Tag Archives: contempt of Congress

crime news

What would happen if we did this?

I watched Steve Bannon’s tirade outside the courtroom today as jury selection in his federal contempt of Congress trial was completed. I was struck by this question: What would happen if you or I thought to thumb our nose at a congressional subpoena?

If it were me, I would be locked up and kept in the cooler until my trial began.

The House 1/6 committee summoned Bannon — a former Donald Trump senior political adviser — to testify before the panel in its quest to find the truth behind the 1/6 insurrection. Bannon said, in effect, “f*** you” to the committee. The Department of Justice, acting within its authority, then indicted Bannon on contempt of Congress.

Well, today Bannon challenged the legitimacy of the House committee’s very existence, let alone its legal authority to subpoena him. Then he launched into The Big Lie mantra that “Donald Trump won the 2020 election” and that “Joe Biden is an illegitimate president.”

That is his opinion. Bannon also is full of horse dookey … but that’s just my opinion.

It astounds me beyond measure how these individuals think they can defy what I am certain is a duly and legally constituted congressional committee charged with the task of investigating what most of us believe is a crime against the government.

Yet there is Steve Bannon, a fire-breathing ideologue who spews The Big Lie about vote fraud — which has been thoroughly and roundly discredited — while giving the middle finger to a congressional probe.

I shudder to think what would happen if I were to demonstrate such arrogance.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Absent an argument over the facts, then where do we stand?

Congressional Republicans have laid down their marker: They are not going to argue the facts surrounding the impeachment of Donald J. Trump.

Congressional Democrats are arguing that the facts are beyond dispute. They are acknowledged as being true.

So what is left, then, for Congress to consider? I am left to conclude only that the facts as presented either are impeachable or they are not. That’s what I get from all of this.

I happen to believe that a president who invites foreign involvement in our election has committed an impeachable offense. It is an abuse of the immense power of his office. Trump allies, I am presuming, believe otherwise. If that is their belief, then why are we not hearing them argue that point?

Moreover, I also believe that obstruction of Congress also is an impeachable offense. The U.S. Constitution gives Congress all the authority it needs to conduct an investigation into executive branch behavior. When a president orders all key witnesses to ignore congressional subpoenas, I believe that constitutes an impeachable offense.

What do congressional Republicans use to justify their resistance to these two articles of impeachment that are heading inexorably to a vote in the House Judiciary Committee and then to the full House of Representatives?

I am just a voter, a patriot and someone with a deep interest in our government. I believe the president has violated his oath of office. Believe me or not, but I am waiting to hear someone on the GOP side speak to the facts at hand.

That specific defense is not forthcoming, or so it appears as we hurtle toward impeachment.

So we’re left with one side arguing that abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are impeachable offenses. The other side seems to believe they are not impeachable.

What is the rationale of those who cannot defend the indefensible?

national news

Possible trail to be blazed toward impeachment of POTUS

Follow me on this journey for just a few moments. I think I’ve discovered a possible path that could lead to an impeachment of Donald J. Trump.

Congressional Democrats who chair key House committees are set to vote on whether to hold U.S. Attorney General William Barr in contempt of Congress.

A contempt of Congress decision by the full House doesn’t have much legal impact, given that Congress lacks the authority — as I understand it — to send the cops out with handcuffs to arrest individuals found in contempt.

However, a contempt resolution does open the door for litigation by Congress, which then can sue for records it seeks from the AG, the former White House counsel and, yes, even the president.

So, a lawsuit goes to a judge, or a panel of judges.

Then you have the possibility of the federal court system standing behind Congress, therefore ordering the president, AG and anyone else to do what Congress is asking. Turn over the records, or else!

What happens then if Donald Trump orders Barr to ignore the courts? What happens if the president gets an order from the courts to hand over, say, financial records to Congress?

Right there, ladies and gents, is a violation of the law.

We then would have a president of the United States who has broken federal law. He would have sanctioned others to do the same.

It occurs to me: Wasn’t that the pretext that GOP members of Congress used to impeach President Clinton, because he lied under oath to a federal grand jury about his relationship with a much-younger White House intern? Didn’t they insist in 1998 that we cannot have a president who breaks the law, who perjures himself?

They couldn’t sanction what they called “lawlessness” then. What about now? Would be OK this time with congressional Republicans for POTUS to ignore a duly constituted court order?

national news

What does ‘contempt of Congress’ really mean?

I have to acknowledge that I do not have a clue what lawmakers are going to do to enforce a recommended contempt of Congress citation against Attorney General William Barr.

The House Judiciary Committee issued the recommendation this week; the full House will have to vote on it. What happens then?

A contempt of Congress citation doesn’t have the same legal impact as a contempt of court citation. If someone defies a judge or doesn’t show up to, say, testify in a court proceeding, there are legal remedies at the court’s disposal. The judge can issue a warrant for the arrest of that individual.

What can Congress do to enforce what is in effect a political argument? Does it have the authority to arrest the attorney general? Does it go to court to settle it once and for all?

My sense is that the House Judiciary Committee is setting the table for a monstrous political battle royale between the legislative and executive branches of government. Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler is stone-faced and grim as he discusses this matter. He accuses Barr — likely at Donald Trump’s insistence — of usurping Congress’s constitutional authority to conduct oversight of the executive branch.

Nadler is having none of that. But . . . what about his Republican colleagues? They appear ready to cede their own power to the chief executive, who is instructing his White House staff to ignore every single demand placed on them by Congress.

A contempt of Congress citation could turn into a battle for the soul of our government. Or, as it did in 2012 when congressional Republicans cited AG Eric Holder for contempt over the “fast and furious” gun-sale program, it could sputter and fizzle into oblivion.

My sense is that Jerrold Nadler — with the backing of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — is getting ready to rumble.

national news

AG held in contempt of Congress … to what end?

Well, here we go. Donald Trump has managed to make history once again.

The U.S. House Judiciary Committee has ruled that it now holds Attorney General William Barr in “contempt of Congress” for refusing to turn over the complete, unredacted report filed by special counsel Robert Mueller III.

To be honest, I don’t know what this really means in actual terms. A previous Congress once held another AG, Eric Holder, in contempt, but that went nowhere.

This one somehow feels different.

Trump has declared executive privilege in declaring that the White House will no longer allow anyone to testify before Congress; nor will it send over any documents that Congress might demand as it continues its constitutional role of oversight of the executive branch of government.

The president leads the executive branch, which the Constitution says is merely a “co-equal” arm of government. Its power is no greater or less than Congress, which comprises the legislative branch of government.

I’ll stand with Congress — no surprise there, I’m sure — in this dispute. Congress is seeking to assert the power granted by the Constitution. Donald Trump is asserting a vast array of executive privilege that he is seeking to block congressional inquiry.

I do not know how in the world the president can get away with this power grab.

A key House committee now has acted. It holds the president in contempt. That decision by itself is virtually meaningless, in my view. However, it is looking like a precursor to more legislative action intended to get to the bottom of this matter regarding obstruction of justice and whether the president is blocking efforts to find the truth.

Is there an impeachment on the horizon? A big part of me hopes that isn’t the case. House Democrats are in a position to impeach Donald Trump. Republicans who run the Senate — where an impeachment trial would occur — are in a position to dismiss whatever complaint comes to them from their colleagues in the House.

It’s taken a while to get to this place. It is an ugly spectacle to watch. It’s making me quite jittery.