Robert "Third" Reich encourages Congress to consider arresting William Barr

[Papageorgio]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Were you as outraged when Holder was held in contempt of Congress? Were you upset with him? Or was it the damn Republicans picking on the AG>

 

[Papageorgio]

What has he got to hide, anyway?

That is the worst possible reason to do anything. We have protection of innocent until proven guilty. That said I believe Barr should testify, but this is just like when Holder was held in contempt by Congress. Did you say then, "what does Holder have to hide?"

 

[justoffal]

I doubt Barr is worried at all. The dimwits in the House aren't his bosses. Trump is his boss.

Hope he tells the idiots to pound fucking sand.

No you idiot, you and I are his boss, not tRump.

No....you are wrong. We may hold the power of the vote but that's it. Even Trump cannot order the AG....he can pressure him to resign. The AG has nothing to fear from Congress or even the white house. In fact he can resist being terminated. The house cannot impeach him alone. Even the democratic Senators would stop them. Congress however and the white house house also do indeed have something to fear from the DOJ.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

What has he got to hide, anyway?

That is the worst possible reason to do anything. We have protection of innocent until proven guilty. That said I believe Barr should testify, but this is just like when Holder was held in contempt by Congress. Did you say then, "what does Holder have to hide?"

Barr does not have to agree to their format which is arduous for no good reason at all.
He is not a punching bag for Congress.
When they get over themselves and offer him the respect due a sitting AG he may decide to go. Until then they are quite welcome to hold him in contempt....an utterly toothless option.

Jo

 

[Lysistrata]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

And you are still a POS and a anti-Ameeican!

View attachment 258790Politico › blogs › politico44 › 2013/04
Web results
Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman' - POLITICO
View attachment 258791
Apr 4, 2013 · Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman' ... Attorney General Eric Holder brushed off a question ... Instead, the top lawman professed his allegiance to President Barack Obama

Please explain your assertions that I am a "POS" and "anti-American." What makes YOU not a "POS" and "anti-American"?

You are addressing a person who stood up and saluted the television while watching our flag being planted on the moon. so be careful.

 

[SAYIT]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

Lysol has a strong "life isn't fair" whine-thing goin' on and envisions reality as she needs it to be to serve her hate

Political pundit Robert Reichhhh encouraged Congress to consider having Attorney General William Barr arrested if he doesn't cooperate with lawmakers' demands.

Barr is scheduled to testify about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but the Justice Department and majority party Democrats are grappling over the parameters.

Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., has said Barr will be subpoenaed if he doesn't show.

In an opinion piece in Newsweek on Tuesday, Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration, said there should be consequences if Barr refuses to comply with a subpoena.

"What could the Committee do? Hold Barr in contempt of Congress—under Congress's inherent power to get the information it needs to carry out its constitutional duties. Congress cannot function without this power," Reich wrote. "Under this inherent power, the House can order its own sergeant-at-arms to arrest the offender, subject him to a trial before the full House, and, if judged to be in contempt, jail that person until he appears before the House and brings whatever documentation the House has subpoenaed."

Reich noted historical precedence of at least threatening jail time, citing the Nixon era, but cast doubt on Nadler actually going through with such an extreme show of force.

"Would America really be subject to the wild spectacle of the sergeant-at-arms of the House arresting an Attorney General and possibly placing him in jail?" he said. "Probably not. Before that ever occurred, the Trump administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com...

------------

DemonRAT pundits are allowed to suggest getting dirty and nasty with polticis, and the rest of the media applauds, but someone on the right in the media suggested these things, they’d be screaming nationalism or white supremacy or whatever crazy hyperbole they saw fit...
Yeah, placing Eric "The RED" Holder under contempt of congress worked so well!!!!!

Perhaps they can send a fully armed swat brigade like they did with Roger Stone?

If it will enforce our rules regarding separation of powers, this might be a good idea. He's just one person who purports to know the rules, but he apparently doesn't. These rules have been in place throughout decades, if not hundreds of years, and complied with by both Republican-led and Democratic-led administrations. barr has no right to refuse congress.

