House Dems are trying to hold Barr in "contempt" for....Upholding the Law

Author: Dr.Franklin ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 96
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin

    The DOJ, for its part, pushed back on the vote. A senior DOJ official said it was not a "civil contempt vote," calling the terminology a "Democratic talking point."
    Wow, Barr UPHOLDING THE LAW Getting in contempt. How bullshit. House Dems are screwed. Its gonna be another 1998.
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    But he's also breaking the law by ignoring a house-issued subpoena right?

  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @dustryder
    Expand
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,747
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    Isn't this old news? Like from a month ago?
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @Greyparrot
    nah
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    So my understanding of the situation is that the house judiciary committee officially issued a subpoena for the unredacted mueller report and its underlying evidence. Barr ignored this subpoena. Defying a federal subpoena is a federal misdemeanor crime

  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @dustryder
    He needs word from DOJ and Mueller first.Thats integrity and upholding the law
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,747
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    And that was enough for Democrats to lock in to a “coverup” narrative. Never mind that Barr soon waived all executive privilege claims and released the whole report, redacting only a sliver of material that relied on confidential grand jury testimony and a few sentences that might reveal sources and methods of intelligence gathering. The latter is stuff the Russians would presumably love to see, the former is stuff Barr is barred by law from releasing. If you read the report – a bestseller on Amazon — it’s clear there was no coverup.


    This is news from May 14.

    We've known for a month now that Nadler was going to hold Barr in contempt for not releasing grand jury testimony, even though it is clearly illegal for Barr to release grand jury testimony under current law.

  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,747
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    Besides, there is no way in hell Trump is going to do anything at this point but escalate impeachment proceedings as the public perception has shifted dramatically with the critical findings of the Mueller report. He WANTS to be impeached. Even Pelosi knows this, as stupid as she is about some things.
  • FaustianJustice
    FaustianJustice avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 146
    0
    1
    3
    FaustianJustice avatar
    FaustianJustice
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    I just want to make sure the guy that says "Nah" in response to an objective current events post is in good faith asking for evidence from other posters, here.

    Da fuq bro.

    You don't converse in good faith.
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    Can you elaborate on which laws require him to converse with his department and/or Mueller first?
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @Greyparrot
    The article on my first post says ANOTHER house vote
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @FaustianJustice
    I do have evidence.MY article was written yetserday
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @dustryder
    Well,if its mulluer and the DOJ report,common sense says thy will give the green light to congress.
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    But you said he was upholding the law. What law(s) require him to consult with Mueller and the DOJ first or for them to give the green-light to congress first?

  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @dustryder
    Its a metaphor
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    I'm not sure I understand your reaction then. If Barr knowingly and willingly broke the law, and there is no mitigating legal circumstance which justified his action, it seems hardly unsurprising or unfair that he got held in contempt
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @dustryder
    How did he break the law?
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    So my understanding of the situation is that the house judiciary committee officially issued a subpoena for the unredacted mueller report and its underlying evidence. Barr ignored this subpoena. Defying a federal subpoena is a federal misdemeanor crime


  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @dustryder
    I told you why he did that and how its not a crime
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    You certainly said why you thought he did that. You didn't explain why it's not a crime however.

    To me it's quite simple.

    There was a federal subpoena
    That subpoena was ignored
    He did not have a reasonable reason to ignore the subpoena
    Ignoring a federal subpoena is a crime


  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,493
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @dustryder
    He did not have a reasonable reason to ignore the subpoena
    WRONG. 


    Well,if its mulluer and the DOJ report,common sense says thy will give the green light to congress.

  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 882
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    Why are those reasonable reasons if he's not compelled to consult with Mueller and the DOJ by law?
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,747
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @dustryder
    Releasing grand jury testimony is a crime.

    And there is very good reason for that. If the grand jury finds insufficient evidence, then the state should not impose burdens on the people compelled to give testimony to the grand jury. It's almost like double jeopardy where a person testifies in front of a grand jury, the evidence is lacking so the case is thrown out by the grand jury, and now the Congress wants a redo bringing back the person to testify after insufficient evidence was already established by the grand jury for the sole reason for the Congress to intimidate and smear their political rivals. That is something Putin does. I don't want to live in a country that operates like Russia.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,747
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    I think it's a real sign of character that Trump has not gone down the path of jailing his political opponents like Putin does. While he has plenty of evidence to indict Hillary for an amazing amount of malfeasance, and has used rhetoric to indicate that Hillary is a criminal, he has not used the FBI or the Congress as a weapon against his political rivals in any way shape or form that resembles how Obama used the FBI to imprison his opponents and how Congress has abused their power to jail their opponents.