Posted on 05/02/2018 5:51:19 AM PDT by ptsal
The chairmen of two House committees are asking the Justice Department for records related to Daniel Richman, the FBI “special government employee” who handled former FBI Director James Comey’s memos of conversations he had with President Donald Trump.
Virginia Rep. Bob Goodlatte and South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy, the GOP chairmen of the House Judiciary and House Oversight and Government Reform Committees, are asking Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for Richman’s work records as well as information regarding his security clearance.
(Excerpt) Read more at amp.dailycaller.com ...
Why is Richman NOT subject to leaking regulations and penalties?
Sessions/The DOJ Want Details Of Comey Friend’s Handling Of Trump Memos
Read no headline ever.
Congress nothing. Should be a federal grand jury.
I’d like to know what kind of “special status” he was granted and why he was given it. Was he deputized in some way? If so, why and by whom?
Daniel Richman, the FBI “special government employee” who handled former FBI Director James Comey’s memos ...
—
Would Richman be what one would call “barely a lawyer”?
Is Comey his only client? If so, than a raid on his office to confiscate his documents is justified.
And when the DOJ blows the Committee Chairs off or starts the slow rolling for the next year, what will Congress do? Unless Congress causes Sessions, et al real pain, Congress just emphasizes how toothless it is.
Good point. Use the same criteria that they use on Cohen.
If CONgress wanted the Answers and Documents, they would have them immediately:
Congress has ALL the power in washington, the executive and judicial branch operate according to the whims of CONGRESS!
“U.S. CODE
TITLE 2—THE CONGRESS
CHAPTER 6—CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMITTEE PROCEDURE; INVESTIGATIONS
Sec. 193. Privilege of witnesses
No witness is privileged to refuse to testify to any fact, or to produce any paper, respecting which he shall be examined by either House of Congress, or by any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or by any committee of either House, upon the ground that his testimony to such fact or his production of such paper may tend to disgrace him or otherwise render him infamous.”
Simply look up Hinds Precedents, especially chapters 53 and 51, and Cannon’s Precedents, especially chapters 184-185. You’ll find numerous detailed cases of Congress asserting its power, arresting people, holding them until they agreed to answer questions, and then releasing them. Some of these people did not refuse to appear, but simply failed to satisfactorily answer questions. One has to wonder how a previous Congress might have responded to Alberto Gonzales’s endless recitations of “I do not recall.”
Congress can Remove the President
Congress can remove the head of every executive agency Congress can remove ALL of their employees
Congress can Abolish every agency they so choose
Congress can remove EVERY JUDGE IN AMERICA, including every supreme court justice.
Congress can abolish every federal court except the supreme Court
Congress can decide which cases the Judicial Branch can hear and decide
CONGRESS can Imprison ANYONE they want for any reason they so desire for as long as they wish.
Congress can declare WAR
No other governing body has even 10% of the power CONGRESS has!!
CONGRESS IS ALLOWING ALL OF IT!!!
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.” http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html 73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934) https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
In 1857, a New York Times reporter refused to say which members of Congress had asked him to get them bribes (protecting his “sources” just as various Judith Millers today protect the people who feed them proven lies that costs thousands of lives), so Congress locked him up until he answered and then banned him from Congress.
In 1924 an oil executive appeared but refused to answer certain questions, so the Senate held — literally held — him in contempt. Senator Thomas Walsh of Montana argued that this question of contempt was of the gravest importance, and that it involved “the very life of the effective existence of the House of Representatives of the United States and of the Senate of the United States.” The matter was taken to court, and the witness fined and imprisoned.
“Why is Richman NOT subject to leaking regulations and penalties? “
I said the same this yesterday on another thread. If I were Richman I’d be saying to myself “My good bud Comey is on a million dollars book tour and all I got is this bus on top of me”
No matter....Comey was the leaker. His bud was co-conspirator.
I assume the New York Times has a copy.
Sounds like a no show consultant crony. All the big swamp critters need to disclose these secret employees.
The President is allow to fire anyone working for him for any reason.
He does NOT need to expalin is reasons.
If Congress wants to change that law they have that right. Until then Mueller needs to respect the laws on the books.
Comey misled everyone by calling "The Professor" simply a friend. Except he knew he was a Special Agent and had unique access to the FBI.
What were you thinking is pretty broad. It would be ABSOLUTELY impossible for the President to have no thoughts on the Russian Investigation during the period before Comey's firing.
However....the investigation would continue regardless and it did so that could not be the reason he fired him.
Rosenstein's letter was very thorough.
No matter...In the Comey memos, Comey himself tells the President "You can fire me at anytime..........."
I’m trying to figure out how a Professor had the proper clearance to be given access to classified information.
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.