Republicans on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted on Wednesday to greenlight subpoenas and depositions as part of an investigation into the FBI’s Russia probe and the Obama administration.
The 8-6 party line vote authorizes Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), the chairman of the committee, to issue a combination of subpoenas and set up closed-door depositions with approximately 40 individuals.
The votes come less than two months before the November election, injecting fresh acrimony into the Wednesday committee meeting where Johnson accused Democrats of a “coordinated spear” against his probes. Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), the top Democrat on the panel, accused Republicans of a “partisan fishing expedition.”
“I’m disappointed that our committee is once again meeting to discuss the authorization of subpoenas instead … of the serious challenges facing Americans,” Peters said. “Your own public comments … state that your desire to reinvestigate these matters demonstrates the alarming partisan nature of this investigation which is designed to influence the presidential election.”
The votes give Johnson the power to set up depositions with dozens of officials he previously got authorization to subpoena in June.
But those subpoenas ran into a snag in August, when Peters accused Johnson of violating the committee’s rules by trying to set up the interview without support from Peters or a majority of the committee to formally issue the deposition notice.
Johnson blasted Peters on Wednesday accusing him of forcing the votes to authorize the depositions “based on an absurd interpretation of committee rules.”
But Wednesday’s vote also authorizes subpoenas of new individuals including former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and Justice Department official Bruce Ohr.
read more:
Replies
Rick, you are right. We are taking back control of our government through our man in the White House. That's why Trump needs to assume total authority over the country especially over the judiciary and congress. That's the only way he can maintain constitutional order and he can preserve our freedom and the liberties.
The Constitution prescribes all three branches of government as "co-equal", meaning that Trump in the executive branch cannot, and must not, assume authority over either of the other two branches that is not specifically granted to the executive by the Constitution. That is why we are in this predicament in the first place, because all three (3) branches have exceeded their Constitutional authority and "we the people" are caught in the middle to suffer the consequences and pay the bill.
I am not talking about a legal takeover, just a de facto takeover. It will certainly be done within the boundaries of our beloved Constitution.
The Constitution says nothing about "co-equal" branches of government. It does allow co-equal in both houses of Congress. It does allow Congress to remove any from the other two.
In Federalist No. 78 is says the Judiciary is the least of the three.
In Federalist No. 78, Hamilton said that the Judiciary branch of the proposed government would be the weakest of the three branches because it had "no influence over either the sword or the purse, ...It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment." Federalist No. 78 quotes Montesquieu: "Of the three powers [...], the judiciary is next to nothing." There was little concern that the judiciary might be able to overpower the political branches; since Congress controlled the flow of money and the President the military, courts did not have nearly the same power from a constitutional design standpoint. The Judiciary would depend on the political branches to uphold its judgments. Legal academics often argue over Hamilton's description of the judiciary as the "least dangerous" branch. Hamilton also explains how federal judges should retain life terms as long as those judges exhibit good behavior. [2]
Based on this, Roe is not law and never was, and neither is Obergefell and neither is 0care. The courts hear the case in front of them and no ohter. The do not write law. Period. It would have taken an act of Congress to write/invent the right to kill the unborn, for homos to marry and there is no right anywhere for Congress to order us to purchase anything. Except, the invention of the pagan right to kill babies is not moral or natural law, as is homo marriage, so there is no way for any of these three atrocities to be legal. The violate the Law of Nature and Nature's God. Roberts should ahve been impeached and all who voted for the other strociites should have been impeached. So, we brought our own curse upon ourselves, as America has been under a curse from the inception of Roe v Wade.
Precisely what I have been abdicating... Judges don't make law and Stare Decisis is not settled... anything... it is usurped authority and fiat law.
Rule by Judicial Fiat must end and end hard... with the impeachment or resignation of nearly every sitting Justice on the US Supreme Court and every Judge in the Federal Judiciary.... for their willful abuse of the law and our Constitution.
Congress- needs to rewrite the Federal Judiciary act to limit the Federal Courts Jurisdiction to adjudication of the case in law before them. The power of the Federal Courts must not extend beyond the case before the Court...
If the court finds Constitutional issues they may provide relief in the case before them and defer to Congress for the amendment and correction of the Statutory law. If Congress agrees with the Court and deems it urgent enough, they may modify the law to bring it in compliance with the court's dicta... if not, they may remain silent or by resolution overturn the Court's decision... and if necessary, Congress may rebuke or start impeachment of the justices involved.
By no means should any Judge have the declaratory power to issue universal injunctions that set aside the law... The Court's orders must only apply to the case before it and must not extend beyond their statutory jurisdiction or District. No more rule by Judicial fiat.
Lawyers and Judges who bring frivolous cases or allow such cases to waste the court's time or abuse the public's trust must be disciplined by law... not a Bar Association... Standards for charging such conduct and punishing such conduct must be by Statutory law and provide common relief accessible by US Citizens and Congress.
The Courts must be thoroughly rebuked and restrained... they have betrayed the Constitution and the people's trust. The Judicial Branch was to be the weakest of the three branches. Judges are unelected technicians of the law... they are there to administer it by aiding Juries to find justice thru the exercise of restrained judicial judgment.
Today, we find President's and Congress deferring to the Court's waiting on LAWYER to approve their every decision before they act. The abdication and deferral to the Courts are totally out of hand and its time to fire those who have aided and abetted such overreach and frankly treason... usurpation of the law and thru the law our government, by overreaching Petitfoggers.
I agree with you completely on rewriting the Federal Judiciary Act. They are so out of bounds, twisting common words into nonsense, twisting abominations into protected classes of citizens or protected actions.They do not even comprehend the truth inherent in the word "UNalienable."
It is beyond sickening 1. to know that this is all illegal 2. to know the American public is clueless 3. to know all 3 branches know that either 1. is true, or 2. is true or that 1. and 2. are both true and those in the 3 branches of government just simply do not care.
Ron, I couldn't agree more. The only supreme court judges I would keep are Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh. The rest are eitherblatant leftist activists or so cowardly they are no good to the Constitution. We didn't fight to establish judicial tyranny did we?
An awful lot of what you are saying has me saying, AMEN!
"overreaching Petitfoggers." ? Why Colonel, how scandalous! You military men have a dashing flair.......
True, but our legal system employs both legislative ( Roman de Juris) legal authority and precedent (English de facto or "common") legal authority. The latter is where the rub is. Had Roe vs. Wade been neglected by the Executive, then the Legislature would have had to later codify and spell out its effects to compel the Executive to execute the intent. Instead, the Executive deferred to SCOTUS as creating new Constitutional law under the guise of interpretation. Shocking Constitutional usurpation of Congressional authority!
Montesquieu. Wild name, huh? Sounds rascally.
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
of 13 Next