Biden Calls for the Prosecution of Anyone Refusing Subpoenas in the Jan. 6th Riot Investigation

We recently discussed the troubling declaration of guilt made by President Joe Biden at the start of the investigation into border agents allegedly whipping or “strapping” undocumented Haitians trying to enter the country. The statement shattered the integrity of the investigation as well as the reputation of the federal agents. Now, President Biden has called for the Select Committee looking into the Jan. 6th riot to hold those who refuse subpoenas in contempt and for his Department of Justice to prosecute them.

During the Trump Administration, many of us criticized the President for commenting on pending investigations and crossing the line on seeking to influence the Justice Department. A chorus of legal experts declared such public comments to be an attack on the rule of law and the integrity of the Justice Department. Those voices have been largely silent on Biden’s own comments.

Any contempt prosecution would be handled by the Justice Department. I have long been critical of its handling of such cases. However, Biden’s call ignores the fact that most of the Democratic leadership in the House supported the Obama Administration in refusing to even submit contempt cases to grand juries. That was the case with Eric Holder who was in flagrant contempt of House subpoenas in the “Fast and Furious” investigation. If the Democrats seek the prosecution of these Trump officials, they will have to step over a mountain of hypocrisy on such cases.

Of course, such hypocrisy has never been a major obstacle for either party. Indeed, Holder himself seemed immune from the shame of hypocrisy during his calls for total transparency in the Mueller investigation.

Calling for prosecutions as President is always problematic and unwise, particularly given the still unfolding matter before the Select Committee. This is a fairly early stage in such conflicts. There is often some line drawing and then some negotiations on the narrowing of inquiries and the waiver of objections. That may not succeed in this case.  With the 2022 midterms looming, the Democrats are at risk of losing the House and these subpoenas may die on the vine. Yet, it is unlikely that there could be any prosecution decision made before the election anyway without an abnormal and reckless rush by the Garland Justice Department.

This matter has not been resolved in Congress, let alone reached any decision stage at the Justice Department. The President should retract his statement and allow the process to work.

 

105 thoughts on “Biden Calls for the Prosecution of Anyone Refusing Subpoenas in the Jan. 6th Riot Investigation”

  1. It’s getting so I can’t even get through the entirety of one of Turley’s posts any more, because he has sold his soul to Fox News. Turley: you know damn good and well that if a deponent or someone being asked to produce records has a valid objection, he or she can file an objection and ask a court to decide whether there is privilege or some other valid reason not to comply. That’s not what Steve Bannon did–he just flat-out refused to comply, smirking all the way–and THAT’s the conduct Biden complained of–flipping the bird at a Congressional Committee and just flat refusing to comply. Bannon wasn’t even working for Trump on January 6th because he had been fired, so he can hardly claim privilege.

    But, hey, don’t let the law or facts get in the way of a post in which Turley can attack Biden and/or Democrats. And, the disciples eat it up.

      1. Is there something that prompts you to ask this now, when they’ve been doing it for all of your life?

        It’s implied by their Article I powers. See court rulings discussing this, for example:
        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. See, e.g., Eastland 421 U.S. at 504-05, 95 S. Ct. 1813 (“The power to investigate and to do so through compulsory process plainly falls within [the] definition [of Congress’s legislative function].”); Barenblatt, 360 U.S. at 111, 79 S. Ct. 1081 (“The scope of the power of inquiry, in short, is as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and appropriate under the Constitution.”); Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 187-88, 77 S. Ct. 1173, 1 L. Ed. 2d 1273 (1957) (“It is unquestionably the duty of all citizens to cooperate with the Congress in its efforts to obtain the facts needed for intelligent legislative action. It is their unremitting obligation to respond to subpoenas, to respect the dignity of the Congress and its committees, and to testify fully with respect to matters within the province of proper investigations.”); McGrain, 273 U.S. at 175, 47 S. Ct. 319 (“[T]he constitutional provisions which commit the legislative function to the two houses are intended to include this attribute to the end that the function may be effectively exercised.”).
        https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1810993/committee-on-jud-us-house-of-repres-v-miers/
        For more discussion: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf

        1. Objection.

          I move to strike as non-responsive.

