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

Author: Dr.Franklin ,

Posts

Total: 96
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11

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's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
But he's also breaking the law by ignoring a house-issued subpoena right?

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @dustryder
Expand
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 11,634
3
4
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
8
--> @Dr.Franklin
Isn't this old news? Like from a month ago?
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @Greyparrot
nah
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @dustryder
He needs word from DOJ and Mueller first.Thats integrity and upholding the law
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 11,634
3
4
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
8
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 11,634
3
4
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
8
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 150
0
1
3
FaustianJustice's avatar
FaustianJustice
0
1
3
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @Dr.Franklin
Can you elaborate on which laws require him to converse with his department and/or Mueller first?
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @Greyparrot
The article on my first post says ANOTHER house vote
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @FaustianJustice
I do have evidence.MY article was written yetserday
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @dustryder
Well,if its mulluer and the DOJ report,common sense says thy will give the green light to congress.
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @dustryder
Its a metaphor
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @dustryder
How did he break the law?
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @dustryder
I told you why he did that and how its not a crime
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 9,654
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,020
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @Dr.Franklin
Why are those reasonable reasons if he's not compelled to consult with Mueller and the DOJ by law?
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 11,634
3
4
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
8
--> @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's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 11,634
3
4
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
8
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.