Posted on 03/07/2014 9:10:06 AM PST by SeekAndFind
They have the power but not the will to use it.
The word is unix or is it eunuch?{I used to sell UNIX don't bash me for a joke}.
Not a chance. Republicans would gather an even larger voting bloc should they actually hold someone in contempt or jail them. They don’t want to do this. It does defy logic. Anywho, Why do Republicans insist on pushing Immigration issues when it can only hurt them(and will) and they could bring up immigrantion AFTER they win the MidTerms?
I actually think they don’t want to win or look into any criminal activity.
TREASON - continuous, in-your-face, agenda-driven, agency-abetted, media-complicit, representative-enabled, court-sanctioned, ongoing…
“Charter of negative liberties” - hiding behind it, while destroying it. Tactics of totalitarians/socialists/criminals.
U.S.A. - United Socialists of America
korny.
>> The house has the power to hold her in contempt and to send their own marshals to have her arrested and brought in for confinement.
Absolutely correct!
There’s two sets of rules...None for the elite class and the rest for us. We’d be thrown in jail. Make no mistake, we are in tyranny....
Absolutely correct!
Except it hasn't been done since 1934. For good reason.
I believe the arrest authority of the Sergeant at Arms is now restricted to Capitol Hill, period. And the Congressional jail is merely a temporary holding tank for any rowdy demonstrators -- and isn't equipped to feed or handle overnight guests.
Accordingly, while Congress might have the authority to arrest and confine people under an "inherent contempt" charge, they no longer have the ability to do so (nor the will, evidently).
Don't shoot the messenger...
Why is there a question about this?
You have a high profile case in which the IRS is accused of using its power against the political opponents of the President. This is not a meaningless violation of law that is being investigated.
My only question is why this wasn’t turned over to a Special Prosecutor months ago. Do these Republicans really think they can investigate in hearings or are they just looking for TV face time.?
If so, they’ve had their fun, now the should get out of the way and let a Special Prosecutor get on with the damn job.
If she was going to be then she would have been by now.
Wske up folks! This is ALL Kabuki theater for YOUR entertainment.
This contemptuous turkey neck will keep her ugly mouth shut till this is over. Then she will get a high-paying low-effort job, thanks to the democrat party.
What difference does it make? Eric Holder would have to make the decision to prosecute her,what do you think the chances of that are? Especially since Lois Lerner has already been interviewed by the Justice dept. And actually answered questions!She did not take the fifth there?
of course The justice dept. Takes its orders from Obama and they have already labeled this a phony scandal,so Lerner knows nothing is going to happen,
never mind the movies folks,we are witnessing in real time,the perfect crime,the crooks control the whole apparatus in Government,and more importantly the MEDIA,who are supposed to expose this corruption but they are in this perfect crime,a participant
>> I believe the arrest authority of the Sergeant at Arms is now restricted to Capitol Hill, period.
Still peddling your OPINION in the face of facts to the contrary?
The Supreme Court says the authority of the Sergeant at Arms extends throughout the United States
“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.” Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204
A fact. Not an opinion.
Because CONgress is a repository of gutless wonders.
You have not substantiated your claim that “arrest authority of the Sergeant at Arms is now restricted to Capitol Hill”
I have cited the Supreme Court which says you are mistaken.
I have fact, you have opinion.
I have cited the Supreme Court which says you are mistaken.
Ray, I have never argued that Congress didn't have the authority. My argument has been limited to whether they have the ability.
I have heard -- from a reliable, though unremembered, source -- that, some years ago, the Congress agreed to restrict the S-a-A's authority in return for the DOJ taking over responsibility for any arrests or confinement.
And, indeed, the Congress' authority in this regard has not been exercised for eighty years! Why?
You do realize that Anderson vs Dunn traces to 1821, don't you?
Obviously, something has happened since then to alter the equation. What do you suppose it could be?
American private sector tax paying peons, who were held in contempt and actually went to jail for such things as yawning and cell phone ringing in court, are no doubt watching...
>> I have never argued that Congress didn’t have the authority.
You in post 27:
“I believe the arrest authority of the Sergeant at Arms is now restricted to Capitol Hill, period”
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.