Jump to content


Democratic House Investigations of Donald Trump & His Criminal Associates


299 replies to this topic

#201 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 04 May 2019 - 05:45 PM

View PostD. C. Sessions, on 04 May 2019 - 03:59 PM, said:

Jail and fines, basically.

What else is there since these don’t rise to the level of capital crimes...unless they were Democrats.
" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#202 Traveler

    Rambling Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13121 posts
  • LocationPhilly Area

Posted 05 May 2019 - 07:24 AM

But what jail? DC city? Fines mean nothing.
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."-- Winston Churchill
"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices" Voltaire

#203 Rue Bella

    Emerging from a state of cryogenic denial

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7881 posts
  • LocationSoCal

Posted 05 May 2019 - 10:37 AM

Is the possibility of jail real? What agency would, could, actually enforce that? It's easy to say 'We'll put them in jail', but in this day and age when our 'leaders' simply ignore past precedents, what are the mechanics?
What is wrong with these people? ~ PG

No longer politically correct

#204 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9656 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 05 May 2019 - 01:10 PM

View PostTraveler, on 05 May 2019 - 07:24 AM, said:

But what jail? DC city? Fines mean nothing.

Jail until they comply, fines likewise. I will remind y'all that quite some years ago, SCOTUS upheld a judicial sanction for contempt of $1 the first day, $2 the second day, $4 the third day, $8 the fourth day ...

Around day 13 the city that was subjected to the contempt sanctions started to notice. Someone pointed out that by day 20, they were headed into serious budget busting and by the end of a month, well, they complied.
The way a lot of catastrophes happen is that X doesn't occur because there are safeguards in place, therefore people assume X isn't a worry and they remove the safeguards. Then X happens.
— Nate Silver
"Robots aren't the problem. Capitalism is." -- Last words of Stephen Hawking.
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
"Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events." -- some RINO

#205 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9656 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 05 May 2019 - 01:20 PM

View PostRue Bella, on 05 May 2019 - 10:37 AM, said:

Is the possibility of jail real? What agency would, could, actually enforce that? It's easy to say 'We'll put them in jail', but in this day and age when our 'leaders' simply ignore past precedents, what are the mechanics?

The Master at Arms of Congress [1]. Real person, with staff for security. If necessary, can call upon the Marshall's for help. The Marshalls are organizationally under the DoJ but are on standing duty to enforce the Judiciary's authority (e.g. order in the Court, interstate escort of prisoners, etc.) and also back up the Congressional CMoA on request. I doubt that the courts will take the Administration's playing "Unitary Executive" games with the Marshalls lightly.

[1] I could be off on the title.
The way a lot of catastrophes happen is that X doesn't occur because there are safeguards in place, therefore people assume X isn't a worry and they remove the safeguards. Then X happens.
— Nate Silver
"Robots aren't the problem. Capitalism is." -- Last words of Stephen Hawking.
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
"Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events." -- some RINO

#206 Bact PhD

    Frustrated, Thoughtful Independent

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1795 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 05 May 2019 - 02:04 PM

View PostD. C. Sessions, on 05 May 2019 - 01:20 PM, said:



The Master at Arms of Congress [1]. Real person, with staff for security. If necessary, can call upon the Marshall's for help. The Marshalls are organizationally under the DoJ but are on standing duty to enforce the Judiciary's authority (e.g. order in the Court, interstate escort of prisoners, etc.) and also back up the Congressional CMoA on request. I doubt that the courts will take the Administration's playing "Unitary Executive" games with the Marshalls lightly.

[1] I could be off on the title.
Sergeant-at-Arms, it looks like. I kinda sorta remembered hearing the term once upon a time. Googling “Congressional Master at Arms” brought up this, among similar pages:

https://www.house.go...ergeant-at-arms

Quote

As an elected officer of the House of Representatives, the Sergeant at Arms is the chief law enforcement and protocol officer of the House of Representatives, and is responsible for maintaining order in the House side of the United States Capitol complex.

