It’s why I have very little to say…its all been said…nothingbto debate…i got TDS is the standard reply.
Hope all is ok!?
Yeah, things seem to have improved. I’ll pm you.
So the Dems intend to hold the AG in contempt because… he rejected their demand to break the law ?
Who has oversight over Congress and holds the Dems accountable when they are committing and abuse of power, which is now obviously the case?
It’s hard to debate when posters don’t want Congress equal to the Prez.
Barr can comply without breaking the law.
The same people that held the Republicans accountable for their non oversight.
Didn’t Holder get held in contempt?
The word “co-equal” appears in the Constitution? Are you sure?
The resolution also allows any House Committee Chair to file contempt charges without overall House approval.
That could be considered to be a solid punch, or might be overreach.
Three branches with countervailing powers. Maybe you weren’t being sarcastic?
This from the guy who promoted “collusion” for 2+ years.
Maybe it wasn’t “official” contempt.
There’s this document that you may have heard of, that holds the answers to all of your questions.
It’s called “The Constitution”.
When it’s an Executive branch officer (like Holder, and Barr and McGahn), Contempt of Congress is a political tactic, and otherwise meaningless.
I was listening to a Constitutional Historian who said that many who have studied it agree that it was the vision of the Framers that Congress have the most power. That is why they can do oversight on any part of the government.
I’m hoping they attempt to put Barr in jail. That will be fun to watch.
They can’t. It’s not like this hasn’t already been litigated.
Not at all. Is “countervail” or any conjugation thereof in the Constitution?
By the way, “co-equal” is not unless I missed it.
Is that a yes or no?
Was Holder held in contempt? Yes, of course.
Did it mean anything? No, of course not.
Will it mean anything if Barr is held in contempt? Again, of course not.