- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: Giuliani Tells Democrats To Take Their Subpoena & Cram It
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:28 pm to TigerDoc
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:28 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
Failing to respond to subpoenas was part of Nixon's impeachment articles that passed through HJC, so...
Nixon was summoned with real subpoenas with the backing of legislation that invokes the judiciary.
There is ZERO legislative backing for these subpoenas in name only. So the judiciary has no power in this situation.
It's just two branches of government (the executive and legislative)
The judiciary can do nothing until the legislative branch passes legislation for them to act.
I understand the confusion. This is a little more advanced than general civics but it still boils down to three co-equal branches of government.
2
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:31 pm to TigerDoc
That's nice charge him.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:32 pm to GumboPot
quote:
It's just two branches of government
Not even that, GP. Just a couple of rogue Committees with all Dems wielding power. The Republicans should walk out, ending any and all semblance of legitimacy.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:36 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Nixon was summoned with real subpoenas with the backing of legislation that invokes the judiciary.
There is ZERO legislative backing for these subpoenas in name only. So the judiciary has no power in this situation.
It's just two branches of government (the executive and legislative)
The judiciary can do nothing until the legislative branch passes legislation for them to act.
I understand the confusion. This is a little more advanced than general civics but it still boils down to three co-equal branches of government.
They have to have a "legislative purpose". If their reasoning for issuing the subpoenas have that, then they are legit.
The only realistic way to enforce them is to file a civil suit and have a civil court judge rule on it, hoping that the judge will rule that compliance is required. If refusal still happens, then they are in contempt of the civil court - leading to daily fines and possibly imprisonment.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:37 pm to RCDfan1950
If congress passes a resolution (i.e., legislation) to start an official impeachment inquiry then the judiciary can enforce subpoenas.
It's just the way our constitutional government works.
The Democrat controlled House has not passed a resolution to start an official impeachment inquiry.
And the strategy is not to pass a resolution.
Why? Because if they do the GOP will have equal subpoena power.
Democrats do not want a rebuttal. They only want to hear their side.
It's just the way our constitutional government works.
The Democrat controlled House has not passed a resolution to start an official impeachment inquiry.
And the strategy is not to pass a resolution.
Why? Because if they do the GOP will have equal subpoena power.
Democrats do not want a rebuttal. They only want to hear their side.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:38 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
They have to have a "legislative purpose".
Well, hell, that went out the window 2 years ago. Unless "We just gotta get him" is a legitimate legislative purpose, that is.
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:39 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
The only realistic way to enforce them is to file a civil suit and have a civil court judge rule on it, hoping that the judge will rule that compliance is required. If refusal still happens, then they are in contempt of the civil court - leading to daily fines and possibly imprisonment.
I repeat. Bring it.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:42 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
hey have to have a "legislative purpose". If their reasoning for issuing the subpoenas have that, then they are legit.
Then pass the legislation.
quote:
civil court
quote:
imprisonment
Does not happen.
ETA: I even welcome a civil suit.
Note: Dems won't touch a criminal or civil suit. First of all a criminal suit would have no standing and second a civil suit would incur discovery and cross examination that the Dems sorely do not want.
This post was edited on 10/15/19 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:42 pm to AuburnTigers
quote:
he will be arrested within the week
By whom?
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:44 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Then pass the legislation.
You don't have to have legislation already passed lol. It can be to pursue new legislation.
quote:
Does not happen.
Um, yes it can. For contempt of court, yes it 100000% absolutely can.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:47 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Um, yes it can. For contempt of court, yes it 100000% absolutely can.
Contempt is not a civil case. That is a criminal case. Contempt of court is a crime of disobeying the court.
The executive is not in contempt of court by ignoring House "subpoenas" based on zero legislation.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:48 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Um, yes it can. For contempt of court, yes it 100000% absolutely can.
Can =/= will
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:50 pm to GumboPot
quote:
a civil suit would incur discovery and cross examination that the Dems sorely do not want.
Which is exactly why they won’t hold an impeachment vote to begin with.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:51 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Contempt is not a civil case. That is a criminal case. Contempt of court is a crime of disobeying the court.
The executive is not in contempt of court by ignoring House "subpoenas" based on zero legislation.
You're not following....They get a civil judge to rule that the original subpoena is valid and must be upheld. If the subpoena is still ignored after that, a civil judge can find the person in contempt of his court for ignoring his ruling.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:53 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
You're not following....They get a civil judge to rule that the original subpoena is valid and must be upheld. If the subpoena is still ignored after that, a civil judge can find the person in contempt of his court for ignoring his ruling.
As I said in my first response in this thread, take Rudy to court.
He is dying to be sued. Do it.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:55 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
They get a civil judge to rule that the original subpoena is valid and must be upheld.
A judge isn’t just going to rule that a subpoena is valid or invalid. There is a process involved that must be followed. A process the Dems want no part of, otherwise they’d have already held an impeachment vote to legitimize this “inquiry” and going to court would be unnecessary.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:56 pm to GumboPot
quote:
As I said in my first response in this thread, take Rudy to court.
He is dying to be sued. Do it.
Fair enough lol. Just wanted to clear up the whole "fake subpoena" "nothing they can do to enforce it" narrative in here.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:57 pm to Godfather1
quote:
A judge isn’t just going to rule that a subpoena is valid or invalid
I wouldn't be so sure about that. They are excellent at judge shopping.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:58 pm to Janky
quote:
I wouldn't be so sure about that. They are excellent at judge shopping.
Ok. And if due process isn’t followed, it goes to appeal.
Posted on 10/15/19 at 2:58 pm to Godfather1
quote:
A judge isn’t just going to rule that a subpoena is valid or invalid. There is a process involved that must be followed. A process the Dems want no part of, otherwise they’d have already held an impeachment vote to legitimize this “inquiry” and going to court would be unnecessary.
If they bring a civil lawsuit and the focus of that lawsuit is the congressional subpoena, yes they can.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News