Skip to comments.Vanity: "Obstruction of Congress" Is The House Insisting It Is Has Defacto Judicial Powers To Force Summons, Etc
Posted on 12/14/2019 2:05:27 AM PST by Its All Over Except ...
Whereas abuse of power is a separate issue, how can the House impeach Trump for "Obstruction of Congress" when it is the Constitutional right of the co-equal Judicial Branch to act as the arbiter in the event of the House of Reps wanting the White House to comply with summons and turning over what it believes is important and pertinent documents, the White House/Executive as another co-equal branch says take it to the courts to decide, the House of Reps refuses, then demands that the Executive acquiesce to its demands, unconstitutionally acts as if it possesses those Judicial Branch powers to make the Executive comply, and then moves to impeach for Obstruction of Cingress when the Executive refuses to comply to it's attempts to act as if it posseses those Judicial Branch powers?
Leftists are getting creative and just as they carve up parts of the Constitution (like the 2nd amendment) and ignore the part that says “sham not be infringed” here they have decided to try to ignore the role of the Judicial Branch and absorb its role and power in an attempt to wield it against the Executive branch by punishing the Executive for failure to comply when only the Judicial Branch has the power to punish for failure to comply.
IOW, if the House went to the courts and the courts ruled the White House had to comply to the House’s demands the Judicial Branch could punish the Executive for failure to comply.
But the House wants that power to punish as it tries to weild that same power that resides with the judiciary.
The dims argue that the word “sole” is in the Constitution regarding impeachment, so they don’t have to abide by the courts.
Of course the Constitution also reads: “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The Dems issued a subpoena for Kupperman...and when he went to court....they took it back. How does that work??
*shall not be infringed. Autocorrect. Hate it sometimes...
No where in the Constitution does it say they are co-equal. They are not by their very nature.
Dems in the House don’t want the courts involved. They want to have it’s power though but the Constitution do not vest it with those powers.
So “sole” gives the House the powers of the Judicial Branch?
But that would tear up the rest of the Constitution.
If true, how can the House try to wield its powers?
Article one, clause 5: “ The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. “
So the dims are interpreting this to mean they don’t need the courts for any impeachment proceedings, including the validity of their subpoenas.
And they believe this clause allows them to run to roughshod over the rest of the Constitution that does not grant them certain powers that they want to wield anyway?
The reality is that dems have no principles. This is not about separation of powers. It is the belief that their side is righteous and good and should have full authority whereever they hold power. If they hold the presidency in the future, they will argue for the unlimited power of that President to do whatever he wants. If they lose the house, they will argue with a straight face the opposite of what they are saying today.
“And they believe this clause allows them to run to roughshod over the rest of the Constitution that does not grant them certain powers that they want to wield anyway?”
and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
It doesn’t say “ with the exception of HOR as pertaining to impeachment”. Probable cause still needs to be proven.
Think back over the past few weeks of how many times the Shiff and Nadler committees have stated they are a co-equal branch to the Executive branch.
They are only a couple of committees among many in the House, which is only half of the Legislative branch that includes the Senate; and that branch is co-equal.
For the House committees’ so-called subpoenas to have any clout, they would have to go to court, win their argument and get a court order to enforce.
It is actually Article I, Section II; which is what you are referring to, JP.
Further, the democrats do need the Judiciary Branch because the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court would preside over the impeachment of a President (Article I, Section III).
The term whistleblower in itself is an obstruction of justice excuse, a fraud
Interesting take last night on Ingraham’s show. She had Derschowitz on as a guest and he said the Supreme Court’s action yesterday in granting certiorari to the Trump tax case effectively negated the Democrat’s second Article of Impeachment. There can be no “Obstruction of Congress” for asserting executive privilege.
Wonder how the Dem’s will react to that?
judicial Branch is not really a co-equal branch. There is NOT a check on the Judicial Branch.
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.