• Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Torrents
    • Login

    DOJ Won’t Pursue Criminal Contempt Charges Against Garland

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Politics & Debate
    4 Posts 2 Posters 13 Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • raphjdR Offline
      raphjd Forum Administrator
      last edited by

      https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/doj-wont-pursue-criminal-contempt-changes-against-garland-reports-5668952

      A DOJ official said that Mr. Garland’s refusal to comply with a subpoena ‘did not constitute a crime.’

      Strange how they prosecuted others for the exact same thing they are claiming isn't a crime.

      B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • B Offline
        blablarg18 @raphjd
        last edited by blablarg18

        @raphjd Yes.

        Steve Bannon & Peter Navarro both wanted to comply, as soon as Constitutional issues around Executive Privilege could be cleared up. So they are innocent.

        Merrick Garland merely said, he himself would judge what was a valid subpoena from Congress & whether he had to comply. So he's guilty.

        Meanwhile - DOJ also refuses to prosecute St. Fauci, for he lied to Congress.

        https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/18/rand-paul-slams-partisan-doj-for-refusal-to-investigate-fauci/

        Fauci testified in May 2021 that his agency never funded risky “gain-of-function” experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but Paul has repeatedly highlighted records and emails suggesting otherwise.

        Paul filed a criminal referral against Fauci in July 2021 and again in July 2023 over the perjury claims.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • B Offline
          blablarg18
          last edited by blablarg18

          "Inherent contempt" - twist - unlikely, but not impossible.

          It turns out that USA Congress can raise stakes, on Garland.

          When they vote someone in contempt - they rely on Executive Branch (DOJ) to arrest & prosecute. As we know.

          But - Congress can vote someone in "inherent contempt" - in which case, enforcement power derives from USA Congress who can have Congress' police or Sergeant at Arms detain person.

          At present, it's unlikely for that vote to be done on Garland. Just not impossible.

          Reports that Garland makes phone calls, to lobby House Republicans, to NOT do that vote.

          https://x.com/RepLuna/status/1804288513015198126

          raphjdR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • raphjdR Offline
            raphjd Forum Administrator @blablarg18
            last edited by

            @blablarg18

            It reminds me of when the DOJ under Loretta Lynch (Obama's AG) refused to prosecute Eric Holder (Oama's previous AG) for disobeying a Congressional subpoena.

            Of course, liberals are silent on shit like this because know their morals can't stand up to scrutiny.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • B blablarg18 referenced this topic on

            Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

            Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

            With your input, this post could be even better 💗

            Register Login
            • 1 / 1
            • First post
              Last post