DOJ Won’t Pursue Criminal Contempt Charges Against Garland
-
A DOJ official said that Mr. Garland’s refusal to comply with a subpoena ‘did not constitute a crime.’
Strange how they prosecuted others for the exact same thing they are claiming isn't a crime.
-
@raphjd Yes.
Steve Bannon & Peter Navarro both wanted to comply, as soon as Constitutional issues around Executive Privilege could be cleared up. So they are innocent.
Merrick Garland merely said, he himself would judge what was a valid subpoena from Congress & whether he had to comply. So he's guilty.
Meanwhile - DOJ also refuses to prosecute St. Fauci, for he lied to Congress.
Fauci testified in May 2021 that his agency never funded risky “gain-of-function” experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but Paul has repeatedly highlighted records and emails suggesting otherwise.
Paul filed a criminal referral against Fauci in July 2021 and again in July 2023 over the perjury claims.
-
"Inherent contempt" - twist - unlikely, but not impossible.
It turns out that USA Congress can raise stakes, on Garland.
When they vote someone in contempt - they rely on Executive Branch (DOJ) to arrest & prosecute. As we know.
But - Congress can vote someone in "inherent contempt" - in which case, enforcement power derives from USA Congress who can have Congress' police or Sergeant at Arms detain person.
At present, it's unlikely for that vote to be done on Garland. Just not impossible.
Reports that Garland makes phone calls, to lobby House Republicans, to NOT do that vote.
-
It reminds me of when the DOJ under Loretta Lynch (Obama's AG) refused to prosecute Eric Holder (Oama's previous AG) for disobeying a Congressional subpoena.
Of course, liberals are silent on shit like this because know their morals can't stand up to scrutiny.
-
Referenced by B blablarg18
