Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: afraidfortherepublic

I’m afraid I don’t understand this concept.

A congressional investigating committee doesn’t have the power to compel a witness to produce evidence? Really?


2 posted on 03/11/2015 2:27:29 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Sherman Logan
"You can subpoena but the power to subpoena is only as good as the power to compel compliance,"

The Justice department is the power to compel. At least that's pretty much how Judge Napolitano explained it.
7 posted on 03/11/2015 2:31:15 PM PDT by cripplecreek ("For by wise guidance you can wage your war")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Sherman Logan
A congressional investigating committee doesn’t have the power to compel a witness to produce evidence? Really?

Have you checked into the Clintonemail.com IP address?

28 posted on 03/11/2015 2:41:32 PM PDT by Charles Martel (Endeavor to persevere...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Sherman Logan

Their subpoena power flows through the attorney generals office, if that helps any


34 posted on 03/11/2015 2:44:57 PM PDT by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Sherman Logan

I join you in consternation. How can the committee’s rules empower it to compel witnesses to appear, and agencies and individuals to produce documents, but not to produce the electronic repository of those documents? Gowdy must see legal wrangling with the Clintons as a tar-baby that will bog down his career. But this is now bigger than his remit, and requires an Independent Counsel.

We need a learned explanation of the ownership of the server. Hillary asserts that the server is part of Bill’s “ex Presidential office”, and also that it will “remain” private, thus implying it has been private property. But is it? When the taxpayers provide office infrastructure for ex-Presidents, do the ex-President’s take title to it as personal property? When? By what process? What stops ex-Presidents from buying expensive furnishings, artworks, etc. for their “office”, then selling them the next week, or carting them off to their homes? (If it was allowable, I am certain people like the Clintons would). I would really like to have some attorneys weigh in on this.


63 posted on 03/11/2015 3:03:58 PM PDT by Chewbarkah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson