Pattaya Bar/Go-Go Death Watch

[webfact]

U.S. House Democrats move to fight Trump's stonewalling in court

By David Morgan

 

FILE PHOTO - U.S. Attorney General William Barr participates in a news conference after a meeting with Attorney Generals of Northern Triangle of Central America in San Salvador, El Salvador May 16, 2019. REUTERS/Jose Cabezas

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. congressional Democrats moved closer on Thursday to suing in federal court for access to the unredacted Mueller report on Russian election meddling, and its underlying evidence, taking a step bound to intensify their clash with President Donald Trump.

 

After months of stonewalling by Trump of their many investigations of him and his presidency, Democrats unveiled a resolution that authorizes the House Judiciary Committee to seek a court order to enforce its subpoenas against U.S. Attorney General William Barr and former White House Counsel Don McGahn.

 

Both have refused to cooperate with the Judiciary Committee, which wants the unredacted report by U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller on his probe into Russian election meddling and possible obstruction of the probe by Trump, and documents related to the investigation, as well as testimony from McGahn, a major player in the Mueller inquiry.

 

The resolution, which the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives is expected to consider on Tuesday, replaces an earlier plan by House lawmakers to vote formally on whether to hold Barr and McGahn in contempt of Congress, aides said.

 

Introduced by the House Rules Committee, the measure also sets out terms for possible court action by other House committees that are investigating the president and authorizes the Judiciary Committee to petition a federal judge for access to Mueller's grand jury evidence.

 

The House Ways and Means Committee is similarly poised to file a federal lawsuit to enforce subpoenas of Trump's individual and business tax returns.

 

Congressional committees already have the authority to seek court remedies. But Democratic aides said Tuesday's vote is intended to reaffirm congressional authority to enforce subpoenas against White House efforts to stymie investigations by six separate House committees.

 

"We will not allow this president and his administration to turn a blind eye to the rule of law," Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern, who will take up the measure on Monday, said in a statement.

 

"The Trump administration is waging an unprecedented campaign of stonewalling and obstruction ... This resolution will allow Congress to hold the president accountable."

 

Justice Department officials were not immediately available to comment on the resolution.

 

The measure follows through on House Democrats' plans to go to court in their quest for an unredacted copy of Mueller's report. Democrats say they are confident of swift court victories after decisive court rulings against Trump's efforts to block subpoenas of his financial records issued by three other House panels.

 

Barr released a redacted version of the 448-page report on April 18. He later disregarded a House Judiciary Committee subpoena demanding release of the full report, along with the underlying evidence that Mueller relied on.

 

The House Judiciary panel voted on May 8 to cite Barr for contempt of Congress. The House Oversight Committee is also weighing contempt citations against Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross for failing to comply with subpoenas in its probe of their handling of the U.S. Census.

 

The Oversight panel had set a Thursday deadline for Barr and Ross to produce the requested documents.

 

In a letter to Cummings on Thursday, the Justice Department called a contempt vote "entirely premature" and declined to hand over the specific documents demanded, saying they were protected by attorney-client privilege and other doctrines. It said it was still working to produce other papers the committee requested.

 

The White House has asserted the seldom-used principle of executive privilege to try to keep the full Mueller report under wraps, even though Trump allowed aides to speak with Mueller during his investigation.

 

House Judiciary also subpoenaed McGahn, seeking his testimony, which he refused to provide in line with a pattern of stonewalling by Trump of Democrats' inquiries.

 

Lawmakers have said they would vote to hold Barr and McGahn in contempt. But on Thursday, aides said a formal contempt vote would have referred the case for criminal prosecution, a move unlikely to succeed with Barr at the helm of the Justice Department. Lawmakers instead opted for the new resolution.

 

(Reporting by David Morgan; editing by James Dalgleish, Tom Brown and Richard Chang)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-06-07

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

[Silurian]

More and more obfuscation and obstruction from the criminal reality TV con man and the WH administration. The WH administration just keeps flouting the law and think they are above and beyond the reach of the justice system.

