Posted on 09/05/2024 7:59:17 AM PDT by hardspunned
Claims His Former Colleague Alvin Bragg's Case is "Nonsense" And Alleges He Was "Stacking Charges"
“He[Alvin Bragg] was just stacking charges and rearranging things just to make it fit a case.”
“I think the case is nonsense.”
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
And the Republican Party Leadership is In On Board with this Authoritarian behavior and lawlessness, otherwise they might have stopped it...
“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.
In vino veritas................
Time to take the lower courts system apart: bench by bench!
Toss soiled judges and AGs on top of the scrap heap: they’re our enemies Release all political prisoners.
Reminder: Louder with Crowder has a podcast (generally over an hour) on weekdays if you desire an off-color and hilarious at times news of the day.
Well then…
If this is the case, then those involved ought to be prosecuted for it.
Am I right or am I right?… right?… right??
Not that they’ll stop. Just an admission that they’ll do whatever they want and dare someone to stop them. NOTHING is off the table to prevent PDJT from taking back the oval office.
It is the way reality works.
Wow.
Interesting
I had only partially understood this until reading your post.
We are doomed. The people who run our country hate us and we have no redress for our grievances. We have no representation at all anymore.
That part is correct. Repentance and turning back to God can give us salvation from the doomed (in this life) part. And, God will smash them for us if we turn to Him. Promise. The hard part is getting people to repent and turn back to God.
Shouldn’t this guy’s sworn testimony be taken for appeals?
The Democrat Party Organized Crime Syndicate has members who are judges.
More than "soiled", these judges and AGs should be indicted, tried, and convicted for giving aid and comfort to the domestic and foreign enemies of the United States.
I’m not saying that Republican “leadership” doesn’t want Trump to go away, but how could Republicans stop a prosecution in New York? What kind of political power do they have in NYC or NY state?
Name???
Nicholas V. Biase
This kind of confirms that “Mike Johnson” is in on it, either by choice or by blackmail. I kind of think it is the latter.
Haul this guy in before Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz and get him publicly on the record.
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.