Thompson Blasts Wolf For Defying Subpoena

TPM Article Topics
41

Not sure about that last part. Kushner is in very, very deep with His Royal Bonesawness, MBS.

5 Likes
42

There isn’t a single congressional district in the country that will turn on the basis of whether “Chad” Wolf gets hauled into a committee chamber to answer questions from a bunch of preening ineffectual hacks.

4 Likes
43

This is a novel argument. Nomination does not shield an acting from testifying before the relevant congressional committees. It just doesn’t. Too bad the press can’t call bullshit. Bothsiderism and all that.

5 Likes
44

I cannot understand why they don’t just do this (Sargent at Arms). The GOP would do it in a nanosecond. Come on, does this “administration” deserve a scintilla of respect?

1 Like
45

You know they would do exactly that.

We do need to have a way, though, to short-circuit the review time of the courts in these matters. Shouldn’t be able to run for a year and more without a final resolution to get or not get the testimony.

6 Likes
46

o/t (leaving this here)

3 Likes
47

The case went to the DOJ - when is SHOULD have gone to the Supreme Court.

My point back in 2019 was “Move fast, break things” - agile development. It was a long screed, but the point was “Send the Sargent of Arms to place the scoflaw under ‘house arrest’. Take away their cell phones, and keep them in their office. Follow them to the bathroom. Provide them a cot. You don’t need a ‘jail cell’ in the basement. DO IT. Make them scream in outrage. Make them shout that it’s unfair. Make it a public spectacle that the congress is USING ITS LEGAL POWER. And if they don’t like it - take it to court. It might take a couple of months - but you know - it’s all about dotting the 'i’s and crossing the 't’s with legal process”

That’s how THEY play. And it’s how we should be playing the "I don’t recognize congress authority to issue a subpoena’ game.

But you know - that’s just me.

7 Likes
48

How about defunding the entire department? The Homeland Security Department didn’t exist before 9/11. It hasn’t done much right since. It has turned into a home for fascists like Wolf and has perpetrated more evil than any other American government agency in history.

7 Likes
49

Love these guys: “I can’t testify about my illegal appointment because I’m illegally appointed.”

6 Likes
50

I’ve already got the hymnal my friend.

2 Likes
51

I’ve often seen this argument. However, if the POTUS is a lawless and shameless individual who is willing to violate any norm, his party that controls the Senate enables his behavior and the courts allow all major constitutional issues to be sidelined in unending appeals, what exactly is the Congress supposed to do? The idea of sending in the Sergeant-at-Arms strikes me as romantic but fanciful.

2 Likes
52

Opa Modern Style!

image
image250×308 59.9 KB

2 Likes
53

The Sergeant at Arms lacks jurisdiction outside of a small area. The U.S. Marshals are the ones who are relied on to enforce subpoenas. Guess who they fall under… DOJ.

And Congress doesn’t have prosecutors to bring charges, that’s the job of… DOJ.

3 Likes
54

It’s the best there is.

55

The original “hot seat”…

56

But we’re not talking parking citations here. If you run a department of the federal government funded by congress with taxpayer dollars and our elected representatives (no matter the party in charge) sends for you to give account on some matter of national importance, you damn-well should have to show up at the appointed time and place - not a week, not a month, and certainly not a year later.

5 Likes
57

image
image466×873 92.9 KB

2 Likes
58

His jurisdiction is the Capital Building. Hence ‘house arrest’ in the building. And even if they’re held until some sort of local decision is issued - the point is made. It’s about winning the narrative. “We are powerless to do anything why try?” is not a strong narrative. “We are exercising our legitimate power - we want you to contest it in court. We want to debate this…” is the right narrative. Skipping to 'oh well, we probably can’t get the votes, no point in ACTUALLY fillibustering…" is throwing in the towel, before the fight.

But that’s just me.

3 Likes
59

It does. It needs to be like it was…you know: when America was great. Had Bill Clinton told Starr to fuck off the shit would have hit the fan. Had HRC told Trey Gowdy to shove it more shit would hit that fan. We know this.

I’m not so sure Trump and Barr are working with the same definition of “Great Again” the rest of us are.

1 Like
60

So how the hell can Congress be a check when the actual enforcement relies on the Executive Branch?

2 Likes