Neal Katyal suggests House defund the Office of Atty General until release of report.

[Grasswire2]

[link:http://

Link to tweet

|

[Chin music]

1. Now you're talking.

Why not? It's not protecting Americans. Shut it down.

[katmondoo]

2. Sounds good to me, lets go

[Chin music]

10. Indeed...LET'S GO.

Get the party started.

[Grasswire2]

3. Katyal is the former Acting Solicitor General of the United States ..

...who was tasked with writing the Special Counsel rules after the Clinton impeachment.

[drray23]

68. Yes and he messed up. He left enough loopholes

In there for Barr to exploit. The rules specify that the report is given to the attorney general and not to Congress.

[UniteFightBack]

4. I love this guy !! nt

[SunSeeker]

5. Exactly. We're paying for this shit show. We should call in our chips. nt

[Chin music]

11. It' springtime and it feels like October.

[2naSalit]

6. K&R!!

[malaise]

7. What a great idea

Rec

[lastlib]

63. (I was thinking the other day, withhold Barr's salary until he releases....)

But wouldn't the president have to sign it? That ain't gonna happen.

[CentralMass]

8. Do it.

[TruckFump]

9. DO IT NOW!!!!!!!!!

That'll teach those assholes a lesson. Screw with the House and starve!

[asiliveandbreathe]

12. Neal goes there...LAWLESSNESS....could there be a better description for what we are

witnessing..all around....I keep asking myself, WHAT DO THEY WANT with all this undoing of norms...I have no answers....

[Chin music]

13. Congress is the Peoples Branch. No wonder he thinks he doesnt have to answer to us.

We pay the bills too don...and we arent your daddy.

[watoos]

14. Barr was probably already paid handsomely

And in rubles.

[cilla4progress]

15. Does anyone else think Neal might feel responsible

for a poor drafting of the SC rules in that they do not SPECIFY the report is to kick over to Congress and not the AG?

I mean, this clearly is the "norm," if not the law. But we know how these Rs roll....

[Grasswire2]

17. I'm not sure anyone could have anticipated the perfidy of today's Republicans...

..but in answer to your question, he was very angry the Sunday the "summary" was released.

And surely he was not the only person to see his rules before they were adopted. Other eyes should also have seen any flaw.

[cilla4progress]

20. Yes,

perfidy indeed.

Great word. Love it. Admit - had to look it up!

They are busting through all the norms. Infuriating.

Like, "don't lie. Don't cheat. Don't have biz deals ongoing with a foreign adversary at the same time you are running for Prez."

Impossible to cover them all !!!

[Ligyron]

35. I'm afraid that anything re: government not codified into law will be used and abused

attempted and excused by Republicans and they'll care less what anyone thinks concerning their actions.

Problem is: where would you even start?

[democratisphere]

16. How about defunding the WH?

That should include Marine 1 and Airforce 1.

[Grasswire2]

24. how can we defund trips for golf and maralago? :-) nt

[DLevine]

18. Excellent idea. nt

[padah513]

19. That's what I call bringing a gun to a knife fight!!!

[notdarkyet]

31. Trump has spent millions on golf. I think that is enough.

[Firestorm49]

21. You know damn well the Republicans would do it in a heartbeat

[certainot]

64. there's no way to see that report in full using regular

tactics of various legal forms of asking

this way the pressure from inside on barr will increase but they'll say to cut costs they had to hire homeless people and one of them used the report for toilet paper - so it's gone

the only way americans are going to see the whole thing is if mueller or his crew kept a copy or two, but he might have made sure he could say under oath - no other copies

[trueblue2007]

22. Hey Honey .... take away hiw money !!! Embarass the Hell-o out of Barr !!!!

[SHRED]

23. Would Barr care?

I am sure he is awash in dark money or already wealthy.

[lark]

25. He would only care because Dems are taking it from him, not that it had a good purpose.

He would only use the money to fuck us over anyway so take it all.

I don't really know if this can be done, but Katyal should and since he's recommending this action, think Dems should 100% do it if Barr refuses to honor a subpoena, and that's pretty much a given. He can't let the truth get out without exposing the absolute traitorousness of himself, drumpf and the entire party.

[onetexan]

26. Excellent idea - kill the money flow

[OnDoutside]

27. Wow, I actually thought that on Monday but I didn't think it realistic !!!

Note to self : Don't doubt myself so much...

[MarcA]

28. This is the type of Action that Can and Should be done.

Although there will be some, including on DU, who would get the vapors
and clutch their pearls over such action.

[onenote]

52. How "can" this be done effectively

given that any legislation defunding the Attorney General's office would have to be passed by the Senate?

[triron]

29. Thank you. Do it already!

[Butterflylady]

30. It's all about 💰 and power

So what the hell, so go for it.

[gademocrat7]

32. K&R!

Do it.

[Capperdan]

33. The Senate will laugh

Good luck there

[uponit7771]

34. So both congressional bodies needed to stop the money flow? tia

[madville]

37. Yes, The House would need Senate approval

To do something like that.

[tritsofme]

36. Yes...Congress always has the option to shutdown the government. Hasn't worked out too well

for those who have initiated such confrontations over the years.

[Hotler]

38. Do it, do it, please do it......... nt

[California_Republic]

39. No. Just no.

And Then the Rs shut it down until they prosecute Hillary?

[Grasswire2]

40. Rs can't shut it down.

House has funding authority and Dems have majority.

[former9thward]

44. No they don't

Funding bills START in the House but must be also approved by the Senate. Then the President must sign it. None of that is going to happen. It was just a tweet to get some publicity.

