Adam Schiff mike pence Mike Pompeo politics Trump

Walls Close In On Trump As Pompeo Accused Of ‘Illegal Witness Intimidation’; Mike Pence, Rick Perry Questioned

"He should immediately cease intimidating Department witnesses in order to protect himself and the President".

"He should immediately cease intimidating Department witnesses in order to protect himself and the President".
This content has been archived. Log in or Subscribe for full access to thousands of archived articles.

3 comments on “Walls Close In On Trump As Pompeo Accused Of ‘Illegal Witness Intimidation’; Mike Pence, Rick Perry Questioned

  1. H-Man, the death knell may be the call to Ukraine. The transcript is 10.5 minutes, the call lasted 30 minutes. The Ukrainian president speaks English, no translator problems. What transpired in those missing 20 minutes? Sounds like Nixon and Rose Marie transcribing tapes.

  2. vicissitude

    Just for fun:

    Under the inherent contempt power the individual is brought before the
    House or Senate by the Sergeant-at-Arms, tried at the bar of the body, and can be imprisoned or detained in the Capitol or perhaps elsewhere.79

    79 Given Congress’s plenary power over the District of Columbia, the contemnor could potentially be detained or jailed in a D.C. Metropolitan Police Department facility. See U.S. CONST. art. I, §8 (“The Congress shall have Power…To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District…as may…become the Seat of the Government of the United States.”

    ==> Congress’s Power to Investigate

    The power of Congress to punish for contempt is inextricably related to the power of Congress to investigate.10 Generally speaking, Congress’s authority to investigate and obtain information, including but not limited to confidential information, is extremely broad. While there is no express provision of the Constitution or specific statute authorizing the conduct of congressional oversight or investigations, the Supreme Court has firmly established that such power is essential to the legislative function as to be implied from the general vesting of legislative powers in Congress.11 The broad legislative authority to seek and enforce informational demands was unequivocally established in two Supreme Court rulings arising out of the 1920s Teapot Dome scandal.


    See, e.g., Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 435 (1977); Eastland v. United States Servicemen’s Fund, 421 U.S. 491 (1975); Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109 (1959); Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178 (1957); McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 (1927); Committee on the Judiciary v. Miers, 558 F. Supp. 2d 53, 84 (D.D.C. 2008) (“In short, there can be no question that Congress has a right—derived from its Article I legislative function—to issue and enforce subpoenas, and a corresponding right to the information that is the subject of such subpoenas. Several Supreme Court decisions have confirmed that fact.”).

    https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL34114.html

    • OK, great. But how to explain this to airhead FAUX News viewers?
      Let’s hear Chris Wallace say:
      “The Orange man made a booboo and his little helpers cannot stop the big blue boogiemen from finding all his dirty little droppings.”

Speak On It

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to toolbar