Eisenberg has committed felonies and unless pardoned by Trump is eventually going to prison–unless he rats them all out, in which case he merely gets disbarred.
7 Likes
Assume Dems feel all the recalcitrant witnesses, some of whom may never testify in the House investigation phase, nevertheless have vital information that they choose to compel in the Senate trial phase. Are witnesses under more of an onus in that phase to show up? Can they force those issuing subpoenas to go to court, like they do now? And if so, whose call is it to decree the Senate go to court and force the testimony? Can Roberts, presiding over the Senate trial, overrule McConnell if McConnell says a verdict is being issued without the testimony? Does the remainder of the trial occur, and then everything is put on hold awaiting court rulings? Again, stuff down the road that’s going to become pertinent, and I don’t see anyone gaming it out as to the legal requirements.
5 Likes
Dear Repubs, your day of reckoning is fast approaching.
3 Likes
Let me expand that for you:
It’s fine with me if:
-
Republicans don’t show up, as long as I never hear the phrase “rule of law” again
-
Republicans vote for the pussy grabber, as long as I never hear the phrase “family values” again
-
Republicans support a rapist for the SC, as long as I never hear the phrase “morals and values” again
-
Republicans kill all abortions, as long as I never hear the phrase “states rights” again
-
Republicans piss on Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman’s credibility as long as I never hear the phrase “we support veterans” again
-
Republicans (my fingers are getting tired)
15 Likes
I would hold them in contempt and throw their asses in jail until the decide to talk.
2 Likes
I hope you’re right. Indeed I’d wager that as a former prosecutor Schiff had already calculated some of this would happen. That he’s playing the long game, to get these dweebs on record for later action at the right time.
4 Likes
Houses of Congress must forward contempt charges to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia for ajudication and charges. Jessie Liu, a rabid Trump loyalist (and member of his transistion team) holds that position.
No one is going to jail for refusing to respond to a House subpoena. No one.
2 Likes
Not a good look. Doomed to fail.
Hi! To find out what I can do, say @discobot display help.
1 Like
I suppose you could start fining their asses. Say $100 large a day until they start testifying but I’d start arresting their asses and throwing them in jail. You do that and it would stop this 'ignore the subpeonas ’ nonsense now and I mean right now.
All it takes is guts. That’s ALL it takes.
2 Likes
T’hell with this. Those six-figure salaries come from us, the taxpayers. They work for us because we’re the ones that pay them. If they can’t show up then Congress needs to dock their pay. Or maybe I should do like tRump and just choose not to pay my fucking taxes. Everyone knows how that would turn out. Unlike tRump, I’d be in big trouble for not following the law if I did that. In the end, all of these people are not above the law no matter what tRump tells them to do or not do.
4 Likes
No, it doesn’t. It also takes the DOJ to work with you and the courts to back you, and there’s no guarantees of that.
Hell, look at the criminal referrals sent over from the House to DOJ already, went nowhere.
They’ll all be taken to court to enforce the subpoenas, it’ll take months, but that’s the process that we have. To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you go to court with the system you have, not the system you would like to have.
4 Likes
Are you sure. The House has a sgt at arms and access to jail cells.
That bastard should be thrown in jail forever, he can have Jared Kushner as cell mate.
4 Likes
If Congress has the power of the purse, can they hold back on payments to the people that will not comply with subpoenas? Withhold funding for the DoJ or the Executive branch… turn off the lights, electricity and water at the White House, no fuel for Air Force One or Marine One.
Unless all of this would be viewed as QUID PRO QUO.
“It’s a fair cop.”
2 Likes
one thing of note – the word subpoena is not used in the article, which usually indicates that none was issued. In other words, none of these guys is doing anything that would come close to justifying contempt charges, etc.
And thus far, except for Parnas and Fruman (who, since they are awaiting trial, get a free pass) and Kupperman (who went to court) no one has defied a subpoena to testify. However, lots of document subpoenas have gone ignored.
…and yet no court cases have been filed to even compel document production. This does appear to be deliberate; Pelosi has Schiff on a very tight leash, and won’t even allow him to take anything to court without her permission.
So what is the strategy here? Is it to forget the courts, and impeach Trump based on the phone call summary and the testimony of relatively low level officials – i.e. get impeachment off the table as quickly as possible? Or perhaps is it to get all those subpoenas issued, and take all the cases to court at once - and consolidate them into one giant case? Can anyone make sense of this?
3 Likes
Little to no downside either, so long as the House fails to punish noncompliance. That said, it’s not even clear whether any of these people have actually been served with subpoenas.
3 Likes
I don’t get the reference.
For them, perhaps, perhaps not, but for Trump, every witness who refuses to testify makes him look guiltier, which hurts him politically. But, I expect that some will be made examples of. Dems would be insane to not do that, even if it would take too long in the courts to make anything stick. The law is a weapon and the actual legal outcome is often secondary.
2 Likes