We, The People, have the right to full transparency. barr must testify to Congress, which oversees the goings-on of the executive branch. BTW: we taxpayers pay these folks' salaries, and we are entitled to a full reporting.

One can only wonder how you consistently get everything bass aackwards.

Much of gov't info - for instance your tax return - is not available for public viewing thanks to our constitutional protections. The right to privacy and protection from even the threat of "unreasonable search & seizure" (4th Amendment) far outweighs your curiosity or even that of congress.

Tossing around "We, The People" may make you think you are fooling someone but there is more to our constitution than the first 3 words of the preamble. Since you clearly have never read it you will have to trust me on that.

 

[Lysistrata]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

All people in the executive branch "work" for the President, but some do take an oath to uphold the constitution and laws of the US.

Why is it that progressives always think unelected Bureaucrats should hold more power than elected officials?

Oh, that's right because they know they can get away with more shit via a bureaucracy than than ballot box.

trump's officials are NOT elected. They are "unelected Bureaucrats." Congress consists of those persons elected by their various districts.

 

[The Purge]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

And you are still a POS and a anti-Ameeican!

View attachment 258790Politico › blogs › politico44 › 2013/04
Web results
Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman' - POLITICO
View attachment 258791
Apr 4, 2013 · Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman' ... Attorney General Eric Holder brushed off a question ... Instead, the top lawman professed his allegiance to President Barack Obama

Please explain your assertions that I am a "POS" and "anti-American." What makes YOU not a "POS" and "anti-American"?

You are addressing a person who stood up and saluted the television while watching our flag being planted on the moon. so be careful.

Easy answer....nothing this president has done has you agreeing with him....He has done more for our economy than any other president since Ike....want me to go on with ranting about you leftist, communist loving scum?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

But the branches of government are supposed to work together.

How naive.

We have currently two dominate political parties in the United States. Voting patterns indicate that's how the voting citizenry likes it.

The problem is one of those parties has been co-opted by those diametrically opposed to the foundational mandates of the nation. They are enthusiastically attempting to "fundamentally change the United States of America" in the words of their erstwhile Messiah, the bulk of whose activities in office have thankfully been erased.

That being the case, there is likely to be little interest within those parties to "work together", since one is trying to destroy the foundation the nation is built upon, with the other opting to remain American, creating essentially what is so far a "soft war".

 

[martybegan]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

All people in the executive branch "work" for the President, but some do take an oath to uphold the constitution and laws of the US.

Why is it that progressives always think unelected Bureaucrats should hold more power than elected officials?

Oh, that's right because they know they can get away with more shit via a bureaucracy than than ballot box.

trump's officials are NOT elected. They are "unelected Bureaucrats." Congress consists of those persons elected by their various districts.

Agreed. yet you want them responsible only to some vague term "the people" and not to the elected member of their branch of government.

The people in the executive branch serve at the sufferenace of the President.

 

[Pilot1]

Political pundit Robert Reichhhh encouraged Congress to consider having Attorney General William Barr arrested if he doesn't cooperate with lawmakers' demands.

Barr is scheduled to testify about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but the Justice Department and majority party Democrats are grappling over the parameters.

Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., has said Barr will be subpoenaed if he doesn't show.

In an opinion piece in Newsweek on Tuesday, Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration, said there should be consequences if Barr refuses to comply with a subpoena.

"What could the Committee do? Hold Barr in contempt of Congress—under Congress's inherent power to get the information it needs to carry out its constitutional duties. Congress cannot function without this power," Reich wrote. "Under this inherent power, the House can order its own sergeant-at-arms to arrest the offender, subject him to a trial before the full House, and, if judged to be in contempt, jail that person until he appears before the House and brings whatever documentation the House has subpoenaed."

Reich noted historical precedence of at least threatening jail time, citing the Nixon era, but cast doubt on Nadler actually going through with such an extreme show of force.

"Would America really be subject to the wild spectacle of the sergeant-at-arms of the House arresting an Attorney General and possibly placing him in jail?" he said. "Probably not. Before that ever occurred, the Trump administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com...

