(12-18-2017 10:09 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  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?

Maybe the first witch hunt in history that actually finds a witch. Hillary sure has been quiet lately.

(12-18-2017 10:55 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:09 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  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?

Maybe the first witch hunt in history that actually finds a witch. Hillary sure has been quiet lately.

Ironically, she's the only candidate that isn't currently under investigation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost...67da337720

(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.

Wouldn't that be something...The Sgt. At arms walking into the DOJ to arrest one of their people

(12-19-2017 08:54 AM)solohawks 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.

Wouldn't that be something...The Sgt. At arms walking into the DOJ to arrest one of their people

The current Senate Sgt at Arms is Frank Larkin. In addition to being a former homicide detective in Maryland he's also a former Navy SEAL.

(12-19-2017 09:54 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 08:54 AM)solohawks 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:  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.

Wouldn't that be something...The Sgt. At arms walking into the DOJ to arrest one of their people

The current Senate Sgt at Arms is Frank Larkin. In addition to being a former homicide detective in Maryland he's also a former Navy SEAL.

Nice! Someone who could literally skull drag his ass in if necessary.

(12-19-2017 09:57 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 09:54 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 08:54 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:04 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

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

Wouldn't that be something...The Sgt. At arms walking into the DOJ to arrest one of their people

The current Senate Sgt at Arms is Frank Larkin. In addition to being a former homicide detective in Maryland he's also a former Navy SEAL.

Nice! Someone who could literally skull drag his ass in if necessary.

What a wonderful visual that would be!