Posted on 09/28/2016 2:09:07 PM PDT by Be Careful
Any Legal Eagles out there that know if Immunity can be removed for 'bad faith', perjury, etc etc etc?
Congress can only override a veto with a two thirds majority in both houses. That’s not possible for any bill the Democrats don’t like. Sunset bills also require the president’s signature.
> Sunset bills also require the president’s signature.
Just to clarify, I did’t mean a bill to sunset an agency, I meant the bill that creates an agency has a built-in sunset provision.
Of course to start implementing this would require bills to sunset all agencies. Then the agencies would have to be recreated by bills with sunset provisions.
Click through to the article at this link http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3315932/posts
did’t = didn’t
the agents were most likely ordered to do a poor job, or risk getting fostered. i am sure they were ordered not to record it, like std operating procedure.
This thread started when you said that congress could end the DOJ and the FBI. Congress doesn’t have the power to do this without either the president’s support, or a 2/3 majority in both houses. Congress has neither, so your statement was incorrect. It’s important to stick with realistic expectations.
Congress most certain does have the power.
You’re thinking about politics, not legality - which is what my comment was directed at, hence the link to the DOJ page listing the statutes by which is was created.
Now is your Chance to do the Right Thing for ONCE in your Life:
Find Comey and Lynch in CONTEMPT AND JAIL THEM YOURSELF!!!
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/
A divided Congress Could easily END the FBI and the DOJ by REFUSING to Fund it in the House, REGARDLESS of what the President or Senate Wants.
Not true. The president STILL has to sign the bill that stops the funding.
That's not true, at all. Congress has power to WRITE bills. The president still has to sign them. It always takes a 2/3 vote to override his veto.
The original process was for the House to have to take positive action to fund the government, with the Senate and Exec having some say.
What has happened is that various methods are used to fund the government perpetually, with positive action being required to halt funding.
It certainly *was* intended that the House could simply refuse to fund areas of the government, with the Senate, Exec and interested private parties left to be mere supplicants.
That's simply not so. It has always been that the house writes the funding bills, the senate approves them, and the president signs them. It has always taken all three to Tango.
If Congress can show that Comey violated the terms of the immunity deal then all bets are off. He can be impeached, removed from his position, and then charged and tried.
It was called the Senate until destroyed by the 17th Amend.
Your “concurrence by a majority of the States” is served by the Senate.
> By putting specific policies into the control of the State Legislatures/Governors themselves...
State legislatures used to command their U.S. Senators.
There is no need to create a new institution, the encumbrances placed on the existing institution need to be removed.
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.