ETA: Excerpt from webpage.
Politics these days is show business. Elections are Dancing with the Stars with consequences. ~Rue Bella

(About fame) Living for likes, shares and follows is a form of validation. The question is whether it is also the source of our self esteem. If it is, we’re screwed. And, culturally, it seems as if it’s become more and more our shared value. ... Meringue is no longer a sweet and pretty topping but the body itself. ~Charles Perez

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancey, 1816. ME 14:384, via LFC, 12/1/2016

Competent people go in one of a few directions. But incompetence is infinite. ~David Brooks, NY Times

#207 Traveler

    Rambling Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13121 posts
  • LocationPhilly Area

Posted 06 May 2019 - 07:38 AM

Thanks DC. 2^20 is indeed a very big number. A cool million and change.
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."-- Winston Churchill
"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices" Voltaire

#208 D. C. Sessions

    I don't have to pretend to be an adult any more

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9656 posts
  • LocationCentral New Mexico

Posted 06 May 2019 - 07:46 AM

Yeah, but 2^31 is almost real money.
The way a lot of catastrophes happen is that X doesn't occur because there are safeguards in place, therefore people assume X isn't a worry and they remove the safeguards. Then X happens.
— Nate Silver
"Robots aren't the problem. Capitalism is." -- Last words of Stephen Hawking.
These days, "libertarian" is just a euphemism for a Nazi who's afraid to commit.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." -- Heather Heyer
"I'd rather have my child, but by golly, if I gotta give her up, we're gonna make it count." -- Her mother
"Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events." -- some RINO

#209 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 10 May 2019 - 03:15 PM

Schiff is considering a fine of $25,000 a day.

Quote

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) said he and his colleagues are considering reviving an old rule that would allow Congress to charge fines to enforce subpoenas.

“Much as I like the visual of (throwing people in jail), I think it’s far more practical to consider levying individual fines on the person — not on the office — until they comply. Courts use that practice, I think it’s quite successful,” Schiff told Axios Mike Allen. “You could fine someone $25,000 a day until they comply and that will probably get their attention. … You can do that. We’re looking through the history and studying the law to make sure we’re on solid ground.”

The White House has effectively stonewalled House Democrats’ oversight subpoenas. According to Axios, Schiff said Democratic leadership might have to think outside the box and take “extraordinary” action to make sure Congress’ authority is upheld.

" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#210 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 13 May 2019 - 08:35 AM

Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) continues to try to block constitutionally defined House oversight. Apparently the Constitution has a little known caveat that says it's only allowed if it's run by Republicans, not matter how ridiculous the people involved are (*cough* Nunes *cough, cough* Treytor *cough*).

Quote

Adopting a line from the Trump administration, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) on Sunday accused Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) of asking Attorney General Bill Barr to “break the law” with his Mueller report subpoena.

“Chairman Nadler just held the attorney general in contempt because he requested that he break the law,” McCarthy said during his “Face the Nation” interview with Margaret Brennan.

McCarthy said that if the House Judiciary chairman was “that serious about getting to the bottom,” then he’d read the redact Mueller report in full.

“But he hasn’t even gone to read it while trying to hold the attorney general in contempt,” McCarthy complained. “He’s asking him to break the law.”

The Trump administration made that same argument after Barr ignored the House Judiciary Committee’s subpoena for special counsel Robert Mueller’s unredacted report and his grand jury materials. Democrats pointed out that judges have the power to approve disclosure of redacted material, and that they’re simply asking Barr to help them make that request to the courts.

After Barr refused to budge, the committee voted in favor of holding the attorney general in contempt.

" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#211 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 13 May 2019 - 10:12 AM

Mnuchin may be held in contempt by another committee. It doesn't sound like he has a legal leg to stand on, not that he cares.

Quote

Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI) said Monday that the House Ways and Means committee would do everything in its power to enforce its subpoena of Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin — even potentially holding him in contempt.

“The court has to decide whether to enforce the subpoena,” Kildee said on CNN’s “New Day.” “If they continue to deny what is a clear authority under the statute and under the Constitution we have to take everything, every step possible to enforce this order,” he added in response to a question about if contempt is on the table.

" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#212 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 15 May 2019 - 04:10 PM

Josh Marshall notes that the Trump legal argument against all House subpoenas is now clear. Looks like it can be boiled down to 3 words; no oversight allowed. And once again Republicans wipe their ass with the Constitution.

Quote

We’ll have more on this shortly. But I want to point out the common argument the President’s personal lawyers (yesterday) and the White House Counsel’s office (in today’s letter) are now making. They argue that the Congress has no legitimate oversight role with respect to the executive branch at all, a stunning argument that would clip the wings of Congress permanently. They are arguing first that the only legitimate document requests or subpoenas are those tied specifically and narrowly to shaping upcoming legislation. That’s an aspect of oversight but only a smallish part of it. Secondly, anything that is tied to wrongdoing or malfeasance or possibly crimes is “law enforcement”, which is the exclusive purview of the executive branch. In other words, from both sides of the equation, they argue that Congress has no oversight role at all.

Now the argument is out in the open.

" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#213 golden_valley

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5714 posts
  • LocationNorthern California

Posted 15 May 2019 - 07:34 PM

View PostLFC, on 15 May 2019 - 04:10 PM, said:

Josh Marshall notes that the Trump legal argument against all House subpoenas is now clear. Looks like it can be boiled down to 3 words; no oversight allowed. And once again Republicans wipe their ass with the Constitution.

So they're daring the House to start impeachment proceedings since it's the only way to investigate presidential behavior.

#214 baw1064

    formerly of the public sector

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4856 posts
  • LocationEarthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanos--oh my!

Posted 16 May 2019 - 12:38 AM

As I've said before, they just don't pass any budget bills. That will make an impression.
“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” --Dr. Seuss

#215 Rich T Bikkies

    Trainee Basil Fawlty. Practising Victor Meldrew

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4229 posts
  • LocationBirmingham, UK

Posted 16 May 2019 - 01:13 AM

Gosh.

We are in big trouble here in dear old Blighty, but nothing —nothing— to what you guys are in!

But that may change soon. Things are so bad here that there is a serious danger that Boris Johnson or Nigel Farage could be our next Prime Minister (depending on whether the Maybot is junked in weeks or months, respectively, and how much momentum Mr Farwich's new Brexit Party gets from his apparently inevitable landslide win in the European Parliament) and then we will be in the same depth of shtuk that you are.

A principal difference from pussygrabberism is that both our prospects can speak clear English and string more than two thoughts together to make an argument, and one has a brilliant mind, a top-class education and speaks excellent English with a large vocabulary. But other than that I don't see us being much better off than you.
Reality is a hallucination caused by alcohol deprivation.

Only Satan can rebuke sin. The righteous don't know enough.

God is not dead. He was merely voted out of office.

You can do anything with anybody if you just save them the trouble of thinking.

#216 HockeyDon

    Mind blown...

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3668 posts
  • LocationNew Britain, CT

Posted 16 May 2019 - 07:53 AM

How exactly did we imagine dictators in other countries moved from an elected process with parliamentary oversight into a full-blown dictatorship?

One of the ways is to simply cut out all oversight of the would-be dictator's actions. We all know Trump loves his dictator buddies all over the globe and how they're able to dominate every part of their country.

Remember, once all oversight is eliminated there is nothing to stop the declaration of a national emergency which requires suspension of the next presidential election. The question may be, "What national emergency? We've never had a situation so bad we couldn't hold a vote" and the response will be, "Your oversight powers were eliminated so you'll just have to trust us."

I realize the abruptness of that description is a bit much, but that's essentially the end-game goal; elimination of citizen representation.
Well, fuck.

How can I be expected to distinguish BS from reality when so much of my reality is utter BS?!

"There seems to be a lot of people dying of ignorance while living in the information age." my sister-in-law.

#217 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 16 May 2019 - 01:09 PM

CHOOTZPAH!

Quote

If Congress is allowed to investigate President Trump’s finances, then future commanders-in-chief will face “nonstop investigations into the[ir] personal lives,” Trump argued in a Wednesday court filing.

