Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I'm sorry, but some apparently need to hear this in VERY simple terms: [View all]MFGsunny
(2,356 posts)28. Am on your same wave-length as to timing. Two is minimum # of Impeachment Articles ......
for the reason that POTENTIALLY voting for one but not the other will offer a few of the Rethugs in the Senate a possible cover and/or plausible deniability in the face of revengeful MF45.
We have to remind ourselves and others that it's about 2/3 of Senate members present (and NOT an absolute 2/3 of 100 senators). Yes, of course, I get it that if all 100 senators are present that would equal needing 67 votes to convict. But, these are couple ways for some potential CYA in rethug land senate ........
Each day by day. Am taking stock and counting twice about naughty and nice and such.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
61 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I'm sorry, but some apparently need to hear this in VERY simple terms: [View all]
Atticus
Oct 2019
OP
Yep, and refusing to testify can be taken as circumstantial evidence of corrupt intent
William Seger
Oct 2019
#46
Does the president have the right to block someone from testifying in front of Congress?
Maraya1969
Oct 2019
#53
Am on your same wave-length as to timing. Two is minimum # of Impeachment Articles ......
MFGsunny
Oct 2019
#28
Impeachment is required. We can't set a precedent that condones so many crimes.
Garrett78
Oct 2019
#61
That's exactly the kind of enforcement the House has. Why doesn't it use it? Are they serious about
ancianita
Oct 2019
#12
They don't really. There is no little mini-jail anymore. That has been gone for decades. n/t
pnwmom
Oct 2019
#21
Then what. is. the. point. There IS no protecting and defending the Constitution from scofflaw rule
ancianita
Oct 2019
#22
Evidence. Yes. Being Right. Yes. Enforcement of the Right and Rule of Law. No. Only hope, that
ancianita
Oct 2019
#30
Can the committees complain to the bar with a view to having obstructive lawyers...Barr,
Karadeniz
Oct 2019
#17
Sure. Letters can be written to the state bars that issued Barr's and WH counsel law licenses.
ancianita
Oct 2019
#44
So, Inherent Contempt seems to offer an enforcement tool not tried since 1935. U.S. Capitol Police
ancianita
Oct 2019
#24
Congress is not their arena. DU discussed this over a year ago, but I can't find the thread.
ancianita
Oct 2019
#35
I don't think it lacks one, it's more like enforcement across branches has historical lanes.
ancianita
Oct 2019
#41
Where is this cell that is reserved? They got rid of the Congressional jail decades ago.
pnwmom
Oct 2019
#31
First, it is my understanding that the Capitol Police have cells which could be used,
Atticus
Oct 2019
#33
"They" consist of two parties, and the party that controls the Senate won't agree.
pnwmom
Oct 2019
#36
So, you understand that the Senate can govern how the House exercises and enforces its
Atticus
Oct 2019
#37
Have you read post #24 above? It is uncontoverted that the inherent contempt power
Atticus
Oct 2019
#40
As I said in #33 above, I don't see that as a problem, but I am not an expert in this
Atticus
Oct 2019
#43
I trust Nancy to find a way, if there is one. And to use this power, if it still exists,
pnwmom
Oct 2019
#45
Do you have any ballpark estimate of just how long it will take for a court to assist in enforcing
Atticus
Oct 2019
#55
Oddly enough, I just got done reading an article and closing it out before I saw your post
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2019
#56
What's the point of calling it a "subpoena" if they can't or won't enforce it?
BlueStater
Oct 2019
#59
It's an old-fashioned term for a "summons" - the term isn't only or strictly applied to courts.
BumRushDaShow
Oct 2019
#60