Democrats plot next phase in impeachment, including new wave of subpoenas

[applegrove]

Democrats plot next phase in impeachment, including new wave of subpoenas

By Manu Raju, Jeremy Herb and Lauren Fox, CNN

Updated at 5:56 PM ET, Wed October 9, 2019

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/10/09/politics/democrat-impeachment-plans/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fpoliticalwire.com%2F


"SNIP.....

(CNN) — House Democrats are preparing a flurry of subpoenas in the face of the Trump administration's stonewalling of their impeachment investigation, amid a new debate within their caucus over holding a vote to formally authorize the inquiry in order to call the White House's bluff, according to Democratic sources.

In the face of the blistering White House letterrefusing to cooperate with their probe, Democrats expect they are likely done with any voluntary interviews for most witnesses, according to multiple Democratic sources. And Democrats are now threatening subpoenas to associates of Rudy Giulianiand considering them for current State Department officials, including former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. She is scheduled for an interview Friday, but there are new concerns she won't appear given that she is still a State Department employee and could face backlash internally if she were to appear voluntarily.

Discussions about Yovanovitch's testimony continued into Wednesday, and it remained unclear how it would it shake out by Friday. An official working on the impeachment inquiry said the committees, at the moment, expect Yovanovitch to appear Friday.

Negotiations are also intensifying over bringing in for an interview the whistleblower whose complaint has upended Trump's presidency, with new discussions about holding the interview in secret or off site and not disclosing that it happened until after the fact, according to multiple sources familiar with the situation.

......SNIP"

[Kentonio]

1. Notice the deliberate use of the word 'plot'?

[TheRealNorth]

2. MSM is subtley rat fucking us again

But I think the Dems need to be thinking up a plan on how they are going to expedite anything that goes to court.

[ritapria]

3. For God's sake Bring in Tillerson

NOW …...He has stated publicly that Trump frequently told him to break the Law

[mysteryowl]

4. "wave of subpoenas" MUST be followed up with enforcement!

[dustyscamp]

6. We really need to work on enforcing the law in this Country

Lot of criminals and sociopaths get away with their crimes because authorities lack the will to do what is right

[mysteryowl]

7. Even Lewondowsky was not held accountable for contempt of congress.

From the lesser important to the big fishes, we need action!

[GulfCoast66]

10. How do we enforce them?

Contrary to what you read on the internet the House of Representatives has zero power to arrest any one. They can hold them in contempt and have the DOJ bring charges before a federal judge. Need I remind you who runs the DOJ? Same goes with fining someone.

Same situation as when the republicans held AG Holder in contempt for not appearing before a committee. AG Holder decided not to prosecute himself.

The only way to really hold them to account is winning in 2020. And it’s going to get a lot worse before then. Trump would fight like hell to not lose even with nothing else at stake. But he knows what he has done. If he loses an honest AG and DOJ will have him up on charges within a year.

[mysteryowl]

11. I like the idea of Kamala Harris for US AG

[GulfCoast66]

12. I agree 100%. Although I prefer VP.

[mysteryowl]

16. I think she would have more power and be able to change more as the AG.

She has the energy, talent, and smarts to revamp the damage that is being done.

[Turin_C3PO]

15. One way they can be held accountable:

Take them to court. If the court orders the subpoena enforced, then the US Marshalls can enforce the court order. From everything I’ve read, including posts by our own Starfish Saver, the US Marshalls are more loyal to the federal courts than they are to the DOJ. I’d love to see it tested.

[mysteryowl]

17. Thank you. Sounds good!

[GulfCoast66]

18. Oh please. The US Marshall's work for the DOJ

Barr is their boss.

They are not going after anyone he tells them not to arrest.

[Turin_C3PO]

19. I wish Starfish Saver would jump in here.

She explained it to me once regarding US Marshall loyalty to federal courts and their orders . I have no personal knowledge on the issue but I think it would be interesting to see how it pans out.

[GulfCoast66]

20. They may be loyal to the courts.

But Barr can fire them for insubordination.

[StarfishSaver]

23. No, he can't

See my post below.

[Turin_C3PO]

24. See Starfish's response below this post.

[StarfishSaver]

22. Poof!

The U.S. Marshals are housed in DOJ, but they report to the federal judges. And they are VERY loyal to them

If a judge gives an order and it's not followed, that's contempt of court. The judge can order the violator jailed and instruct the marshals to arrest them. Anyone who interferes with the carrying out of that order, including the attorney general, is also in contempt of court and any order he gives countermanding the judge is an unlawful order.