Trump is trying to convince a federal judge to delay the enforcement of subpoenas sent to Deutsche Bank and Capitol One by two congressional committees last month as part of a wide-ranging investigation into his finances.

In a legal memo filed in Manhattan federal court, attorneys for the president, his family, and his businesses wrote: “The Committees’ position means that nonstop investigations into the personal lives of Presidents (motivated by the hope of finding politically damaging information) will be the new normal whenever the President is from a different political party than the House or Senate.”

The Trump team wants the judge to prohibit the financial institutions from responding to the subpoenas from the House Intelligence and Financial Services Committees until the full court case can play itself out.

The Deutsche Bank subpoena focuses on the potential of foreign influence over the Trump administration, while the Capital One request targets fraud allegations surrounding the President and the Trump Organization.

The new filing accuses Congress of undertaking an unprecedented attempt “to rifle through the private financial information of a sitting President, his family, and his businesses.”

Trump took the unprecedented step of hiring personal attorneys to file lawsuits sue the financial institutions to prevent them from responding to the congressional requests.

Yet in the new filing, his attorneys claim that Congress is engaging in a radical expansion of its own power by issuing these “illegal” subpoenas. They urge the court to take its time in deciding the case.

“This Court would do well to pause, and at least receive full briefing and argument on the merits of these serious constitutional questions, before endorsing the Committees’ unchecked view of congressional subpoena power,” Trump wrote.

He goes on to say that it is “‘cold comfort’ that only the House—an institution controlled by the other political party and that is currently investigating every nook and cranny of the President’s life,” would receive the requested information.

" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#218 golden_valley

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5714 posts
  • LocationNorthern California

Posted 16 May 2019 - 01:19 PM

Yeah well Mr Trump maybe if you honored tradition and released your actual tax returns some of this could have been avoided. And remember the Clintons warned about this stuff for years. Did you forget that in your rush to get some good PR from your escalator ride into candidacy?

#219 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 20 May 2019 - 03:07 PM

In the face of total obstruction Tomasky has 3 suggestions for House Dems to make Trump's life a living hell. I particularly like this one.

Quote

“If they can’t get any witnesses from the administration to come before them, produce expert witnesses of their own,” Tomasky advised. “Get a parade of legal and constitutional scholars up there.”

“Around 800 former federal prosecutors signed a letter earlier this month stating that Trump did obstruct justice. Some of them are Republicans. Get them up there, if they’ll do it,” he continued. “Have other legal and political experts testify defending the Russia probe and describing the various ways in which Trump has subverted the Constitution. The Republicans on the committee will call their witnesses too. Fine. Let the country judge.”

" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer

#220 LFC

    Fiscal Conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28410 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 20 May 2019 - 04:21 PM

Trump loses another court battle.

Quote

A D.C. federal judge on Monday denied a request from President Trump’s personal attorneys to halt the enforcement of a subpoena from Congress to the President’s longtime accounting firm.

Judge Amit Mehta issued the ruling less than one week after holding a hearing in the matter.

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), chair of the House Oversight Committee, had filed a subpoena to Trump accounting firm Mazars USA LLP as part of an investigation into Trump’s finances. The President then took the nearly unprecedented step of suing his accountant to stop the subpoena from being fulfilled.

Cummings is seeking years of Trump’s financial records as part of a probe that began with the testimony of Michael Cohen, who told Congress in February that Trump would routinely deflate and inflate the value of his assets to benefit himself and his businesses.

" 'Individual conscience' means that women only get contraceptives if their employers, their physicians, their pharmacists, their husbands and/or fathers, pastors, and possibly their mayors, Governors, State Secretaries of Health, Congressmen, Senators, and President all agree that in that particular case they're justifiable." --D.C. Sessions

"That's the problem with being implacable foes - no one has any incentive to treat you as anything more than an obstacle to be overcome."

"The 'Road to Serfdom' is really all right turns." --Progressive Whisperer

""The GOP ... where every accusation is also a confession." --Progressive Whisperer





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users