Ohr didn't show up for his testimony today before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/2017...itano.html

I wouldn't be surprised if Ohr unfortunately suffered a mysterious accident in the near future.

(12-18-2017 07:04 PM)WoodlandsOwl Wrote:  Ohr didn't show up for his testimony today before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/2017...itano.html
I wouldn't be surprised if Ohr unfortunately suffered a mysterious accident in the near future.

You mean Vince Fostered?

Suicide by three shots to the back of the head.

Oh, and Vince Fostered is so 1990s. The kids all say Seth Riched.

(12-18-2017 07:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:04 PM)WoodlandsOwl Wrote:  Ohr didn't show up for his testimony today before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/2017...itano.html
I wouldn't be surprised if Ohr unfortunately suffered a mysterious accident in the near future.

You mean Vince Fostered?

Yep. No Show just provides more fuel to the fire for the claims that the Stelle Dossier was the genesis for all the Russian collusion allegations.

And if it was used to obtain a FISA Warrant then someone will go to Jail.

He definitely doesn't have anything to hide.

(12-18-2017 07:22 PM)Kronke Wrote:  He definitely doesn't have anything to hide.

Except himself.

(12-18-2017 07:26 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:22 PM)Kronke Wrote:  He definitely doesn't have anything to hide.

Except himself.

Hopefully he was subpoenaed. Easy to compel his testimony. He might resign from the DOJ tomorrow. Then as a private citizen he can take the 5th without the fallout of being actively employed by the DOJ.

LOL, it's all falling apart.

Has mccabe resigned yet?

(12-18-2017 07:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  LOL, it's all falling apart.

Has mccabe resigned yet?

Bet you one of your overpriced TDECU Stadium "Cougar Dogs" that Mccabe doesn't testify this week either.

(12-18-2017 07:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  LOL, it's all falling apart.

Has mccabe resigned yet?

He failed to show last week. He's due back up there tomorrow morning.

Just what power does congress have to compel testimony from a member of the judicial branch of the government, given the separate but equal clause in the constitution? What are congresses powers of arrest? Can congress charge a member of a co-equal branch with a crime? Until William Sessions and the Justice Dept. comes on board with this, it's in my opinion, going no where. Members of congress are only interested in one thing. Gaining or keeping their seats. And that's it.

(12-18-2017 07:59 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  Just what power does congress have to compel testimony from a member of the judicial branch of the government, given the separate but equal clause in the constitution? What are congresses powers of arrest? Can congress charge a member of a co-equal branch with a crime? Until William Sessions and the Justice Dept. comes on board with this, it's in my opinion, going no where. Members of congress are only interested in one thing. Gaining or keeping their seats. And that's it.

Unless I am mistaken, the Justice Dept is part of the Executive Branch, not Judicial and funded by Congress. So yeah, there is a hell of a lot that can be done. The President can fire them and the Congress can defund them.

(12-18-2017 08:14 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:59 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  Just what power does congress have to compel testimony from a member of the judicial branch of the government, given the separate but equal clause in the constitution? What are congresses powers of arrest? Can congress charge a member of a co-equal branch with a crime? Until William Sessions and the Justice Dept. comes on board with this, it's in my opinion, going no where. Members of congress are only interested in one thing. Gaining or keeping their seats. And that's it.

Unless I am mistaken, the Justice Dept is part of the Executive Branch, not Judicial and funded by Congress. So yeah, there is a hell of a lot that can be done. The President can fire them and the Congress can defund them.

It is.

(12-18-2017 08:29 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:14 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:59 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  Just what power does congress have to compel testimony from a member of the judicial branch of the government, given the separate but equal clause in the constitution? What are congresses powers of arrest? Can congress charge a member of a co-equal branch with a crime? Until William Sessions and the Justice Dept. comes on board with this, it's in my opinion, going no where. Members of congress are only interested in one thing. Gaining or keeping their seats. And that's it.

Unless I am mistaken, the Justice Dept is part of the Executive Branch, not Judicial and funded by Congress. So yeah, there is a hell of a lot that can be done. The President can fire them and the Congress can defund them.

It is.

Whether executive or judicial the question still remains does the congress have the power to compel their testimony? Honest question, I don't know the answer to.

