Posted on 06/05/2018 4:02:43 PM PDT by davikkm
Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is reportedly in negotiations with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley to be granted immunity in exchange for his testimony on the upcoming Justice Department Inspector General report on the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe. “Grassley, an Iowa Republican, has quietly requested that several former officials appear in front of the Judiciary Committee to discuss the long-awaited internal Justice Department report, which sources say will detail a series of missteps surrounding the Justice Department and FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s handling of classified information while secretary of state,” CNN reports.
“Under the terms of such a grant of use immunity, no testimony or other information provided by Mr. McCabe could be used against him in a criminal case,” Michael Bromwich, an attorney for the former FBI official, told Grassley.
“Mr. McCabe is willing to testify, but because of the criminal referral, he must be afforded suitable legal protection,” Bromwich added.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
He’s a pussy. He is going to sing. Once they start negotiating, it is all over. But they should not give him immunity...plea bargain him...as long as he tells all.
How did that work for Hillary's IT guy, Bryan Pagliano? He was granted immunity for his testimony then still plead the 5th................
I would bet my Immortal Soul this story is Absent on CNN_NBC_MSNBC_CBS_ABC_YAHOO_MSN>>>etc
If this Committee is unwilling or unable to obtain such an order, then Mr. McCabe will have to no choice but to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.”
BULLS&*T, GIVE HIM NOTHING BUT A CELL!!!
And Congress has the absolute authority to JAIL Every last Person that Appears before them for Contempt. They have their very OWN JAIL!! Why do you think it is there??
“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.
This is absolutely DAMNING: Remember McCabe & Co have had a copy of the OIG report for 2-3 weeks now.
McCabe’s request for immunity to testify about the OIG report point to MASSIVE criminal liability......Prison awaits 👇
No immunity. Make him face the music.
Definitely sounds guilty!
Can he give us Obama?
I’m sure he’ll be given immunity in exchange for absolutely nothing.
Immunity for lying? He’s already been proven a liar. Chances are he’ll lie even more.
Why does he need immunity?? Every liberal said he was saint.
The metaphorical heads of Hillary, Obama, and Brennan before discussions even begin.
I think for Obama loyalty is a one-way street. He’s only concerned about himself. He might exert himself for Michelle or Valerie Jarrett, but probably not for anyone else. And definitely not for a cracker.
he is a proven liar he can give info but testify against anyone and he will be ripped to shreds...by defense
“proffer” for immunity also see queen for a day.
He will tell all to save his skin
http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/comey-tweet-begging-mccabe-for-mercy/
Usually there is a proffer where the extent of testimony is discussed by his attorney. Nothing is committed or binding and it gives a boundary as to the limits and conditions of the immunity offer.
Bottom line, he would know where all the skeletons are.
I wonder if Chucky thinks McCabe is acting like an innocent man....
That is true. However, I suspect if it comes to that, it won’t be his word against their word. There will likely be ways to verify at least of a portion of his claims.
Humankind has long experience with liars under questioning, and in the digital age, people leave footprints!
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.