------------

DemonRAT pundits are allowed to suggest getting dirty and nasty with polticis, and the rest of the media applauds, but someone on the right in the media suggested these things, they’d be screaming nationalism or white supremacy or whatever crazy hyperbole they saw fit...
Yeah, placing Eric "The RED" Holder under contempt of congress worked so well!!!!!

Reich the goosestepping Fascist

Truth! He also suffers from Napoleon Complex (short man's disease). I saw him speak once in Montreal many years ago, and he had to stand on a stool to reach the microphone on the podium. He is a total LOON.

 

[martybegan]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

But the branches of government are supposed to work together.

How naive.

We have currently two dominate political parties in the United States. Voting patterns indicate that's how the voting citizenry likes it.

The problem is one of those parties has been co-opted by those diametrically opposed to the foundational mandates of the nation. They are enthusiastically attempting to "fundamentally change the United States of America" in the words of their erstwhile Messiah, the bulk of whose activities in office have thankfully been erased.

That being the case, there is likely to be little interest within those parties to "work together", since one is trying to destroy the foundation the nation is built upon, and the other opting to remain American, creating essentially what is so far a "soft war".

The other issue is, one party has entirely abandoned federalism. They want their policies to be nationwide, regardless of how asinine they would be for certain States.

Progressives have more than a few States where they can enact their cherished policies to (almost) their hearts content, and most of the rest of the Country wouldn't say boo about it.

 

[Lysistrata]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

Lysol has a strong "life isn't fair" whine-thing goin' on and envisions reality as she needs it to be to serve her hate

Political pundit Robert Reichhhh encouraged Congress to consider having Attorney General William Barr arrested if he doesn't cooperate with lawmakers' demands.

Barr is scheduled to testify about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but the Justice Department and majority party Democrats are grappling over the parameters.

Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., has said Barr will be subpoenaed if he doesn't show.

In an opinion piece in Newsweek on Tuesday, Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration, said there should be consequences if Barr refuses to comply with a subpoena.

"What could the Committee do? Hold Barr in contempt of Congress—under Congress's inherent power to get the information it needs to carry out its constitutional duties. Congress cannot function without this power," Reich wrote. "Under this inherent power, the House can order its own sergeant-at-arms to arrest the offender, subject him to a trial before the full House, and, if judged to be in contempt, jail that person until he appears before the House and brings whatever documentation the House has subpoenaed."

Reich noted historical precedence of at least threatening jail time, citing the Nixon era, but cast doubt on Nadler actually going through with such an extreme show of force.

"Would America really be subject to the wild spectacle of the sergeant-at-arms of the House arresting an Attorney General and possibly placing him in jail?" he said. "Probably not. Before that ever occurred, the Trump administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com...

------------

DemonRAT pundits are allowed to suggest getting dirty and nasty with polticis, and the rest of the media applauds, but someone on the right in the media suggested these things, they’d be screaming nationalism or white supremacy or whatever crazy hyperbole they saw fit...
Yeah, placing Eric "The RED" Holder under contempt of congress worked so well!!!!!

Perhaps they can send a fully armed swat brigade like they did with Roger Stone?

If it will enforce our rules regarding separation of powers, this might be a good idea. He's just one person who purports to know the rules, but he apparently doesn't. These rules have been in place throughout decades, if not hundreds of years, and complied with by both Republican-led and Democratic-led administrations. barr has no right to refuse congress.

We, The People, have the right to full transparency. barr must testify to Congress, which oversees the goings-on of the executive branch. BTW: we taxpayers pay these folks' salaries, and we are entitled to a full reporting.

One can only wonder how you consistently get everything bass aackwards.

Much of gov't info - for instance your tax return - is not available for public viewing thanks to our constitutional protections. The right to privacy and protection from even the threat of "unreasonable search & seizure" (4th Amendment) far outweighs your curiosity of even that of congress.

Tossing around "We, The People" may make you think you are fooling someone but there is more to our constitution than the first 3 words of the preamble. Since you clearly have never read it you will have to trust me on that.

