• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Fast and Furious Update

Traveler

Well-known member
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/20/fast-and-furious-documents-must-be-provided-to-congress-judge-rules/

The Justice Department says the documents should remain confidential and President Barack Obama has invoked executive privilege in an effort to protect them from public disclosure.
 

Steve

Well-known member
all in order to prove they are the most transparent administration ever ,.. or to cover their a----

not sure which.. but I think there must be some damaging information in the documents.
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
If Barry was behind every scandal his administration was involved in....wouldn't we be seeing some firings?

if you keep the person under control..you can keep them from speaking out,... plus why fire the person for doing what you directed them to do?

but if you fire them.. all bets are off.. .

Hillary is an example.. she left on the best of terms.. yet she is starting to stalk about how inept the administration really is..

if she didn't still want something from them,.. she may have been even more critical..
 

iwannabeacowboy

Well-known member
I think Chaffetz is a weazle and like most spineless rino's has no real desire to see justice performed.

From the Republic’s earliest days, Congress has had the right to hold recalcitrant witnesses in contempt — and even imprison them — all by itself. In 1795, shortly after the Constitution was ratified, the House ordered its sergeant at arms to arrest and detain two men accused of trying to bribe members of Congress. The House held a trial and convicted one of them.

In 1821, the Supreme Court upheld Congress’s right to hold people in contempt and imprison them. Without this power, the court ruled, Congress would “be exposed to every indignity and interruption, that rudeness, caprice, or even conspiracy, may mediate against it.” Later, in a 1927 case arising from the Teapot Dome scandal, the court upheld the Senate’s arrest of the brother of a former attorney general — carried out in Ohio by the deputy sergeant at arms — for ignoring a subpoena to testify.

The Congressional Research Service issued a report in July that confirmed Congress’s inherent contempt powers. It explained how they work: “The individual is brought before the House or Senate by the sergeant at arms, tried at the bar of the body, and can be imprisoned in the Capitol jail.” Congress can do this, the report concluded, to compel them to testify or to punish them for their refusal to do so.

Of course this was written by a NY times liberal while wanting congress to do something about the Bush administration. So it probably doesn't apply to corrupt liberals.

You know how it is, congress isn't suppose to vote on a judge during a conservative administrations lame duck year, but is suppose to during a liberal lame duck year. Or how the law is the law when talking about Obamacare, but is fluid when talking about the Constitution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/opinion/04tue4.html?_r=0
 

Latest posts

Top