p
But the DoD now has it as of this past Monday.
It appears that the President can’t even order unredacted documents be released.
There were very good reasons for the founders to exclude the children of foreign nationals from being President.
The Kenyanesian Usurpation should be proof enough to anyone that they were right.
All congress has to do is say the documents will be on their desk or the DOJ budget will be cut by 10% and it will be cut another 10% per day until it’s received.
So, if Congress won’t do it and neither will the president, the DOJ effectively becomes a fourth branch of government and one that is wholly UNACCOUNTABLE. Basically a rogue agency allowed to bully and intimidate the representatives of the people — and the people themselves.
EVERYONE HERE should Find and Read Hind’s Precedents and Cannon’s Precedents to put this issue to bed once and for all.
From the Article:
neither the Constitution nor the Judiciary Act provided a means for Congress to actually enforce anything beyond funding and/or the impeachment process. Congress could subpoena a witness to appear. If said witness did not appear, an arrest citation could be put out. But the arrest would have to be carried out by the Sergeant at Arms, who is not a law enforcement official. He can arrest people in the gallery, but cannot go outside the confines of Congress to make arrests. If, say, Rod Rosenstein, an individual never went to the House, Congress could not “haul him in.”
Unfortunately there is Already PRECEDENCE for the Sergeant at Arms to ARREST ANYONE ANYWHERE, see Hinds Precedents.
Hind’s Precedents:
1607. The case of Jolm Anderson, continued.
Decision of the Supreme Court affirming the right of the House to
punish John Anderson for contempt.
Anderson brought a suit against the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House ‘ for assault
and battery and false imprisonment, which was finally settled by a decision of the
United States Supreme Court, rendered at the February term, 1821.
From the circuit court of the District of Columbia the case of Anderson v. Dunn
went to the Supreme Court of the United States, and at the February term, 1821 a
decision was rendered. (6 Wheaton, 204.) The summary of the decision was:
To an action of trespass against the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House of Representatives of the United
States, for an assault and battery and false imprisonment, it is a legal justification and bar, to plead, that
a Congress was held and sitting, during the period of the trespasses complained of, and that the House
of Representatives had resolved that the plaintiff had been guilty of a breach of the privileges of the
House, and of a high contempt of the dignity and authority of the same; and had ordered that the
Speaker should issue his warrant to the Sergeant-at-Arms, commanding him to take the plaintiff into
custody, wherever to be found, and to have him before the said House, to answer to the said charge;
and that the Speaker did accordingly issue such a warrant, reciting the said resolution and order, and
commanding the Sergeant-at-Arms to take the plaintiff into custody, etc., and deliver the said warrant to
the defendant, by virtue of which warrant the defendant arrested the plaintiff and conveyed him
to the bar of the House, where he was heard in his defense, touching the matter of the said charge, and
the examination being adjourned from day to day, and the House having ordered the plaintiff to be
detained in custody, he was accordingly detained by the defendant until he was finally adjudged to be
guilty, and convicted of the charge aforesaid, and ordered to be forthwith brought to the bar, and reprimanded
by the Speaker, and then discharged from custody; and after being thus reprimanded, was
actually discharged from the arrest and custody aforesaid.....
.....
As to the minor points made in this case, it is only necessary to observe that there is nothing on the
face of this record from which it can appear on what evidence this warrant was issued. And we are not
to presume that the House of Representatives would have issued it without duly establishing the fact
charged on the individual. And, as to the distance to whch 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.
And why should it be restricted to other boundaries? Such are the limits of the legislating powers of that
body; and the inhabitant of Louisiana or Maine may as probably charge them with bribery and corruption,
or attempt, by letter, to induce the commission of either, as the inhabitant of any other section of
the Union. If the inconvenience be urged, the reply is obvious; there is no difficulty m observing that
respectful deportment whirii will render all apprehension chimerical.
5995—VOL 2—07 68
So then, what is congress even good for.
Congress doesn’t ‘lack teeth’, they lack THE WILL to use the teeth that they have, including indefinite locking up of non-cooperatives.
WOOOHOOO, Larry! Thank you, sir.
OUT-OF-CONTROL executive branch (especially the former administration). Checks and balances? Not so much.
DEFUND / DISMANTLE
pick any 5 or 10 or 15 or etc....
https://www.usa.gov/federal-agencies/a
Prune the tree. You’ve seen what can happen. Witness history.
Witness current events...
You know...I think "rocket man" could drop one on DC and not too many people would give a crap.....
Congress has the power of the purse and should cut their budget, or at least make some large chunk of their budget contingent on compliance with Congressional oversight.
Please see “US vs Nixon (1974)”.
This was a 9 - 0 SCOTUS decision during Pres. Nixon’s impeachment on the Watergate tapes.
There is no executive branch privilege of any sort from a Congressional Impeachment investigation.
Not “classification.”
Not “Sources and Methods”.
Not “Presidential Executive Privilege.”
Not Attorney-client Privilege between Federal executive branch lawyers and the President.
It is all on the table.
Only the paid personal lawyers to the President are not covered by “US vs Nixon (1974)”.
If Asst AG Rosenstein is impeached, the House gets every single document it requested with no redaction’s.
Impeachment is the thermonuclear weapon of the Constitution for the Congress to use against either or both the Executive or Judicial Branches.
Trump potentially could start firing them for not complying - time to clear out all the obama appointees and anyone THEY appointed.
You drain a swamp with a bulldozer, not a shovel.
and since the boss won’t fire them they keep getting away with it