Posted on 05/09/2019 2:47:36 PM PDT by Starman417
The pompous toad who now runs the House Judiciary committee, Jerry Nadler, has declared that the United States is now in the midst of a Constitutional crisis. Here is his hyperbolic rant:
During a press conference after the House Judiciary Committee voted to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt on Wednesday, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler (D-NY) stated that we “are now in a constitutional crisis.”Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) reminded Nadler of his hypocrisyNadler said, “We’ve talked for a long time about approaching a constitutional crisis. We are now in it. We are now in a constitutional crisis. … Now is the time of testing whether we can keep a republic, or whether this republic is destined to change into a different, more tyrannical form of government, as other republics have over the centuries.”
Buck said, “Mr. Chairman, you said in 1998 that a report of this kind is ‘a prosecutor’s report,’ by its nature a one-sided report.”Not surprisingly, the media is equally hypocriticalThe Colorado Republican also referenced Nadler’s comments that grand jury testimony is often “unverified” and could be “salacious,” and its release would be “unfair.”
“You said it would be ‘grossly unfair’ to allow members of the Judiciary Committee to see the materials in relation to a report involving obstruction of justice by a Democratic President,” Buck said.
“Given your position, I offered an amendment several weeks ago to protect those materials [grand jury material], and the Democrats on this committee objected and voted against my amendment,” Buck added.
Congressman Buck said that during the Richard Nixon impeachment proceedings, the committee adopted rules to protect against leaks but, “I note for the record, we have not.”
“Mr. Mueller said no collusion, no provable obstruction,” Buck added.
Congressman Buck then said that Nadler said that impeaching Clinton would amount to a “partisan coup d’etat.”
But the same media in 2012 derided the contempt vote for Eric Holder as cynical political grandstanding, if not outright abuse of power.California rep Jackie Speier threatened to put Barr in handcuffs:On June 19, 2012 (the evening before the House’s contempt vote for Holder), Matthews repeatedly compared the gesture to a demeaning (and perhaps racist) “stop-and-frisk”: “Is this sort of stop-and-frisk at the highest level? Go after the Attorney General, get him to empty his pockets, stand under the spotlight as long as they can and see if anything happens?”
The following day, CNN’s Brooke Baldwin grilled Republican Congressman John Mica on why such a vote was even necessary: “Why go ahead with a contempt vote? Why?” Baldwin later added: “For a lot of people, this is Republican versus Democrat, and they say, ‘This is just theater, it amounts to nothing.’”
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes dismissed the development as sheer politics, opening his June 23 show by remarking: “Given what we know about the Republican Party — and the way the House of Representatives conducts itself when run by Republicans and with a Democrat in the White House — it shouldn’t really count as news when a House committee finds the Democratic Attorney General in contempt of Congress.”
Speier said, “I think, before long, you’re going to see more and more people willing to be very aggressive. I think, frankly, our membership has been very respectful and has tried to accommodate everyone in terms of having them come without subpoena. I think subpoenas are going to fly now, and when they are not complied with, we have what’s called inherent contempt proceedings. Which means we send the sergeant [at] arms out to handcuff the individual who is declining to testify.”Back in 2012, Eric Holder was held in contempt for withholding documents pertinent to his screw-up of Fast and Furious. Just imagine, if you will, the reaction had Republicans threatened to put Holder in chains,er, I mean handcuffs.Host Chris Matthews then asked, “Who are you going to handcuff?”
Speier responded, “Well, I’m going to start with Mr. Barr and bring him in. And –.”
Matthews asked, “Are you really serious about that threat? Because he’s laughing at that.”
Speier answered, “Well, you know, he won’t get the last laugh. I mean, he has to comply with the subpoena. And, so far, he has been — it’s all been negotiated, but once there are specific subpoenas, and he does not comply with them, he can be brought before the House. He can be tried. He can either be held there to testify, or he can be punished. And there is actually a jail in the Capitol, which has been used as recently as 1930.”
You will recall that Nadler voted against holding Holder in contempt.
But Nadler may have a point. We really are in a Constitutional crisis, but it's one of democrats' making. They are voting to hold Barr in contempt for failing to violate the law.
(Excerpt) Read more at Floppingaces.net...
Jerry, what did you expect but a constitutional crisis when YOUR SIDE did everything it could to nullify the consitutionally-elected President o the United States?
I’m surprised that a lot of you aren’t “swinging from nooses” (Hilliary’s words not mine) already
Nadless is like the bar drunk who needs to repeat himself three fricking times to impress a point upon himself while also boring it into others. They all think they’re all so damn ‘profound’.
Congressman Buck has been a huge disappointment. But it sounds like he did a good job today. Maybe he is coming around.
Charge hillary with espionage and obstruction then charge comey for leaking classified material and watch how fast we snap right out of this crisis.
They are voting to hold Barr in contempt for failing to violate the law.
Which sure sounds like a Felony to me, ARREST Nadler and the rest of the Democrats that voted to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE!!
To me, things are looking more like treason.
We're in a constitutional crisis and you're looking for blog traffic?
Really?
In a similar ploy, they wanted Mueller to charge President Trump with obstruction of INjustice, as it turns out
I agree that a felony by the Dems has probably taken place. They are overtly extorting the AG to commit a crime, and they know it. I would think each aye voter on the committee could be charged with some sort of conspiracy charge if nothing else, such as extortion.
All the more-so if such discussion occurs outside of the halls of Congress where they might be able to claim some sort of speech immunity.
Based on the pic, this dude’s nickname ought to be Waddler. He’s the long-lost twin of Whimpie from Popeye cartoons. “I’ll gladly jail Barr tomorrow for a hamburger today.”
The only constitutional crisis is the grotesque, risible abuse of power by Waddler, and Pelosi, who lives at the intersection of Alzheimer’s and Dementia.
I’m pretty sure Nadler meant “Constipational” Crisis ...just look at the guy; he’s quite obviously full of...
Shaving cream/be nice and clean/Shave every day/And you'll always look keen.
doesn’t the whole house have to vote on contempt for it to actually be a charge? Or is it just the committee? I thought that they have to vote it out of the committee, and then it goes to a floor vote.
Right off of Dr. Demento’s Best Of playlist. You win the thread!!!
:)
“”doesn’t the whole house have to vote on contempt for it to actually be a charge? Or is it just the committee? I thought that they have to vote it out of the committee, and then it goes to a floor vote.””
I also understand this to be the procedure. The news has been reporting/speculating when/if Pelosi will bring it to the floor for a vote....
The Dem have had their running temper tantrum for years now.
And now, they’re pushing us toward CWII with smiles on their faces.
Thanks for the answer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.