          The question was, “Where in the Constitution is Congress given power to issue subpoenas?”

          The question was not, “Where in the Constitution was power to issue subpoenas “IMPLIED?”

          Answer: Nowhere.

          Please answer the question; you may know it at this point.

      2. Where in Article 1, Section is Congress given power to tax for anything other than “…general Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual welfare, specific welfare, small-group welfare, redistribution of wealth or charity? General Welfare being All Well Proceed as in roads, water, sewer, electricity, telephone, internet, trash collection, post office, railroad, telephone, etc. Where in Article 1, Section 8, is Congress given power to regulate anything other than the value of money, the “flow” of commerce and land and naval Forces? Where in the 5th Amendment is Congress given the power to transform private property into public property “on demand?”

        Answer: Nowhere!

  2. The entire country should want a thorough investigation of the Jan. 6 insurrection, and the DOJ should prosecute those who obstruct the investigation.

    Trump organized his rally to be on Jan. 6 so he could send rile up his supporters and send them to the Capitol to delay or prevent the peaceful transfer of power — the congressional certification of the EC vote. Some of his supporters constructed a gallows outside the Capitol, went looking for Pence chanting “hang Mike Pence,” some came armed, some attacked law enforcement, some broke into offices, some stole government property, … Trump was derelict in his duty, waiting hours before authorizing the National Guard to show up to help control it. The American people deserve to know what Trump’s plans were ahead of the rally, what communication occurred during the insurrection, …

    And for those who deny the violence, who claim that it was a false flag operation, or any other denialist claims: they should also want a thorough investigation.

    1. ATS: “And for those who deny the violence, who claim that it was a false flag operation, or any other denialist claims: they should also want a thorough investigation.”

      +++

      True, but this ‘investigation’ is like having Willie Sutton investigate a bank robbery he committed.

      1. “this ‘investigation’ is like having Willie Sutton investigate a bank robbery he committed.”

        Yet another of your faulty analogies.

        A reminder that the Democrats agreed to the following terms for a National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex, which could have had more diverse membership, but the Senate Republicans filibustered it, even though they would have been able to appoint whomever they wanted for the members appointed by McCarthy and McConnell: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3233/text

        1. Your grasp of fact is despairingly sad.

          You do recall the Democrats refused to seat members named to the Investigation by the Republicans.

          The Democrats only wanted “Never Trumpers” on the Panel….and not those who they knew would not idly sit by and watch a Kangaroo Court conduct an Inquiry with its outcome already written up.

          When Holder goes to jail for his well known and patent misconduct during Fast and Furious….then perhaps I might be more inclined to listen to comments such as yours.

          This Inquiry is bogus just like two Impeachments were bogus.

          But…please do tell the whole truth, and nothing but the truth…..except of course right up to the point the truth really does begin to come out….and ensure a Republican Landslide in 2022.

          1. On the contrary, it is *your* “grasp of fact” that fails here.

            Because the Senate Republicans filibustered the National Commission, it was never formed. Instead, what was formed was a House Select Committee, comprised solely of House members. By the rules of the House, the Speaker of House controls membership of Select Committees.

            As I said: Republicans “would have been able to appoint whomever they wanted for the members appointed by McCarthy and McConnell” on the National Commission. I did NOT make that claim for the House Select Committee, because I understand that they aren’t the same thing and aren’t governed by the same rules. Do *you* understand that that? (It seems not. It seems that you’re confusing them.) It’s the Senate Republicans’ fault that McCarthy wasn’t able to appoint Jordan and Banks. Blame them, not Pelosi.

