
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:54 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
DOJ and the Executive has always taken the position that the contempt statute does not apply to executive branch officials who withhold documents after the WH claims executive privilege.
Except when their names are Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon working for the Trump administration.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:55 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Again, the DOJ and the Executive has always taken the position that the contempt statute does not apply to executive branch officials who withhold documents after the WH claims executive privilege.
And again, administrations have always taken the position to not prosecute former Presidents…until now
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:56 pm to IT_Dawg
quote:
administrations have always taken the position to not prosecute former Presidents…until now
Ok? What does that have to do with this thread?
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:57 pm to GumboPot
quote:
xcept when their names are Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon working for the Trump administration.
Trump did not claim executive privilege over the documents in those cases, and both morons refused to appear and testify in any event.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:58 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I get our point but couldn't congress pass a resolution nullifying the subpoena
No. I guess they could pass whatever resolution they want. Resolutions are meaningless pieces of paper. It would impact nothing.
quote:
file an amicus with the court requesting the judge to vacate the charges based on new info and circumstances and list the information and circumstances in the amicus brief?
They can file all the amicus briefs they want.
Nothing Congress does will change the fact that a federal court has already held that the J6 committee was lawfully constituted and that it had lawful subpoena power. Nothing whatsoever. Only the federal court system can change that.
This post was edited on 6/14/24 at 2:59 pm
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News