Posted on 06/20/2024 6:49:47 AM PDT by george76
Kash Patel, a former federal prosecutor and adviser to former President Donald Trump, has asserted that Congress has the authority to arrest and detain U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland for refusing to comply with a subpoena.
Patel’s statement stems from Garland’s refusal to turn over embarrassing audio recordings of Joe Biden’s classified documents interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur, which were subpoenaed by Congress.
Last week, the House of Representatives voted to hold Merrick Garland in criminal contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena.
Two GOP-led House committees passed resolutions in May recommending US Attorney General Merrick Garland be held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over audio of Biden’s interview with Hur.
Merrick Garland has reportedly “classified at the highest level” the audio tapes of Joe Biden’s embarrassing interview with Special Counsel Hur. The tapes have been locked away in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), according to investigative journalist Paul Sperry.
...
The White House previously admitted in federal court to altering the transcript of Joe Biden’s testimony with Special Counsel Robert Hur.
The edits were made to artificially inflate Biden’s competence during his five-hour interrogation about his mishandling of stolen classified documents.
Biden has personally invoked Executive Privilege against The Heritage Foundation and Judicial Watch in an attempt to keep his controversial interview with Special Counsel Hur under wraps.
DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) asserted that no administration official has ever faced prosecution for non-compliance with a subpoena when the president has invoked executive privilege. Except if your name is Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, or any other Republican.
The memo, obtained by The Hill, states, “For nearly seven decades and across presidential administrations of both parties, the Executive Branch has taken the position that the criminal contempt of Congress statute… does not apply to Executive Branch officials who do not comply with a congressional subpoena based on a presidential assertion of executive privilege.”
“Consistent with this longstanding position, no U.S. Attorney has pursued criminal contempt charges against an Executive Branch official asserting the President’s claim of executive privilege,” the memo added.
House Oversight Chairman James Comer previously argued that Joe Biden cannot assert executive privilege over the audio of his interview with Robert Hur because the transcript has already been publicly released.
Following the House’s decision on contempt charges, the Justice Department said they won’t prosecute Merrick Garland.
In a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson on Friday, the department said, “The department has determined that the responses by Attorney General Garland to the subpoenas issued by the committees did not constitute a crime, and accordingly the department will not bring the congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the Attorney General.”
Patel, who served as chief of staff to Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller during the Trump administration, said that the House of Representatives, under its statutory authority, can instruct the Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest Garland and hold him in detention until he complies with the subpoena, according to Just the News.
“Merrick Garland said, ‘No, I’m not going to comply [with the subpoena]. I’m going to break the law,'” Patel said on the Just the News show.
“Then Congress under that authority granted to them by statute can have the sergeant at arms go and arrest Merrick Garland, and can hold him in detention until he complies, just like DOJ would do to anyone else who violates a subpoena,” he added.
According to House rules:
To supplement this inherent power, Congress in 1857 adopted an alternative statutory contempt procedure. Sec. 2, infra. Thus, the House may either (1) certify a recalcitrant witness to the appropriate United States Attorney for possible indictment under this statute or (2) exercise its inherent power to commit for contempt by detaining the witness in the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. Manual Sec. 296. The statutory procedure is the one used in modern practice, but the “inherent power” remains available. In one instance, the House invoked both procedures against a witness. 3 Hinds Sec. 1672.
In contrast, the Senate may invoke its civil contempt statute (2 USC Sec. 288d) to direct the Senate legal counsel to bring an action in Federal court.
...
GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna said she will bring force an inherent contempt vote to the House floor after the DOJ declined to prosecute US Attorney General Merrick Garland.
“The DOJ is not above the law. Garland is not above the law. Inherent contempt will be called up and brought to the floor,” Anna Paulina Luna said.
...
“I already filed the resolution and I will be calling up the vote,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna said.
It should be made very obvious to the American public that the police state folks running Justice think that they’re untouchable and are actually running things via blackmail and intimidation of our elected leaders. Most folks haven’t reached that conclusion yet.
2) Where would Garland be detained/incarcerated? Who would watch him and care for his needs?
CONgress has their very own Jail in the basement, for over 150 years now.
“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.
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.
I’m pretty sure that 50 years or so ago, Congress had an actual jail cell in the Capitol for holding contemptuous witnesses, but I believe they eliminated in a remodeling project. Bring it back!
Doing that would require a pair. The GOP has sorely lacked that in 90% of its members — and I am excluding the obvious women.
Oops. Eyeamok beat me to it with actual data!
.
Interesting! Nancy Pelosi must not have known about the jail, otherwise she would have used if for her political opponents.
Having authority is one thing. Having any cajones to use it is quite another.
Garland knows that Congress is full of craven cowards, many of whom don’t give a rat’s ass darn about America, the rule of law, our individual liberties, or our future as a nation.
Nothing’s gonna happen to Garland.
He’ll get off scott free, just like Biden, Obama, Schumer, Pelousy, Schiff/tt, AOC, and all the rest of the commies and traitors in WashDC
What you said.
If congress cut their budgets they could retain some control, but they won’t because of the blackmail from these rogue modern day Praetorian guards called the US bureaucracy use against the elected politicians. These Praetorian thugs are unelected and unaccountable and there is nothing about them that’s professional. They are greedy, partisan leftist apparatchiks.
The problem with this is that SCIF Clearances are specific to a particular one, not any of them in general.
“Would the Sargeant-at-Arms open fire?”
I sure hope so!
“Who would watch him and care for his needs?”
Who cares?
It may come to that if the election is stolen again. But I fear too many swamp monsters will raise their heads and we will on continue down the slavery path.
need another sirhan sirhan
I really wish this would happen to establish some credibility of this circus for the american people.
Provide him a deadline, maybe 2 weeks, if he doesn't comply let him know in the warning that he will be arrested.
I really wishhe would be arrested to establish some credibility of this do- nothing govt circus the american people are being subjected to.
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.