[bigeasy_70118]

The executive branch has no authority to enforce a legislative subpoena until the Speaker of the House or the President of the Senate introduce and then pass a resolution finding Michael Schiavo and George Greer in contempt of congress. As far as I know, this hasn't and won't be done. So under your scenario, the President has no role to enforce the subpoenas.

Thanks for playing, we have a lovely Separation of Powers: The Home Game for you to brush up on your constitutional knowledge before posting again.

Being wrong is one thing. Being condescending is another. Being wrong and consdescending at the same time is very uncouth.

[Defiant]

The executive branch has no authority to enforce a legislative subpoena until the Speaker of the House or the President of the Senate introduce and then pass a resolution finding Michael Schiavo and George Greer in contempt of congress.

And you assert this...how? By pulling it out of a rectal orifice? Certainly not by reading the statute. I read it a few days ago, and it provides that interfering with a Congressional witness is a felony. Now, not after Congress says the interference has occurred. The executive is empowered to prevent the commission of crimes and to protect witnesses in federal matters, including Congressional inquiries, and need not wait for a Congressional action.

You have mistakenly confused the statute that involves protection of Congressional witnesses and subpoenaed things, with the process for finding a witness in contempt of Congress.

Sometimes condenscension is warranted.