I had to survive two courses in the Constitution to get a paralegal certification and then a law degree. Yeah. I've read beyond the first three words. The situation here presented rests on the concept of what is "reasonable." The actions of Congress are clearly reasonable given the circumstances. The situation involves the highest levels of federal government. If Congress does not investigate the workings of the executive branch, which clearly shows that something is being hidden, who will?

 

[SAYIT]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

And you are still a POS and a anti-Ameeican!

View attachment 258790Politico › blogs › politico44 › 2013/04
Web results
Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman' - POLITICO
View attachment 258791
Apr 4, 2013 · Eric Holder: 'I'm still the president's wingman' ... Attorney General Eric Holder brushed off a question ... Instead, the top lawman professed his allegiance to President Barack Obama

Please explain your assertions that I am a "POS" and "anti-American." What makes YOU not a "POS" and "anti-American"?

You are addressing a person who stood up and saluted the television while watching our flag being planted on the moon. so be careful.

Easy answer....nothing this president has done has you agreeing with him....He has done more for our economy than any other president since Ike....want me to go on with ranting about you leftist, communist loving scum?

Ike had very real advantages. Our industrial capacity was stoked after WW2 and the rest of the world was on its knees. We were pretty much the only game in town.

Trump inherited a slowly expanding economy - one that hit rock bottom 1 yr after Obama took office - that was and remains in need of a break. Remarkably we have kept the ball rolling.

 

[martybegan]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

Lysol has a strong "life isn't fair" whine-thing goin' on and envisions reality as she needs it to be to serve her hate

Political pundit Robert Reichhhh encouraged Congress to consider having Attorney General William Barr arrested if he doesn't cooperate with lawmakers' demands.

Barr is scheduled to testify about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but the Justice Department and majority party Democrats are grappling over the parameters.

Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., has said Barr will be subpoenaed if he doesn't show.

In an opinion piece in Newsweek on Tuesday, Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration, said there should be consequences if Barr refuses to comply with a subpoena.

"What could the Committee do? Hold Barr in contempt of Congress—under Congress's inherent power to get the information it needs to carry out its constitutional duties. Congress cannot function without this power," Reich wrote. "Under this inherent power, the House can order its own sergeant-at-arms to arrest the offender, subject him to a trial before the full House, and, if judged to be in contempt, jail that person until he appears before the House and brings whatever documentation the House has subpoenaed."

Reich noted historical precedence of at least threatening jail time, citing the Nixon era, but cast doubt on Nadler actually going through with such an extreme show of force.

"Would America really be subject to the wild spectacle of the sergeant-at-arms of the House arresting an Attorney General and possibly placing him in jail?" he said. "Probably not. Before that ever occurred, the Trump administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com...

------------

DemonRAT pundits are allowed to suggest getting dirty and nasty with polticis, and the rest of the media applauds, but someone on the right in the media suggested these things, they’d be screaming nationalism or white supremacy or whatever crazy hyperbole they saw fit...
Yeah, placing Eric "The RED" Holder under contempt of congress worked so well!!!!!

Perhaps they can send a fully armed swat brigade like they did with Roger Stone?

If it will enforce our rules regarding separation of powers, this might be a good idea. He's just one person who purports to know the rules, but he apparently doesn't. These rules have been in place throughout decades, if not hundreds of years, and complied with by both Republican-led and Democratic-led administrations. barr has no right to refuse congress.

We, The People, have the right to full transparency. barr must testify to Congress, which oversees the goings-on of the executive branch. BTW: we taxpayers pay these folks' salaries, and we are entitled to a full reporting.

One can only wonder how you consistently get everything bass aackwards.

Much of gov't info - for instance your tax return - is not available for public viewing thanks to our constitutional protections. The right to privacy and protection from even the threat of "unreasonable search & seizure" (4th Amendment) far outweighs your curiosity of even that of congress.

Tossing around "We, The People" may make you think you are fooling someone but there is more to our constitution than the first 3 words of the preamble. Since you clearly have never read it you will have to trust me on that.

I had to survive two courses in the Constitution to get a paralegal certification and then a law degree. Yeah. I've read beyond the first three words. The situation here presented rests on the concept of what is "reasonable." The actions of Congress are clearly reasonable given the circumstances. The situation involves the highest levels of federal government. If Congress does not investigate the workings of the executive branch, which clearly shows that something is being hidden, who will?

