DOJ won't prosecute AG Garland for contempt for refusal to turn over audio from Biden, Hur interview

[Procrustes Stretched]

Of course the House has a right to the unedited version. DOJ has absolutely no leg to stand on in this.

Really? LOL

Why? Name the right? LOL

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Why do you think the Congress doesn t have oversight of the DOJ? If not Congress than who does?

Show us the Congress has such an oversight mandate for such copies. It has been given transcripts.

 

[Couchpotato]

Show us the Congress has such an oversight mandate for such copies. It has been given transcripts.

Does Congress have oversight of the DOj or not?

 

[Rogue AI]

Really? LOL

Why? Name the right? LOL

Try reading the Constitution, it's the same oversight powers Democrats used in Trump investigations. Next.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Does Congress have oversight of the DOj or not?

You cannot show us the oversight authority. Hint: it is not absolute. It does have oversight for legislative functions.

What legislative function would these transcripts have for Congress: none.

 

[Couchpotato]

You cannot show us the oversight authority. Hint: it is not absolute. It does have oversight for legislative functions.

What legislative function would these transcripts have for Congress: none.

The legislature hs oversight of the executive. It’s one on the checks on the executive.

 

[busybee01]

Navarro and bannon go to prison for the same crime but not garland!!! The DOJ is all about politics. America has the right to hear this audio.

DOJ won't prosecute AG Garland for contempt for refusal to turn over audio from Biden, Hur interview

The Justice Department will not prosecute U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland over contempt after House Republicans voted Wednesday to hold him in contempt.

www.foxnews.com

Garland provided a transcript of the tapes. They could probably listen to the tapes. Republicans want the audio so they can selectively slice and dice the tapes and then release them out of context. The DOJ acted properly.

 

[busybee01]

You only have one right, and that is to lick the boots of the DNC.

You are too busy licking Trump's ass.

 

[Couchpotato]

Garland provided a transcript of the tapes. They could probably listen to the tapes. Republicans want the audio so they can selectively slice and dice the tapes and then release them out of context. The DOJ acted properly.

1. If the transcripts are correct then the audio will be exactly like them so there's no reason to not provide the audio.

2. The information being provided possibly being used against a political candidate is not legal justification for not providing the requested information.

3. Congress has oversight of the Executive and thus the DOJ. The DOJ doesnt get to tell Congress what it will and wont provide as part of that oversight.

 

[candycorn]

Navarro and bannon go to prison for the same crime but not garland!!! The DOJ is all about politics. America has the right to hear this audio.

DOJ won't prosecute AG Garland for contempt for refusal to turn over audio from Biden, Hur interview

The Justice Department will not prosecute U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland over contempt after House Republicans voted Wednesday to hold him in contempt.

www.foxnews.com

Not even remotely true.

However, perhaps now you guys on the political right will finally admit that it is time to decouple the DOJ from the Executive Branch and make it an independent agency. Give the director a 10 year term like they do the head of the FBI so, if need be, the President and whomever else is involved in crimes can be investigated.

 

[StatesRightsForever]

Congressional subpoenas are for government oversight, not political gain.

What part of the moon do you live on?

 

[StatesRightsForever]

Dunno man. Markets set another record today.

Thanks to the PPT.

 

[Couchpotato]

Not even remotely true.

However, perhaps now you guys on the political right will finally admit that it is time to decouple the DOJ from the Executive Branch and make it an independent agency. Give the director a 10 year term like they do the head of the FBI so, if need be, the President and whomever else is involved in crimes can be investigated.

The FBI is part of the DOJ which falls under the executive. I don’t know that there is a mechanism where a federal agency doesn’t fall under an elected official. That person would t be answerable to the people.

 

[StatesRightsForever]

Garland provided a transcript of the tapes. They could probably listen to the tapes. Republicans want the audio so they can selectively slice and dice the tapes and then release them out of context.

That's politics dood. If the shoe was on the other foot. . .

 

[StatesRightsForever]

Repubs should stop criticizing biden until after he is nominated. They should want him to run. Pedo Joe is a much weaker candidate now that he was in 2020 and he was a mess then.

 

[candycorn]

The FBI is part of the DOJ which falls under the executive. I don’t know that there is a mechanism where a federal agency doesn’t fall under an elected official. That person would t be answerable to the people.

You give the AG a 10 year term; one and done. She or he has some independence. Above anything else, you get away from the blob satisfying his neanderthal voting base by promising (chuckle) that he'll direct his AG to go after ______ (whomever you guys hate most at that particular moment).

Moreover, doing so would be a tacit admission of the all-too-obvious; that, gee whiz, a bunch of guys in 1789 didn't get everything right and we can and should amend their masterpiece.

 

[candycorn]

Repubs should stop criticizing biden until after he is nominated. They should want him to run. Pedo Joe is a much weaker candidate now that he was in 2020 and he was a mess then.

306<232

 

[Couchpotato]

You give the AG a 10 year term; one and done. She or he has some independence. Above anything else, you get away from the blob satisfying his neanderthal voting base by promising (chuckle) that he'll direct his AG to go after ______ (whomever you guys hate most at that particular moment).

Moreover, doing so would be a tacit admission of the all-too-obvious; that, gee whiz, a bunch of guys in 1789 didn't get everything right and we can and should amend their masterpiece.

Who does the AG answer to? No one? Yeah that does t sound like recipe for disaster.

 

[the watcher]

Show us the Congress has such an oversight mandate for such copies. It has been given transcripts.

The White house has admitted it edited and altered the transcripts. The Congress may or may not have what you call oversight of the doj, but they can subpoena and question them, and of course they have power over their funding. Navarro and Bannon ended up in jail for ignoring subpoenas. The thing is if you think of Congress and the doj as adversaries you really need to rethink that. You have no champion in Washington and there is no cavalry coming to save you. No one wants any more cans of worms opened in this year or any other year. Trump is a designated common enemy of the power structure, and he gets no immunity from persecution.

 

[forkup]

. If the transcripts are correct then the audio will be exactly like them so there's no reason to not provide the audio.

Sure there is. If that transcript is only asked for, to release parts off it in bad faith in order to damage the political chances of the president, the next president will be less likely to cooperate with investigation of the DOJ.

He will, like Trump did throughout his entire presidency simply make broad claims off executive privilege, for everything including his own testimony, if he can't guarantee the DOJ will not simply give the opposing party ammunition.

In fact,

Trump invokes executive privilege to block full report release

The White House is invoking executive privilege, reserving the right to block the full release of special counsel Robert Mueller's report on the Russia probe, escalating President Donald Trump's battle with Congress.

www.pbs.org

This is Trump trying to block the release of a report to congress. Not a particular piece of evidence but the entire thing.

I don't remember anyone on the right being concerned with congressional oversight in this case. Or for that matter the dozens of protracted legal fights the DOJ fought to protect Trump from congressional oversight.

. The information being provided possibly being used against a political candidate is not legal justification for not providing the requested information.

No. But having a chilling effect on future investigations is.

3. Congress has oversight of the Executive and thus the DOJ. The DOJ doesnt get to tell Congress what it will and wont provide as part of that oversight.

Sure it does. It did so dozens of times under Trump.



It's really funny to see you guys complain and even refer Garland to the DOJ for charges for not being allowed to abuse the legitimate oversight role off congress. While at the same time supporting Trump's and BARR's actual blocking of relevant documents to perform that oversight.