            1. ATS: “Because the Senate Republicans filibustered the National Commission, it was never formed.”

              +++

              You don’t join and put your imprimatur on a rigged ‘investigation’ set up by some of the some of the same people behind the phony ‘insurrection’.

              1. “The Commission shall be composed of ten members, of whom—
                “(1) one member shall be appointed jointly by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the majority leader of the Senate to serve as Chairperson of the Commission;
                “(2) one member shall be appointed jointly by the minority leader of the House of Representatives and the minority leader of the Senate to serve as Vice Chairperson of the Commission;
                “(3) two members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
                “(4) two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives;
                “(5) two members shall be appointed by the majority leader of the Senate; and
                “(6) two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the Senate.”

                Please do explain how having 5 members determined by Pelosi and Schumer and 5 members determined by McCarthy and McConnell would have made it “a rigged ‘investigation’” and how Pelosi, Schumer, McCarthy and McConnell (the 4 people setting up the Commission) are “some of the same people behind the phony ‘insurrection’”

                If the insurrection were “phony” (a claim for which you provide no evidence, and for which there is a lot of counterevidence, including hours of videos of insurrectionists attacking law enforcement and sworn testimony from law enforcement), then McConnell and McCarthy should have wanted people of their choosing to comprise half the committee.

                1. ATS,

                  You are trying to hold the ball for us again, Lucy.

                  Controlled and directed by radical Democrats and the Republicans would be just as effective as they would be if they were cardboard cutouts.

                  We have seen this rigged game before and it is time to stop playing it.

                  1. Odd that you think a 5-5 split is “controlled” by 5. Did you miss the math lesson where the teacher helped students understand that in a set of 2n, you need at least n+1 for a majority?

                    1. Makes no difference. When the premise for the investigation is false the outcome is driven by that falsehood. This was no Reichstag Fire or Pearl Harbor but the ‘investigation” begins with that assumed. It is Congressional street theater for the cameras; a disgrace that dirties anyone who participates.

                      Get away from the ball Lucy.

                    2. “When the premise for the investigation is false …”

                      You know that begging the question is a fallacy, yet you do it anyway.

                    3. ATS : “You know that begging the question is a fallacy, yet you do it anyway.”

                      +++

                      Odd that you don’t see that this entire ‘investigation’ is begging the question. As I said, the conclusion is part of the basis for the investigation. The premise and conclusion are essentially the same. It is a fraud. And it is theater. I am not sure many people even watch these Congressional Punch & Judy shows anymore. I would rather watch commercials for Preparation H. At least then I know what they are trying to shove up my rear.

                    4. You haven’t even stated what you believe this “false” “premise and conclusion” is, much less what your evidence is that that’s the premise and that it’s false.

                    5. Dear Anonymous: it’s virtually impossible to try to reason with a Trumpster because they will believe lies, like “Donald Trump is a self-made billionaire” or “I had the largest Inauguration crowd in history”; how about: “Mexico will pay to build the wall” or “My father was born in Germany”; “the Mueller Investigation is a witch hunt”; ” if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country any more”. Anyone who could fall for that fat, phony pile of manure, and defend him to the hilt, would be incapable of understanding than n+1 is a majority unless Hannity tells him to believe this. They don’t just fall for Trump, they fall for the lies put out by his media enablers.

                      History will look back on this time and query how or why Republicans could not only stand by and allow Trump to stay out of jail when he fomented an insurrection, but also support the Big Lie, despite massive amounts or proof that there was no widespread election fraud. Historians will question why Republicans could oppose a thorough investigation into the root causes, which could lead to a strategy for preventing this from ever happening again.

          2. The irony of the impeachments is that they exposed Democrat mischief and collusion with Russian interests and the Chinese government that undermined American interests and democratic integrity.

          1. Do fill in the blank:

            having Willie Sutton investigate a bank robbery he committed::having the bipartisan House Select Committee investigate ______ they committed

        2. “even though they would have been able to appoint whomever they wanted” — simply not true — most of the names submitted by McCarthy were rejected, and he threatened to pull all Republicans off the committee. That’s why we have Cheney and Kinzinger on the committee bowing and scraping to the Dems.