The only reason you would think this is "reasonable" is because you hate Trump and want him out of office any way you can get it.

Fishing expedition.

 

[SAYIT]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

Lysol has a strong "life isn't fair" whine-thing goin' on and envisions reality as she needs it to be to serve her hate

Political pundit Robert Reichhhh encouraged Congress to consider having Attorney General William Barr arrested if he doesn't cooperate with lawmakers' demands.

Barr is scheduled to testify about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but the Justice Department and majority party Democrats are grappling over the parameters.

Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., has said Barr will be subpoenaed if he doesn't show.

In an opinion piece in Newsweek on Tuesday, Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration, said there should be consequences if Barr refuses to comply with a subpoena.

"What could the Committee do? Hold Barr in contempt of Congress—under Congress's inherent power to get the information it needs to carry out its constitutional duties. Congress cannot function without this power," Reich wrote. "Under this inherent power, the House can order its own sergeant-at-arms to arrest the offender, subject him to a trial before the full House, and, if judged to be in contempt, jail that person until he appears before the House and brings whatever documentation the House has subpoenaed."

Reich noted historical precedence of at least threatening jail time, citing the Nixon era, but cast doubt on Nadler actually going through with such an extreme show of force.

"Would America really be subject to the wild spectacle of the sergeant-at-arms of the House arresting an Attorney General and possibly placing him in jail?" he said. "Probably not. Before that ever occurred, the Trump administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com...

------------

DemonRAT pundits are allowed to suggest getting dirty and nasty with polticis, and the rest of the media applauds, but someone on the right in the media suggested these things, they’d be screaming nationalism or white supremacy or whatever crazy hyperbole they saw fit...
Yeah, placing Eric "The RED" Holder under contempt of congress worked so well!!!!!

Perhaps they can send a fully armed swat brigade like they did with Roger Stone?

If it will enforce our rules regarding separation of powers, this might be a good idea. He's just one person who purports to know the rules, but he apparently doesn't. These rules have been in place throughout decades, if not hundreds of years, and complied with by both Republican-led and Democratic-led administrations. barr has no right to refuse congress.

We, The People, have the right to full transparency. barr must testify to Congress, which oversees the goings-on of the executive branch. BTW: we taxpayers pay these folks' salaries, and we are entitled to a full reporting.

One can only wonder how you consistently get everything bass aackwards.

Much of gov't info - for instance your tax return - is not available for public viewing thanks to our constitutional protections. The right to privacy and protection from even the threat of "unreasonable search & seizure" (4th Amendment) far outweighs your curiosity of even that of congress.

Tossing around "We, The People" may make you think you are fooling someone but there is more to our constitution than the first 3 words of the preamble. Since you clearly have never read it you will have to trust me on that.

I had to survive two courses in the Constitution to get a paralegal certification and then a law degree. Yeah. I've read beyond the first three words. The situation here presented rests on the concept of what is "reasonable." The actions of Congress are clearly reasonable given the circumstances...

No they aren't as there has been no crime identified and as even a 1st yr law student knows, witch-hunts are neither stipulated in nor protected by our constitution.

That you refuse to admit congress's actions in this matter are not oversight but rather harassment says all one needs to know about your mental and emotional condition.

If you still cry yourself to sleep every night, awake on the angry, bitter side of the bed every morning, and obsess all day long I respectfully suggest you at least consider committing yourself for observation.

Is "Trump Derangement Syndrome" a Real Mental Condition?
"Many have argued that some people have been seriously disturbed and distressed by the policies, speech, behavior and tweets of President Trump, so much so that it has affected their cognitive, affective and behavioral functioning. Such people may need mental health support." - Rob Whitley, Ph.D.

 

[The Purge]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

Lysol has a strong "life isn't fair" whine-thing goin' on and envisions reality as she needs it to be to serve her hate

Political pundit Robert Reichhhh encouraged Congress to consider having Attorney General William Barr arrested if he doesn't cooperate with lawmakers' demands.

