I’ll repeat it as many times as necessary until it catches on.
Yeah, the last time you guys were on about this it lasted all of four years and that with 9/11 and the Iraq War and calling people unpatriotic terrorist lovers.
But see he argued against the patriot act so it doesn’t count. 
And yet they went forward and sued the DOJ for release of the docs based on that contempt and won. So not so meaningless. Meaningless tp him personally I suppose, but that is because the congress failed to follow up the contempt bill with an impeachment.
Holding him in contempt had zero to do with winning the lawsuit against the DoJ.
Indeed. Politics plays a huge role in this. Congress isn’t going to imprison public servants for fear of the optics. Not for relatively minor disagreements such as this.
They’ll prosecute all those Republican crimes and treason.
Like how well copying “The Weasel” is catching on?
It has to be catchy to catch on.
Holding him in contempt is the first part of the civil process. Had he not been held in contempt the Congress would have no case to bring suit as the courts would simply have said it was a political issue best resolved by the political branches. The contempt resolution shows the court the political branches are at an impasse and cannot settle it between themselves. The contempt citation strengthens the Congress’ case in court.
If they used their power they could have imprisoned him, but there’s not a lot of need for it when they could have impeached him instead. They should have. Unfortunately, we have a congress that lacks the will to use the power they have to enforce their will. I know we like to think we have co-equal branches of government, and in the scheme of things in regular business with a functioning system, we do. Bigger picture though, the Congress is the superior branch as they are the only branch with the power to remove individuals from the other two.
Complete nonsense. There’s no requirement for a contempt finding to sue the executive for documents.
They weren’t going to impeach him either. These are nothing more than fantasies.
I didn’t say there was a requirement. I said it strengthened their case. And it does. The contempt bill is prima facia evidence that the congress has done everything short of imprisonment or impeachment to gain compliance and the DOJ still refuses to comply.
I didn’t say they were going to impeach him either, I said they could have. They should have.
I have long held that the Congress should use its powers more liberally when it comes to impeaching unelected officials. It should not be done lightly, but when an unelected official repeatedly and with contempt thwarts the will of the Congress, impeachment should be a serious option.
I read through the ruling. I think you’re right about contempt making their case stronger.
Thank you, it is a rare occurrence when people can discuss political matters sanely. As for the rest, I have long been an advocate of Congress using the powers it does have more liberally. Not just impeachment, but also the powers it has to instruct the courts as to their will, Again, it should not be done lightly, but for too long we have had judges who ignore the clear words of the Constitution and the law to twist rulings to what is politically expedient to whichever philosophy they adhere to.