 

The criminal activities of the swindler-in-chief should be fully investigated without Barr and other lackeys interfering and impeding a lawful investigation. Congress is supposed to be the check on the power and abuses that are blatantly obvious in the current WH administration. Congress should be allowed to do their job.

 

 

Edited June 7, 2019 by Silurian

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

U.S. House Democrats move to fight Trump's stonewalling in court

 

Misspelled 'obstruction'. 

[Tug]

If Donald is clean he will be vindicated if he’s dirty then out I wish the house had some teeth to hold Barr Ross and the rest accountable so we could get resolution on this issue

[mtls2005]

Read this book before...been there, done this.

 

worth a re-read now, IMO.

 

Legal challenges, tussle with Congress same-same. J. Fred Buzhardt's (Nixon's attorney) view very interesting.

 

 

Edited June 7, 2019 by mtls2005

[Basil B]

They just have not found the motherload yet...

[wwest5829]

"I Could Stand In the Middle Of Fifth Avenue And Shoot Somebody And I Wouldn't Lose Any Voters" I’m thinking he has bought into being above the law.....

[Boon Mee]

Show me the man and I'll show you the crime applies to all of these futile examples of so-called 'wrongdoing' by Trump etc. 

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

a formal contempt vote would have referred the case for criminal prosecution, a move unlikely to succeed with Barr at the helm of the Justice Department.

Wouldn't Barr under DOJ rules have to recuse himself from criminal prosecution of himself?

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

Show me the man and I'll show you the crime applies to all of these futile examples of so-called 'wrongdoing' by Trump etc. 

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. 

[Chomper Higgot]

All this could go away if Trump stops ordering people to obstruct Congress seeing the full un-redacted Mueller report. 

 

Having claimed that Mueller has exonerated him, Trump has nothing at all to loose from full open transparency.

 

Do it Donald, order the full release, reverse your orders and allow people to give testimony to Congress. 

 

Get this truth you claim exonerates you out there for all to see. 

Edited June 7, 2019 by Chomper Higgot

[mtls2005]

3 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Show me the man and I'll show you the crime applies to all of these futile examples of so-called 'wrongdoing' by Trump etc. 

 

Somehow paraphrasing Stalin's secret police chief Lavrentiy Beria to describe the trump criminal enterprise seems oddly apropos?

 

Maybe, "Show me trump, and I'll show you the crimes...how long do you have?"

 

 

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Wouldn't Barr under DOJ rules have to recuse himself from criminal prosecution of himself?

 

Special counsel or independent prosecutor time again???

 

I would imagine pretty much the entire Justice Department would be out of bounds in such a situation....  

 

As a Justice Department attorney, you can't exactly be unbiased and impartial in deciding whether and how to pursue criminal contempt charges against your boss (the AG).

 

[Scott]

Off-topic nonsense meme removed.   If you have nothing to say, please don't post.

 

[usviphotography]

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

All this could go away if Trump stops ordering people to obstruct Congress seeing the full un-redacted Mueller report. 

 

Having claimed that Mueller has exonerated him, Trump has nothing at all to loose from full open transparency.

 

Do it Donald, order the full release, reverse your orders and allow people to give testimony to Congress. 

 

Get this truth you claim exonerates you out there for all to see. 

Judiciary Committee has full access to the unredacted report. Only Congressmen who have bothered to go in and read it are two Republicans, who reported that there was nothing of interest in the redactions. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/30/mueller-report-redacted-1295105

 

So Trump Administration has already provided full transparency. Dems, who know there is nothing incriminating in the redactions because Mueller's Team and Media would have already given the heads up, just putting on a big show for the low IQ crowd. 

 

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, usviphotography said:

Judiciary Committee has full access to the unredacted report. Only Congressmen who have bothered to go in and read it are two Republicans, who reported that there was nothing of interest in the redactions. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/30/mueller-report-redacted-1295105

 

So Trump Administration has already provided full transparency. Dems, who know there is nothing incriminating in the redactions because Mueller's Team and Media would have already given the heads up, just putting on a big show for the low IQ crowd.