          1. The actual claim I made IS true.

            What I said: “the Democrats agreed to the following terms for a National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex, which could have had more diverse membership, but the Senate Republicans filibustered it, even though they would have been able to appoint whomever they wanted for the members appointed by McCarthy and McConnell: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3233/text

            You cut off the fact that I was specifically talking about the National Commission, even though I said so and linked to text of the bill that the Republicans in the Senate filibustered.

            I’ve explained the following already (see my 2:30pm comment), but here you go again:

            Because the Senate Republicans filibustered the bill that would have OKed the National Commission, that Commission was never formed. Instead, what was formed was a House Select Committee, comprised solely of House members. By the rules of the House, the Speaker of House controls membership of Select Committees.

            As I said: Republicans “would have been able to appoint whomever they wanted for the members appointed by McCarthy and McConnell” on the National Commission. I did NOT make that claim for the House Select Committee, because I understand that they aren’t the same thing and aren’t governed by the same rules. Do *you* understand that that? (It seems not. It seems that you’re confusing them.) It’s the Senate Republicans’ fault that McCarthy wasn’t able to appoint Jordan and Banks. Blame them.

    2. A riot (“disorder”) forced by the murder of an unarmed woman, and the assault of people… persons by capitol officers. Another drug-induced death a la Floyd. Trump was derelict in his duty when he respected Pelosi et al’s denial of sufficient security to provide crowd control. Pelosi et al were derelict in their duty to allow peaceable assembly and petition for redress of grievances.

        1. ATS: “You are in denial if you believe that what occurred on Jan. 6 was peaceable assembly.”

          +++

          And you are in denial if you don’t admit that federal deep state actors were orchestrating much of the more egregious acts. They have a track record of doing it and mounting evidence is pointing directly at them. The Democrats’ investigation will try to smother that evidence and perpetuate a phony narrative.

          1. I provided evidence for my claim. You have NOT provided evidence for yours, which is totally unsurprising.

            1. Before or after forcing the disorder?

              The Democrat “hero” is responsible for murdering an unarmed woman. The Capitol police and embedded instigators a la Whitmer-closet are responsible for forcing the disorder and assaulting people. Pelosi et al are responsible for denying sufficient security to provide crowd control. Trump is responsible for abstaining from a democratic/dictatorial/fascist regime, and respecting our Constitution’s separation of powers. No Twilight Amendment. No Planned Petitioners.

    3. Do you mean to say that importing illegal aliens en masse to affect elections since 1863, tampering with and “harvesting” votes and defrauding and stealing the election in key states, and Obama conducing a Coup D’etat in America, should not put the entire democrat party in prison for life, if not condemning them to Drawing and Quartering commensurate with their crimes of subversion and defection?

      Do you mean to say that circumventing the Constitution and creating a wholly unconstitutional welfare state, under the dominion of a Constitution which commands that Congress tax ONLY for “…general Welfare…,” is not actionable treason?

      Dang! You communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) are not only unpatriotic and anti-American, but incorrigible.

    4. Well Anonymous, I guess you’ve wrapped up the whole thing for us. Too bad the FBI’s own investigation disagrees with you. But don’t let facts get in the way of your TDS.

    5. The American people deserve to know what Trump’s plans were ahead of the rally, what communication occurred during the insurrection, …
      What the President’s plan was? Congress has no constitutional jurisdiction concerning what “plans” a President might consider. You have stumbled on the reason Congress lacks subpoena power. No Cause of Action.

      Trump was derelict in his duty, waiting hours before authorizing the National Guard to show up to help control it.
      Security in the City of DC is under the control of the the DC Mayor. Not the President.
      The security of the Capital Grounds, is under control of Congress. Not the President.

