Posted on 11/08/2017 3:17:10 PM PST by mojito
Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson struck a deal on Wednesday to testify voluntarily before the House Intelligence Committee next week to discuss his opposition research firm’s involvement in the Steele dossier.
Simpson and his lawyer met with members of the committee for several hours to hammer out a deal for his closed-door testimony.
The Daily Caller was informed that Simpson had indicated prior to Wednesday’s meeting that he would plead the Fifth during his deposition, just as his two co-founders, Peter Fritsch and Thomas Catan, did during interviews last month. But as part of the deal struck Wednesday, Simpson will not plead the Fifth.
Simpson’s move comes amid a tense legal battle over Fusion’s bank records. On Friday, Fusion filed papers in federal court in Washington, D.C. asking a judge to issue a temporary restraining order preventing its bank from releasing records related to financial transactions it has had with “any law firm, ‘media company’ or journalist with which it has worked.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
DEAL or NO DEAL?
FusionGPS no longer has anything to hide.
Limited questions.
What ‘deal’, they’re already in contempt?
Bingo,
The walls are closing in
Including paying “journalists” to run fakenews stories...
I say “deal.” Or one rat decided to abandon the sinking ship, whichever you prefer.
And then someone paid him a visit and told him that his family will be well taken care of...
It’s a classic prisoners dilemma scenario.
We know how this is going to play....
Fifth Amendment and GOP-e are fools again.
Someone please wake Judge Sessions and let him know.
I don’t really care about any of this. Sure it is nice that the House is having their little show but these things usually go nowhere. This is a matter for the Justice dept. Even with a recused Sessions the DoJ can appoint someone to investigate but they probably won’t and Trump sits and does nothing about it.
The DEAL was that the WUSSY Republicans ask them NOTHING IMPORTANT!
Immunity deal?
First one to turn states evidence gets the best deal nicest venues in the witness protection program
If he’s not going to plead the fifth, he’s been given immunity in exchange for the truth, which will probably involve putting someone important away. So it looks like there’s a deal. Is Hillary going to get locked up? Huh? Huh? Huh? Will they hang her? Or give her the chair? Huh? Will they will they will they?
This is the best insurance Fusion could buy!!
Unfortunately it appears the Justice department is either asleep, or incompetent, or some combination of the two. Even Trump's hands have so far been tied from making any changes there over threat of possible impeachment, coming even from Republicans like McCain and Graham. But it appears that other portions of Congress are starting to beat the drums that Justice is AWOL, and will give Trump the cover he needs to eventually lower the boom on Sessions, or whoever over there is needing it most. Until then, Congressional investigations is all we have.
WE ARE BEING SCAMMED, CONGRESS NEVER NEEDS TO MAKE A DEAL, EVER!!
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.
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.