Barr is scheduled to testify about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but the Justice Department and majority party Democrats are grappling over the parameters.

Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., has said Barr will be subpoenaed if he doesn't show.

In an opinion piece in Newsweek on Tuesday, Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration, said there should be consequences if Barr refuses to comply with a subpoena.

"What could the Committee do? Hold Barr in contempt of Congress—under Congress's inherent power to get the information it needs to carry out its constitutional duties. Congress cannot function without this power," Reich wrote. "Under this inherent power, the House can order its own sergeant-at-arms to arrest the offender, subject him to a trial before the full House, and, if judged to be in contempt, jail that person until he appears before the House and brings whatever documentation the House has subpoenaed."

Reich noted historical precedence of at least threatening jail time, citing the Nixon era, but cast doubt on Nadler actually going through with such an extreme show of force.

"Would America really be subject to the wild spectacle of the sergeant-at-arms of the House arresting an Attorney General and possibly placing him in jail?" he said. "Probably not. Before that ever occurred, the Trump administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com...

------------

DemonRAT pundits are allowed to suggest getting dirty and nasty with polticis, and the rest of the media applauds, but someone on the right in the media suggested these things, they’d be screaming nationalism or white supremacy or whatever crazy hyperbole they saw fit...
Yeah, placing Eric "The RED" Holder under contempt of congress worked so well!!!!!

Perhaps they can send a fully armed swat brigade like they did with Roger Stone?

If it will enforce our rules regarding separation of powers, this might be a good idea. He's just one person who purports to know the rules, but he apparently doesn't. These rules have been in place throughout decades, if not hundreds of years, and complied with by both Republican-led and Democratic-led administrations. barr has no right to refuse congress.

We, The People, have the right to full transparency. barr must testify to Congress, which oversees the goings-on of the executive branch. BTW: we taxpayers pay these folks' salaries, and we are entitled to a full reporting.

One can only wonder how you consistently get everything bass aackwards.

Much of gov't info - for instance your tax return - is not available for public viewing thanks to our constitutional protections. The right to privacy and protection from even the threat of "unreasonable search & seizure" (4th Amendment) far outweighs your curiosity of even that of congress.

Tossing around "We, The People" may make you think you are fooling someone but there is more to our constitution than the first 3 words of the preamble. Since you clearly have never read it you will have to trust me on that.

I had to survive two courses in the Constitution to get a paralegal certification and then a law degree. Yeah. I've read beyond the first three words. The situation here presented rests on the concept of what is "reasonable." The actions of Congress are clearly reasonable given the circumstances. The situation involves the highest levels of federal government. If Congress does not investigate the workings of the executive branch, which clearly shows that something is being hidden, who will?

Congress is clearly HARASSING the president... going so far as to trying to get his daughter Tiffany's credit card receipts ..what the fuck does that have to do with any fucking thing???

 

[justoffal]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Were you as outraged when Holder was held in contempt of Congress? Were you upset with him? Or was it the damn Republicans picking on the AG>

I laughed my ass off at Holder's contempt charges because I knew all that it meant is that he would have to arrest himself. It was a farce.

Jo

 

[FJO]

If barr, with all of his experience and his position as chief federal law-enforcement officer, does not understand how the federal government works under the U.S. Constitution, why is he in this position?

BTW: Barr does not work "for trump." He is supposed to be working for the American people. He is not supposed to be a party apparatchik.

Too funny.

The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch, not the Legislative branch. Separation of Powers and all that.

Lysol has a strong "life isn't fair" whine-thing goin' on and envisions reality as she needs it to be to serve her hate

Political pundit Robert Reichhhh encouraged Congress to consider having Attorney General William Barr arrested if he doesn't cooperate with lawmakers' demands.

Barr is scheduled to testify about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but the Justice Department and majority party Democrats are grappling over the parameters.

Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., has said Barr will be subpoenaed if he doesn't show.

In an opinion piece in Newsweek on Tuesday, Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration, said there should be consequences if Barr refuses to comply with a subpoena.

