PDA

View Full Version : Contempt of Congress



Zymologist
04-10-2014, 08:23 AM
Ok, so I'm pretty ignorant here and could use your help.

Congress has voted to hold Eric Holder, and now Lois Lerner, in contempt of Congress. My question is: what does this actually do? In the case of Holder, who I understand has been held in contempt for almost two years now (!), it doesn't seem to have actually done anything.

seanD
04-10-2014, 08:32 AM
After you get that answered, I'd like know what "Good luck with your asparagus" was a reference to...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2spQWZK1gQ

The guy is pure criminal scum.

Zymologist
04-10-2014, 08:33 AM
After you get that answered, I'd like know what "Good luck with your asparagus" was a reference to...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2spQWZK1gQ

The guy is pure criminal scum.

I think I can answer this, actually. (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/09/louie-gohmert-reveals-the-important-history-behind-eric-holders-good-luck-with-your-asparagus-insult/)

Cow Poke
04-10-2014, 09:10 AM
It's all political theater. SHOULD something be done? :yes: WILL it? I seriously doubt it.

Zymologist
04-10-2014, 09:15 AM
I guess I could expand my question, then: what is contempt of Congress supposed to entail? I mean, if the US Attorney General is corrupt*, does his position make him invincible? For all that's been accomplished** in opposition to him, you'd think that the AG can do whatever the heck he wants with no consequences at all.

*Eric Holder, corrupt? Nah.

**Namely, nothing.

seanD
04-10-2014, 09:40 AM
I guess I could expand my question, then: what is contempt of Congress supposed to entail? I mean, if the US Attorney General is corrupt*, does his position make him invincible? For all that's been accomplished** in opposition to him, you'd think that the AG can do whatever the heck he wants with no consequences at all.

*Eric Holder, corrupt? Nah.

**Namely, nothing.

As CP pointed out, it's theater to make it seem like we actually still have a system of law in this country. From what I understand, being held in contempt is only relevant if the House chooses to back it up with some sort of action. I think the problem is that everything is upside down and backwards in this country. There is no longer a Constitution that US government abides by. US officials (servants) can lie to congress under oath and get away with it. So in a system of abject lawlessness, there is no reason for Holder to fear being held in contempt of court because he knows the House will do nothing in the way of action against him.

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 09:45 AM
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/contempt_of_Congress

The problem is that the DOJ handles enforcement - Holder isn't enforcing the charge on himself.

The fun begins when Obama leaves office - just how ticked are these guys? :grin:

Zymologist
04-10-2014, 09:46 AM
As CP pointed out, it's theater to make it seem like we actually still have a system of law in this country. From what I understand, being held in contempt is only relevant if the House chooses to back it up with some sort of action. I think the problem is that everything is upside down and backwards in this country. There is no longer a Constitution that US government abides by. US officials (servants) can lie to congress under oath and get away with it. So in a system of abject lawlessness, there is no reason for Holder to fear being held in contempt of court because he knows the House will do nothing in the way of action against him.

Yeah.... :sad:

Zymologist
04-10-2014, 09:48 AM
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/contempt_of_Congress

The problem is that the DOJ handles enforcement - Holder isn't enforcing the charge on himself.

The fun begins when Obama leaves office - just how ticked are these guys? :grin:

But why is the DOJ in charge of prosecuting itself? That seems obviously wrongheaded to me.

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 09:53 AM
But why is the DOJ in charge of prosecuting itself? That seems obviously wrongheaded to me.

Take it up with the Constitution - enforcement is the Exec's job and the DOJ is the arm it uses for matters involving criminal justice. :shrug:

Yeah, there probably should be another way to deal with this, shy of impeachment, I mean.

seanD
04-10-2014, 09:54 AM
But why is the DOJ in charge of prosecuting itself? That seems obviously wrongheaded to me.

Though I'm ignorant about the specifics, I'm sure that Congress could supersede the authority of Holder if they had grounds to do so. I'm guessing but it seems pretty logical in a system of supposed laws. Otherwise, Holder could just become a dictator.

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 09:57 AM
They could withhold funding. :shrug:

this could get fun after the midterms... :grin:

KingsGambit
04-10-2014, 10:00 AM
I read the other day about how a number of members of Congress are apparently impeding the process for appointing federal judges, to the point where there is a backlog of cases years long. It's a mess.

Zymologist
04-10-2014, 10:01 AM
So basically what you're all telling me is that the checks and balances built into our system are dead and gone, and we're all screwed?

I can't say I'm surprised.

Zymologist
04-10-2014, 10:02 AM
They could withhold funding. :shrug:

this could get fun after the midterms... :grin:

I'm not sure I trust the Republicans to do anything anymore.

rogue06
04-10-2014, 10:03 AM
So basically what you're all telling me is that the checks and balances built into our system are dead and gone, and we're all screwed?

I can't say I'm surprised.
Yup.

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 10:08 AM
I read the other day about how a number of members of Congress are apparently impeding the process for appointing federal judges, to the point where there is a backlog of cases years long. It's a mess.

Actually, you can thank the Warren Court for that. Once the Court became so politicized that they are used as an end run around the legislative process, the appointments became ever more politicized. Allowing a political opponent the power to shape policy from the bench is a bad thing - hence the hold ups from both parties.

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 10:09 AM
I'm not sure I trust the Republicans to do anything anymore.

Parties don't operate on trust - never did. They operate on votes - either party will bow to sufficient voter ire.

Cow Poke
04-10-2014, 11:19 AM
Take it up with the Constitution - enforcement is the Exec's job and the DOJ is the arm it uses for matters involving criminal justice. :shrug:

Yeah, there probably should be another way to deal with this, shy of impeachment, I mean.

Because the founding fathers ASSUMED there would be ethical and honorable people in office.

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 11:45 AM
Because the founding fathers ASSUMED there would be ethical and honorable people in office.
Actually, they didn't - they just didn't consider that multiple branches would be controlled by the same group (party).

Cow Poke
04-10-2014, 01:04 PM
Actually, they didn't - they just didn't consider that multiple branches would be controlled by the same group (party).

Actually, yes they did. You're wrong. And you're wronger than when you said I was wrong about riding cows. :tongue: I should know -- I was there!

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 01:12 PM
You're wrong again. :rasberry:

Zymologist
04-10-2014, 01:14 PM
You're both wrong, and I have unanimously voted to hold you both in contempt.

Cow Poke
04-10-2014, 01:20 PM
You're both wrong, and I have unanimously voted to hold you both in contempt.

Yeah, leave the papers on my desk. I go a fishing! (John 21:3)

Teallaura
04-10-2014, 01:23 PM
We were already in contempt - this is Tweb! Contempt of Thread is expected!