(12-18-2017 08:55 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:29 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:14 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:59 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  Just what power does congress have to compel testimony from a member of the judicial branch of the government, given the separate but equal clause in the constitution? What are congresses powers of arrest? Can congress charge a member of a co-equal branch with a crime? Until William Sessions and the Justice Dept. comes on board with this, it's in my opinion, going no where. Members of congress are only interested in one thing. Gaining or keeping their seats. And that's it.

Unless I am mistaken, the Justice Dept is part of the Executive Branch, not Judicial and funded by Congress. So yeah, there is a hell of a lot that can be done. The President can fire them and the Congress can defund them.

It is.

Whether executive or judicial the question still remains does the congress have the power to compel their testimony? Honest question, I don't know the answer to.

Technically, yes. If they determine Ohr is in Contempt of Congress the Sgt at Arms for the respective house of Congress can arrest him and bring him for trial on the floor of said house.

It hasn't been done like that since the early 1800's due to Congress passing a law making Contempt of Congress a crime and compelling the Justice Dept to arrest anyone indicted.

(12-18-2017 09:04 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:55 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:29 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:14 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:59 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  Just what power does congress have to compel testimony from a member of the judicial branch of the government, given the separate but equal clause in the constitution? What are congresses powers of arrest? Can congress charge a member of a co-equal branch with a crime? Until William Sessions and the Justice Dept. comes on board with this, it's in my opinion, going no where. Members of congress are only interested in one thing. Gaining or keeping their seats. And that's it.

Unless I am mistaken, the Justice Dept is part of the Executive Branch, not Judicial and funded by Congress. So yeah, there is a hell of a lot that can be done. The President can fire them and the Congress can defund them.

It is.

Whether executive or judicial the question still remains does the congress have the power to compel their testimony? Honest question, I don't know the answer to.

Technically, yes. If they determine Ohr is in Contempt of Congress the Sgt at Arms for the respective house of Congress can arrest him and bring him for trial on the floor of said house.

It hasn't been done like that since the early 1800's due to Congress passing a law making Contempt of Congress a crime and compelling the Justice Dept to arrest anyone indicted.

Found this on the internet:

Contempt of Congress:

Congress can issue contempt citations to people unwilling to provide testimony, within certain limits. Congress can ask the Justice Department to incarcerate any witness impeding an investigation. In the case of Anderson v. Dunn (1821), the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to have people arrested for contempt. This right has its limitations. Congress must demonstrate that the testimony of the prospective witness would aid its ability to create laws. If not, then the contempt citation is invalid.

Doesn't sound like they can legally compel any one presently to testify given these limitations.

Career FBI and he pulls this ****? Andy career FBI is he gonna pull the same ****?
Disgusting. Their names will be immortalized in FBI training. Disgusting.

(12-18-2017 09:22 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:04 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:55 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:29 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 08:14 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Unless I am mistaken, the Justice Dept is part of the Executive Branch, not Judicial and funded by Congress. So yeah, there is a hell of a lot that can be done. The President can fire them and the Congress can defund them.

It is.

Whether executive or judicial the question still remains does the congress have the power to compel their testimony? Honest question, I don't know the answer to.

Technically, yes. If they determine Ohr is in Contempt of Congress the Sgt at Arms for the respective house of Congress can arrest him and bring him for trial on the floor of said house.

It hasn't been done like that since the early 1800's due to Congress passing a law making Contempt of Congress a crime and compelling the Justice Dept to arrest anyone indicted.

Found this on the internet:

Contempt of Congress:

Congress can issue contempt citations to people unwilling to provide testimony, within certain limits. Congress can ask the Justice Department to incarcerate any witness impeding an investigation. In the case of Anderson v. Dunn (1821), the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to have people arrested for contempt. This right has its limitations. Congress must demonstrate that the testimony of the prospective witness would aid its ability to create laws. If not, then the contempt citation is invalid.

Doesn't sound like they can legally compel any one presently to testify given these limitations.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/192

Quote:2 U.S. Code § 192 - Refusal of witness to testify or produce papers

Every person who having been summoned as a witness by the authority of either House of Congress to give testimony or to produce papers upon any matter under inquiry before either House, or any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or any committee of either House of Congress, willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 nor less than $100 and imprisonment in a common jail for not less than one month nor more than twelve months.

Looks like the senate reschedued him for later this week because they got their hands on some new documents they want to review first before talking to him.

Not sure why anyone would be concerned that members of the FBI might have conspired to influence the outcome of an election, and then once those election results did not turn out to the conspirator's liking, they conspired to undermine the legitimacy of the elected president.

What's the big deal?