"What could the Committee do? Hold Barr in contempt of Congress—under Congress's inherent power to get the information it needs to carry out its constitutional duties. Congress cannot function without this power," Reich wrote. "Under this inherent power, the House can order its own sergeant-at-arms to arrest the offender, subject him to a trial before the full House, and, if judged to be in contempt, jail that person until he appears before the House and brings whatever documentation the House has subpoenaed."

Reich noted historical precedence of at least threatening jail time, citing the Nixon era, but cast doubt on Nadler actually going through with such an extreme show of force.

"Would America really be subject to the wild spectacle of the sergeant-at-arms of the House arresting an Attorney General and possibly placing him in jail?" he said. "Probably not. Before that ever occurred, the Trump administration would take the matter to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com...

------------

DemonRAT pundits are allowed to suggest getting dirty and nasty with polticis, and the rest of the media applauds, but someone on the right in the media suggested these things, they’d be screaming nationalism or white supremacy or whatever crazy hyperbole they saw fit...
Yeah, placing Eric "The RED" Holder under contempt of congress worked so well!!!!!

Perhaps they can send a fully armed swat brigade like they did with Roger Stone?

If it will enforce our rules regarding separation of powers, this might be a good idea. He's just one person who purports to know the rules, but he apparently doesn't. These rules have been in place throughout decades, if not hundreds of years, and complied with by both Republican-led and Democratic-led administrations. barr has no right to refuse congress.

We, The People, have the right to full transparency. barr must testify to Congress, which oversees the goings-on of the executive branch. BTW: we taxpayers pay these folks' salaries, and we are entitled to a full reporting.

One can only wonder how you consistently get everything bass aackwards.

Much of gov't info - for instance your tax return - is not available for public viewing thanks to our constitutional protections. The right to privacy and protection from even the threat of "unreasonable search & seizure" (4th Amendment) far outweighs your curiosity of even that of congress.

Tossing around "We, The People" may make you think you are fooling someone but there is more to our constitution than the first 3 words of the preamble. Since you clearly have never read it you will have to trust me on that.

I had to survive two courses in the Constitution to get a paralegal certification and then a law degree. Yeah. I've read beyond the first three words. The situation here presented rests on the concept of what is "reasonable." The actions of Congress are clearly reasonable given the circumstances...

No they aren't as there has been no crime identified and as even a 1st yr law student knows, witch-hunts are neither stipulated in nor protected by our constitution.

That you refuse to admit congress's actions in this matter are not oversight but rather harassment says all one needs to know about your mental and emotional condition.

If you still cry yourself to sleep every night, awake on the angry, bitter side of the bed every morning, and obsess all day long I respectfully suggest you at least consider committing yourself for observation.

Is "Trump Derangement Syndrome" a Real Mental Condition?
"Many have argued that some people have been seriously disturbed and distressed by the policies, speech, behavior and tweets of President Trump, so much so that it has affected their cognitive, affective and behavioral functioning. Such people may need mental health support." - Rob Whitley, Ph.D.

WELL SAID!!

 

[Dick Foster]

I am currently watching the Senate hearing with Barr testifying. I just watched as Lindsay Graham apparently saying that the Clinton email frakus is not over but the Trump investigation dois. I also watched as Feinstiene doubled down on stupid which I'd hoped she would not do. I guess there are no sane or responsible democrats left in office so they have become a completely hopeless cause. There is only one way to go now and that is the Democratic party going down hard. By the time the 2020 election ends, the democratic party will start to fade from memory. They just can't or won't help themselves. Any body regardless of party affiliation should know that Trump did no wrong while Clinton supporters all the up to and including the Obama Whitehouse are as guilty as sin. This much is abundantly clear from all of the evidence at hand plus the actions of the parties involved. If you have a brain, it's clear how all of this is going to shake out. That is the present democratic party has no chance unless the republicans show mercy and allow them life. However the actions and behaviour of the democrats indicate that they are not interested in mercy, only in committing suicide. You can only help people who want help but it's abundantly clear from their actions that the democrats don't want any help, they just want to die even if it takes this nation down with them. What a shitty way to go and what a shitty legacy to leave to history.