      The Mayor of DC, and Congress, did not want the National Guard, and the President cannot overrule them.

      1. Here are examples of three times you’ve been presented with evidence that previous claims of yours were false, and you ran away instead of admitting you were wrong:
        https://jonathanturley.org/2021/10/14/is-it-time-for-a-special-counsel-on-the-hunter-biden-scandal/comment-page-2/#comment-2129655
        jonathanturley.org/2021/10/14/is-it-time-for-a-special-counsel-on-the-hunter-biden-scandal/comment-page-2/#comment-2129492
        jonathanturley.org/2021/10/11/is-durham-circling-jake-sullivan-the-special-counsel-may-not-be-done-with-national-security-adviser/comment-page-1/#comment-2128771

        “Congress has no constitutional jurisdiction concerning what “plans” a President might consider.”

        He’s no longer President, and they have jurisdiction to investigate the issues they identified in their National Commission bill: congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3233/text

        Your claim that “The Mayor of DC, and Congress, did not want the National Guard” after the insurrection started is false too, as is your claim that “the President cannot overrule them.”

        Timelines of the events related to the National Guard response:
        apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-army-racial-injustice-riots-only-on-ap-480e95d9d075a0a946e837c3156cdcb9
        justsecurity.org/76117/the-official-and-unofficial-timeline-of-defense-department-actions-on-january-6/

    6. If the criminal, unconstitutional Obama Coup D’etat in America had been terminated with extreme prejudice, the DOJ would still be republican, the Obama Gang would be in prison and January 6th would have been just another day in the White House for the real President Donald J. Trump.

      Crime doesn’t pay, except for democrats.

  3. Perhaps Turley would have been more comfortable if President Biden had just called for all of his political opponents and the media to be “locked up”. Turley said nothing when the “stable genius” called for “locking them up” and countless Hatch Act violations. Or Trump himself telling his staff and others NOT to testify and basically use obstruction of any review of his administration. For Turley nothing “rose to the level” for Trump, but it seems if President Biden says that people breaking the law should face prosecution then it’s just to much for Turley to bear.

    1. Fishy, it might be more helpful for your health if you were more primal, more visceral, more aggressive with your dyschezia. The pleasantly plump womyn in the first 30 seconds of this video shows you the proper approach for addressing irregularity.

      dyschezia – difficulty in defecating usually as a consequence of continued voluntary suppression of the urge to have a BM.

      😉

      1. “This is not a democracy. Everybody doesn’t get to do what they want to do. Everybody doesn’t get to do what they feel like doing.”

        – Nick Saban

        1. Exactly. The founders went out of their way to mitigate the progress of establishing a democratic/dictatorial/fascist regime by constructing a constitutional republic that limited government authority. That said, it’s unfortunate that they could not address slavery, diversity, and foreign entanglements sooner, which allowed the development of a socioeconomic complex that sustains what it purported to resolve.

      2. Dictatorship is what the Founders warned us about.

        Dictatorship is what the Constitution and Bill of Rights precludes and protects us from.

        Dictatorship of monarchs, communists and psychotic parasites is what the American Founders stopped.
        _________________________________________________________________________________

        “[We gave you] a republic, if you can keep it.”

        – Ben Franklin
        ___________

        Ben Franklin’s was a restricted-vote republic, distinctly not a one man, one vote democrazy.

        Franklin et al. engineered an 11.6% turnout in 1788, required citizens to be “…free white person(s)…,” and required voters to be male, European, 21 with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.

    2. Trump responded to misinformation and disinformation (“handmade tales”) by the media, but only Obama actually stalked and imprisoned his opponents. Trump responded to national occupations, insurrections, violence, and neighborhood invasions (Some, Select [Black] Lives Matter), but it was only Biden who actually called the National Guard to support congressional and Capitol Hill officers’ dereliction of duty and violation of civil rights.