It is highly unlikely that any marshal is going to ignore a lawful federal ourt order to follow an unlawful order - especially one issued by a political appointee. Doing so would put the marshal in contempt of court and subject them to arrest and jail. And don't think a judge won't do it - and find a marshal who'd be happy to haul them off to jail.

And as civil servant law enforcement officers, the marshals can't be summarily fired by Barr for insubordination.

[Turin_C3PO]

25. Thank you for the explanation again!

I value your knowledge on these issues

[GulfCoast66]

26. In this situation do you really think a judge is going there?

Or would there not be an immediate appeal to a higher court?

Historically the judicial branch has been loath to interfere with a conflict between the 2 other branches.

And who runs the jails?

If this were so easy why did the republicans not do this to Holder who refused to testify and was held in contempt? I can’t for a minute believe they would not have tried had they thought it was possible.

It’s clear we are in a Constitutional Crisis. But one not yet inescapable. If a federal judge ordered the Marshalls to arrest someone and the AG put all his resources into preventing it, we might be at an inescapable point. I’m not sure the democrats or a federal judge want to go there. Yet.

Not being contentious here. Just curious as to your thinking. I heard a lawyer on NPR explaining this exact same thing. It it was obvious she was no Trump fan.

I’m no lawyer. Play one on DU!

Always like you point of view.

[StarfishSaver]

27. Yes. A judge will definitely go there

Judges do NOT play when it comes to contempt. And if their orders are violated, they do not hesitate to throw someone in jail. They rarely have to, though, because people know the judge's power and the buck usually stops there.

The contempt order can be appealed, but it's not very likely an appellate court would vacate it unless there's a clear showing the judge abused his or her discretion.

The courts don't interfere in political question matters, but a contempt citation for refusal to obey a subpoena is not a political question. If the House goes to court, which it has the power to do, and asks for an order compelling a witness to respond to a Congressional subpoena, the court will likely grant it. Unlike political questions, the enforcement of a subpoena is a legally justiciable matter that a court won't hesitate to step into.

It doesn't matter who runs the jails. The court can order a witness jailed in any federal facility and, in some instances, in local, county, state facilities, as well.

And, trust me - it is highly unlikely the attorney general will pull out all the stops to get between a federal judge and a US Marshal. He's got a lot of nerve, but even he doesn't have that kind of chutzpah. If he tries, he'll find his ass in jail before he knew what hit him. There are reasons federal judges serve for life. One of them is so they can look people like Barr in the eye without blinking and order him hauled off to jail if he disregards his orders.

[GulfCoast66]

28. Can the House directly appeal to a judge?

Does the DOJ have a role?

[StarfishSaver]

29. Yes. The House can go to court to enforce its subpoenas, without going through DOJ

But it's a slower process and it requires lots of procedural preparation in advance. That's why the House leadership has been very meticulous about laying the groundwork - much to the anger and frustration of our more impatient party members. If they want a court to enforce the subpoenas, they need to make sure they have exhausted all remedies for getting the witness to cooperate.

And many people didn't notice that last June the House voted to give committee chairmen the authority to go straight to court to enforce subpoenas without getting the full House approval in advance.

[GulfCoast66]

30. Actually I remember that. Did not know it's ramifications.

This just reinforces my guess on Pelosi’s strategy. She knows Trump will never be convicted in the Senate. But like the republicans did with Benghazi its the drip, drip, drip that keeps coming out that is most damaging. And the whole phone call thingy is more than enough justification. They still have no defense for that. Totally impeachable.

And since it is apparent trump just keeps getting crazier even after only 2 weeks, it’s to our advantage to keep plodding away.

[StarfishSaver]

31. Yes, indeedie

[GulfCoast66]

32. Always interesting typing with you.

Have a nice evening.

[StarfishSaver]

33. You, too!

[ripcord]

34. It took 3 1/2 years for the first court decision when Holder was charged with contempt

I believe the case was finally settled last year, I wouldn't pin my hopes on the courts.

[budkin]

5. What good are subpoenas if there are no consequences for ignoring them

There are literally ZERO consequences for just saying "Nah, not gonna do it."

[StarfishSaver]

8. You might want to wait before claiming that

We're in a different phase now... the consequences aren't immediate but they're coming ...

[budkin]

9. I sure hope so...

Trump is completely out of control!

[shockey80]

14. I agree, justice moves slowly but it will catch up to you.

[MerryBlooms]

21. What are the non immediate consequences?

We know there is no jail to send anyone to...

Can't hold a meaningless impeachment vote...

As far as I can see, there are no consequences, but promises of accountability... with zero details. What will this different phase we're in now produce? More ignored subpoenas?

[FirstLight]

13. I agree... subpoenas mean NOTHING to this Administration.

we're so screwn