The first sentence in the second paragraph of your source:

 

" Barr offered access to a less-redacted version of the report to just 12 members of Congress — six Democrats and six Republicans. "

 

So the Judiciary does not have full access as you claim.  Were you deliberately misleading or did you not read your source?

[stevenl]

11 minutes ago, oby said:

investigate the clinton"s and obama's, oh, and biden also.

clinton's charity received how many $$millions for their retirement fund, whoops foundation.  the charity they donated in tax free money, directly into their expenses

obama, just let the investigators do their job.  hillary and her brothers involvement in selling 20% of america's uranium to russia, blah, blah.  

and biden, flying his son on airforce 2, to receive $billions in chinese funding

yes, could we please start investigating the clintons, obamas and bidens..

then america can vote for the communist sanders, poster boy of the democratic party in 2020 because he will not be indicted yet.

oh, and AOC, she goes back to waitress again... her illegal campaign funds, corrupt PAC money laundry, blah, blah.

she won by 78% of the vote.  that other 22% are voting trump next time... and don't you think she has pissed off at least the other 30% who could be working at amazon $100K + or simply disagree with her socialist/communist ideals... on and on

ebola invasion https://offgridsurvival.com/ebolainfectedillegals/

~~~rant over~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

 

Sure, can be done again. Any reason to presume the results will be any different from earlier investigations?

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, oby said:

investigate the clinton"s and obama's, oh, and biden also.

clinton's charity received how many $$millions for their retirement fund, whoops foundation.  the charity they donated in tax free money, directly into their expenses

obama, just let the investigators do their job.  hillary and her brothers involvement in selling 20% of america's uranium to russia, blah, blah.  

and biden, flying his son on airforce 2, to receive $billions in chinese funding

yes, could we please start investigating the clintons, obamas and bidens..

then america can vote for the communist sanders, poster boy of the democratic party in 2020 because he will not be indicted yet.

oh, and AOC, she goes back to waitress again... her illegal campaign funds, corrupt PAC money laundry, blah, blah.

she won by 78% of the vote.  that other 22% are voting trump next time... and don't you think she has pissed off at least the other 30% who could be working at amazon $100K + or simply disagree with her socialist/communist ideals... on and on

ebola invasion https://offgridsurvival.com/ebolainfectedillegals/

~~~rant over~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

 

As indicated above, everything was investigated, nothing criminal or improper was found.

 

I'm curious; are the people who imagine the Clinton Foundation is doing criminal things even aware of all the legal troubles of the Trump Foundation? 

 

"The foundation was accused by the attorney general, Barbara Underwood, of “functioning as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests,” and of engaging in “a shocking pattern of illegality” that included unlawfully coordinating with Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign."

"In addition to shuttering the charity, her office has pursued a lawsuit that could bar President Trump and his three oldest children from the boards of other New York charities, as well as force the payment of millions in restitution and penalties."  https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/nyregion/ny-ag-underwood-trump-foundation.html

[mtls2005]

8 hours ago, usviphotography said:

Judiciary Committee has full access to the unredacted report.

 

If ever there was a case to be made that Kool-Aid causes brain damage your post would be a start.

 

Barr has dribbled out a less-redacted version of the report.

 

Congressional committees can handle the truth (and top secret info which my God, jared has probably seen), and one has to wonder what trump and barr want to obfuscate? If it exonerates the president they'd release it. It doesn't, so they don't

 

Simple isn't it?

 

 

 

 

Edited June 7, 2019 by mtls2005

[elmrfudd]

if the leftists keep digging, they are sure they can find something to impeach......

because orange man bad!

progressive good!

[mtls2005]

8 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

if the leftists keep digging, they are sure they can find something to impeach......

 

I'm harkening back to the squeals the Republicans made - selective ethics and videotape be darned - during:

 

Whitewater

Travelgate

 

Solyndra

IRS

Benghazi

Fast & Furious

 

 

But I'm sure you were clamoring for a stop to these investigations?

 

 

Investigating corruption, criminal activity seems like a worthwhile effort for a body who's purview includes oversight of the Executive branch.

 

Did you fail Civics? Or were you out wabbit/duck hunting that day?