    3. Fishwings — Ummm…what part of this statement didn’t you get? “During the Trump Administration, many of us criticized the President for commenting on pending investigations and crossing the line on seeking to influence the Justice Department.”

  4. Another massive failure by Joe Biden puts him at odds with the Democrat policy agenda as he accidentally unites Americans of all races and classes through music. The new single by rapper Loza Alexander “Let’s Go, Brandon” has gone viral:

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

    “Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to fvck things up.”
    -Barack Obama

    1. Yes, the Commie/Nazi DemRinos taught the World to sing in perfect harmony “Let’s Go Brandon” & the adult version “Phk Joe Biden”.

      1. It could be worse. It could be “Plan” Joe Biden. Roe, Roe, Roe your president… parent… baby, violently down the river Styx.

  5. Turley: “The President should retract his statement and allow the process to work.”

    +++

    For sure, but to retract the statement he will have to remember he made it.

    1. A probable trespasser, who was unarmed, in a prone position, female, a “burden”, a plausible threat to a man in a different weight class, with superior training and experience. His Choice, and a riot (“disorder”).

  6. Is it going to take an actual, organized leftist army policing us for people to wake up? Do we need literal gestapos for things to register? I still get this soupçon of hope for the Democratic party in the Professor’s writings. Allegiance to them is so unshakeable, how could the rest of us NOT see it as conditioning or brainwashing? They ain’t going to change course of their own volition at this point, that is a fantasy.

    1. As long as one party is seen as always good and the other always evil, then no one will notice the parties are actually playing tug-of-war for power on one end of the rope and the people are on the other end.

  7. “For they are, two things, knowledge and opinion, of which the one makes its possessor really to know, the other to be ignorant.”
    -Hippocrates

  8. “If the Democrats seek the prosecution of these Trump officials, they will have to step over a mountain of hypocrisy on such cases.”….When do you think that will EVER become an obstacle for this administration or the Democrat members of Congress? Better days would be coming if it was an issue to them. We can dream.

  9. JT, you need to realize the normal rules do not apply when fighting for social justice. Heck, the covid virus even gets involved and only infects bigots who want to attend church not those demonstrating for leftist causes.

  10. It is a citizens right to challenge subpoenas. Democrats always ignore the fact, people are sovereign. People do not serve congress, no matter congress considers themselves royal rulers.
    I would ask for immunity. If that was granted, I would plead the 5th. Bannon is smart enough to offer written pleadings, cutting and pasting whole paragraphs from pleadings by Bll Clinton and his wife. Of Course Holder, and a whole slew of Obama administration officials, offer a treasure trove of pleadings written by the DoJ. There is an option to lie. Using the Excuse of Brennen, that he told the lesser aggressive of the lies he wanted to tell. Andrew McCabe lied to investigators and Congress, and he was rewareded by having his pension restored.

    1. One cannot legally plead the 5th after being granted immunity.

      If the DOJ chooses to prosecute Bannon, which it should, he is free to challenge to try to fight it in court.

      “Democrats always ignore the fact, people are sovereign.”

      Nonsense. I’m a Democrat, and I’m not ignoring that Bannon can challenge the subpoena. But he is not above the law, and he risks being jailed for contempt.

      1. If contempt for Congress were a crime….how many millions of Americans would we have to put in Prison for that? Chalk me up as one of them….when I see Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Maxine Waters, and the rest of the Democrat Loons who so abuse their portions….I can only have and show my contempt for them.

        There are Republicans that I am not very fond of either….but the Leftists who are doing their best to see this Nation fail…..are in a class by themselves….even Manchin from West Virginia is calling them out.

      2. “Democrats always ignore the fact, people are sovereign.”

        Nonsense. I’m a Democrat, and I’m not ignoring that Bannon can challenge the subpoena. But he is not above the law, and he risks being jailed for contempt.”