[Grasswire2]

46. I will take the word of the former acting Solicitor General, sorry.

It was his suggestion.

And the rules were written by him, so the remedy ought to be within his purview.

[former9thward]

48. The rules are written by the U.S. Constitution.

If you want to take the word of someone looking for publicity with re-tweets more power to you. Whatever helps you get through the day...

[onenote]

53. Actually, funding bills don't have to start in House

Only revenue collecting bills have to start in the House.

Both the House and Senate often simultaneously consider budget bills. (You may have noticed that DeVos was testifying about the proposed budget cuts to the Special Olympics before both the House and Senate this week.

[WillowTree]

58. Regardless......the House can't do it unilaterally. The Senate would have to go along with it.

[onenote]

60. Absolutely correct.

Yet post after post in this thread don't seem to understand the most fundamental concept of the legislative process.

It's actually a bit alarming that so many posts on this thread are so ill-informed.

[Chin music]

41. Can't convict, what never happened. I'm sure Pres H Clinton would take an investigation

for the team. There's no there there.

[hughee99]

49. Yes, but it's different when we do things like this.

When THEY do it, it’s obstruction of justice. When we do it, it’s necessary.

Can they “defund” money already allocated, or can they just not fund the next DOJ budget?

[uponit7771]

72. They wont do this anyway !??!?! PLEEEEEASE Stop asking slope questions about the KGOP !!!

[DeminPennswoods]

42. This year's budget is already set, but next FY is another

story. The Judiciary Committee can recommend 0 dollars for FY20 for DoJ. There ain't nothing the Senate can do about it.

[hughee99]

50. Exactly. It sends a strong message!

We don’t care about prosecuting criminals, investigating crimes or civil rights violations nearly as much as we need to see exactly what’s in the Mueller report. I bet that would go over well in an election year.

[DeminPennswoods]

67. It sends the message that Dems are serious about getting

the entire SCO report. I can assure you that any federal agency threatened with having its budget cut is going to think more than twice about continuing its defiance.

[hughee99]

71. i remember when Trump "got serious" about building a wall.

He threatened to shut down the government, and he did. That worked out great for him.

[onenote]

51. Why do you think the Senate can't do anything about it?

Budget resolutions and spending bills, to have any effect, have to be passed by BOTH the House and Senate.

Kaytal's idea is a complete waste of time given that the Senate would simply amend the House bill to restore funding.

[DeminPennswoods]

65. Because all appropriations start in the House

nt

[onenote]

69. All appropriations do not necessarily start in the House

All revenue raising measures must, per Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, originate in the House --- "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the house of representatives; but the senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills."

It is a common misunderstanding that the Constitution requires appropriations (spending) bills to originate in the House. That misunderstanding arises because, as a matter of tradition, the Senate usually defers to the House. But even when that is the case, there is nothing that prevents the Senate from amending the bill that originated in the House to add or delete provisions as they choose.

Indeed, the Senate doesn't even have to wait for the House to act on its bill before starting work on its own appropriations measures. It is more common than not for the Senate, even if it introduces its appropriations bills after the House does, to introduce those measures within days of the House and to consider them independently of the House.

To give one relatively recent example, a FY2019 Transportation, HUD, et al Appropriations bill was introduced in the Senate (S3023) on June 7, 2018. The House introduced a FY2019 Transportation, HUD et al Appropriations bill (HR6072) five days later on June 12, 2018.

The bottom line is that there is no way to "de-fund" the Office of the Attorney General without the concurrence of both houses of Congress, which isn't happening and, thus, a House passed measure trying to accomplish that end will never become effective and would be a total waste of time.

[WillowTree]

61. They can recommend anything they want.

Without the Senate it just won't happen.

[DeminPennswoods]

66. That's not how it works

https://history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Power-of-the-Purse/

[WillowTree]

70. Please cite the passage in that link.......

……. that says that the House can grant or cut spending on its own, without agreement from the Senate. For that matter, please cite any authoritative tract that says that either house of Congress can pass any legislation unilaterally, without concurrence by at least a majority in the other house.

Take your time. I can wait.

[onenote]

43. What a monumentally stupid waste of time idea.

The House cannot unilaterally defund the Office of the Attorney General. And if it passed legislation to do so, that legislation would die in the Senate. A resolution censuring Barr would be as ineffective, but wouldn't require a Senate vote. Or they could vote to impeach Barr and force the Senate to acquit him (which they will easily).

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

45. Transfer the DOJ funds to the Special Olympics.

Since the Constitution's separation of powers doesn't seem to matter to Trump (allocating funds from military projects to his ego-wall), we might as well use it to our advantage.

[Grasswire2]

47. love it

[onenote]

54. I'm stunned that so many DUers on this thread don't understand that both the House and Senate

have to approve legislation, including legislation funding (or defunding) the government.

Did folks not notice that we had a lengthy government shutdown that didn't end when the House alone passed a funding bill, but only ended when funding was approved by the House and Senate?

[WillowTree]

62. Frankly, I'm regularly surprised.......

.......that so many politically active people know so little about our government and its workings in general.

[Firestorm49]

55. By all means. You need to do something.

A heavy handed move may be what it takes. Again, we’re fighting with a tribe that has no limits to its depravity. Go in swinging.

[BlueFlorida]

56. Perfect strategy nt

[Mc Mike]

57. Rec, thanks G2. Nt

[beachbum bob]

59. defund whitehouse budget...let them fly coach to Florida