Rick Perry Subpoenaed In Impeachment Probe, Should Probably Just Cooperate Before It’s Too Late

Rick Perry Subpoenaed In Impeachment Probe, Should Probably Just Cooperate Before It’s Too Late

Rick Perry did what virtually no other senior Trump official managed to do - he avoided being swept up in personal scandals or otherwise being sucked into the president's own legal hell. Until now. He avoided it until now. Because thanks to his role in the administration's various dealings in Ukraine, Rick is now knee-deep in an impeachment inquiry, even as he prepares to resign his post as Energy secretary. On Thursday, he was subpoenaed by House Democrats. Read more: Trump Set To Throw Rick
Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.

3 thoughts on “Rick Perry Subpoenaed In Impeachment Probe, Should Probably Just Cooperate Before It’s Too Late

  1. Lock up Rudy, Rick and anyone else that’s in contempt of Congress. In chess, this is called taking material (off the board) take away trumps support group, one by one and play hardball. Will this impact the election next year for either side — who cares, but most of all, how many Americans want the trump mafia causing more chaos?

    Congress’s Contempt Power and the
    Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas:
    Law, History, Practice, and Procedure
    Todd Garvey (Congressional Research Service)
    Legislative Attorney
    May 12, 2017

    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf

    ===> In comparison with the other types of contempt proceedings, inherent contempt has the distinction of not requiring the cooperation or assistance of either the executive or judicial branches. The House or Senate can, on its own, conduct summary proceedings and cite the offender for contempt.

    Furthermore, although the contemnor can seek judicial review by means
    of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the scope of such review may be relatively limited, compared to the plenary review accorded by the courts in cases of conviction under the criminal contempt statute.

    There are also certain limitations on the inherent contempt process. Although the contemnor can be incarcerated until he agrees to comply with the subpoena, imprisonment may not extend beyond the end of the current session of Congress.91

    {[(91 Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 207, n.45 (1957); Anderson, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) at 231) John Thomas Watkins, a labor union official from Rock Island, Illinois, was convicted of contempt of Congress, a misdemeanor under 2 U.S.C. § 192, for failing to answer questions posed by members of Congress during a hearing held by a subcommittee of the House of Representatives Committee on Un-American Activities on April 29, 1954.]

    The Supreme Court decided 6—1 to overturn Watkins’ conviction. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority.[2] Warren noted that it is an offense for a witness to refuse to answer any question “pertinent to the question under inquiry” in testifying before a Congressional committee, but he wrote that the Court was unable to ascertain the nature of the Congressional inquiry with reasonable precision:

    There are several sources that can outline the "question under inquiry" in such a way that the rules against vagueness are satisfied. The authorizing resolution, the remarks of the chairman or members of the committee, or even the nature of the proceedings themselves, might sometimes make the topic clear. This case demonstrates, however, that these sources often leave the matter in grave doubt. }

    Moreover, inherent contempt has been described as “unseemly,” cumbersome, time-consuming, and relatively ineffective, especially for a modern Congress with a heavy legislative workload that would be interrupted by a trial at the bar.92 Because of these drawbacks, the inherent contempt process has not been used by either body since 1935.93

    Proceedings under the inherent contempt power might be facilitated, however, if the initial fact-finding and examination of witnesses were to be held before a special committee–which could be directed to submit findings and recommendations to the full body with only the final decision as to guilt being made by the full House or Senate. Although generally the proceedings in inherent contempt cases appear to have been conducted at the bar of the House of Congress involved,94 in at least a few instances proceedings were conducted initially or primarily before a committee, but with the final decision as to whether to hold the person in contempt being made by the full body.95

  2. One more thought on this contempt matter. Earlier today I posted a comment on how trump wasting time on trade war games and his illusion to MAGA sort of runs down the clock for him, i.e., the more time trump spends on making artful deals that seemingly go nowhere, in an up and down and round and round bouncing ball strategy — his results will end up weaker and weaker, both politically and economically. Hence with that as a foundation going forward — add to that, the contempt processes linked to impeachment investigations. Essentially the Democrats can help trump run the clock out and exhaust both trump and the GOP, as they all hang themselves in a stupidity fest. Taking contempt to the next level places lots of pressure on all the criminal chaos and in the process, it takes away re-election oxygen and opens the door as wide as possible for America to make a critical choice — using a whole new set of facts as to who trump is and what the GOP represents. As much as Republicans may hate the notion of Warren, she at least stands out as someone that won’t be as corrupt or stupid as the pile of feces in the WH today.

    Let’s review:

    Run the clock down and wear the bastard down, then kick him while he’s down and don’t let him get up.

Speak your mind

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

NEWSROOM crewneck & prints