        As usual, you miss the point. Democrats are abusing power and have been corrupted by it. (We can say the same for some Republicans)

    2. There is an option to lie. Using the Excuse of Brennen, that he told the lesser aggressive of the lies he wanted to tell. Andrew McCabe lied to investigators and Congress, and he was rewareded by having his pension restored.

      “To fix upon good government as the only manifestation of Christian charity is giving my business more credit than it deserves…. Don’t place your hope in politics”
      – Justice Antonin Scalia

      James Clapper’s perjury, and why DC made men don’t get charged for lying to Congress

      “In DC, perjury is not simply tolerated, it is rewarded. In a city of made men and women, nothing says loyalty quite as much as lying under oath.”

      Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper is about celebrate one of the most important anniversaries of his life. March 13th will be the fifth anniversary of his commission of open perjury before the Senate Intelligence Committee. More importantly, it also happens to be when the statute of limitations runs out — closing any possibility of prosecution for Clapper. As the clock runs out on the Clapper prosecution, Democrats like Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) have charged that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen committed perjury when she insisted that she could not recall if President Donald Trump called Haiti and African countries a vulgar term. The fact is that perjury is not simply tolerated, it is rewarded, in Washington. In a city of made men and women, nothing says loyalty quite as much as lying under oath.

      Jonathan Turley
      USA Today
      Jan 19, 2018

      https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/01/19/james-clappers-perjury-dc-made-men-dont-get-charged-lying-congress-jonathan-turley-column/1045991001/

      1. Turley says:

        “In DC, perjury is not simply tolerated, it is rewarded. In a city of made men and women, nothing says loyalty quite as much as lying under oath.”

        Turley’s abhorrence of liars is why I have always stated that Turley is no Trumpist.

        Trumpists lie, and Turley won’t.

        Turley’s problem is that he overlooks condemning liars who work at his network, Fox News, but to his credit at least, he refrains from repeating those lies himself.

  11. “Prosecution of Anyone Refusing Subpoenas in the Jan. 6th Riot Investigation”

    This must bring joy to the authoritarians on the blog that think fascism is good for the little guy, like ATS

  12. Dear Professor Turley, it’s the law! Why should members of the Trump gang have to testify when served with a subpoena? Oh I forgot they’re are on a mission from god to destroy our democracy.

    1. Turley did not say that those receiving a subpoena should not testify; his position is that the President should stay on the sidelines and not take a position.

  13. Yes, Biden should retract his statement. He said that he wouldn’t interfere with the DOJ’s decisions, and he shouldn’t be trying to sway them, just as Trump shouldn’t have tried to sway them.

    That said, this is nothing like the DOJ decision not to prosecute Holder for contempt of Congress or, later, not to prosecute Barr for contempt of Congress. No one should be surprised that JT is silent about the latter. I’ve read that the DOJ has a standing policy not to prosecute a sitting AG for contempt of Congress in light of the separation of powers. But here, the people who’ve been subpoenaed aren’t currently in the executive branch, Bannon wasn’t employed by government at the time, Trump is no longer president and so has a different relationship to executive privilege, … The legal consideration is different for many reasons.

    “This matter has not been resolved in Congress…”

    They’ll be voting on the contempt charge against Bannon on Tuesday.

    Here’s a much better legal discussion of executive privilege and the Jan. 6 investigation:
    lawfareblog.com/executive-privilege-and-jan-6-investigation

    1. Congress’ vote does not “resolve” anything because the Judicial branch holds sway. As Turley predicts this Jan. 6 case holds till the GOP takes control of Congress, starts constant public hearings confirming Joe and Hunter’s criminal cabal and finally hammers/embarrasses the limp AG into finally appointing an Independent Prosecutor ending in POTUS Kamala Harris. (We can only dream of both Bidens behind bars.)

      Harris is such a pathetic politician (as is anyone with such a snot nose attitude and her awful, irritating nasal voice) that she garnered a measly 2% of Dem. approval when she exited the Presidential campaign. She promptly blamed her extreme and egregious failures on SEXISM. What is stupider? Not knowing that 100% of the persons she accused are exclusively DEMOCRATIC VOTERS or knowing it and blaming them anyway.

      Betting odds may even favor that dope DeSantis beating Harris.

      1. “Congress’ vote does not “resolve” anything”

        It resolves the portion that takes place in Congress, which is what Turley was referring to in what I quoted, as you’d presumably understand if you’d read his column in its entirety. The full quote was “This matter has not been resolved in Congress, let alone reached any decision stage at the Justice Department.”

        There will be a vote in the Committee on Tuesday, then it goes to the full House for another vote, and if it passes the House, it will be referred to the DOJ and will depend on whether the DOJ chooses to prosecute, and if so, how the courts respond. But the resolution in Congress that Turley referred to will occur shortly.

  14. Yes, Biden should retract his statement. He said that he wouldn’t interfere with the DOJ’s decisions, and he shouldn’t be trying to sway them, just as Trump shouldn’t have.

    That said, this is nothing like the DOJ decision not to prosecute Holder for contempt of Congress or, later, not to prosecute Barr for contempt of Congress. I am shocked, shocked that JT is silent about the latter (sarc). I’ve read that the DOJ has a standing policy not to prosecute a sitting AG for contempt of Congress in light of the separation of powers. The people who’ve been subpoeanaed aren’t currently in the executive branch, Bannon wasn’t employed by government at the time, Trump is no longer president and so has a different relationship to executive privilege, … The legal consideration is different for many reasons.

    “This matter has not been resolved in Congress…”

    They’ll be voting on the contempt charge against Bannon on Tuesday.

    Here’s a much better legal discussion of executive privilege and the Jan. 6 investigation:
    https://www.lawfareblog.com/executive-privilege-and-jan-6-investigation

  15. Time to admit that the US is now governed by a crypto-fascist regime that recognizes no limits on its power over its subjects. Things like precedents and hypocrisy are quaint ideas of no relevance. It has consolidated power across all relevant institutions and power centers, and it can and will do whatever it wants.

    It is much like what a post-Mussolini Italy might have evolved into but for WW2, except that it loathes rather than reveres its history, which it seeks to repudiate rather than glorify, based on equally false narratives.

    Prof Turley notes the mountain of hypocrisy. Does hypocrisy occur if nobody calls it out? If nobody notices or cares?

    1. Nice comment. I would also note that the consolidation of power includes the slanted national “mainstream media” and American journalism. The good professor pointed out Katie Couric concealing Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s negative comments about colin kaepernick.

    2. I think letting Joe Biden out once a week from his assisted living residence is going a bit too much now. He hang with nurse Jill more often now.

    3. All you guys are missing the point now. Biden’s latest BS blurb is to fully fund our police officers. I think he senses the political winds are a changing. This is something he has done for 50 years. That’s ok, next week he will have to appease his left wing base. So the cops will be villains again.

    4. MHJ, I like the use of the term crypto-fascist which has existed since the time of WW2, but insufficiently used and understood. Good job.

      I hope you don’t mind me using the term crypto-fascist in the future leaning on its later definition rather than the earlier one.

  16. Framing the narrative is what President Biden is doing, it’s what the Democratic Party does with all their propaganda.

    The Democrats want to paint all those refusing to instantly bow to the subpoenas “criminals” and render a guilty verdict from the court of public opinion and then link all those guilty “criminals” to any Republican running in 2022.

    Framing the narrative.

    1. “Let’s Go Brandon”…I was going to attach the link to a rapper’s new song on this, but YouTube has blocked it. Censorship is ruining my fun.

  17. “The President should retract his statement and allow the process to work.” Translation: Susan Rice should record a retraction and place the cassette in the back of Biden’s head and hit “play” at the opportune moment. Reaction: Dream on!

  18. Hypocrisy and mendacity are the elite D’s stock in trade. They have no problem in stepping over their own propaganda

Leave a Reply