General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNeal Katyal suggests House defund the Office of Atty General until release of report.
[link:http://
Link to tweet
|
Chin music
(23,002 posts)Why not? It's not protecting Americans. Shut it down.
katmondoo
(6,457 posts)Chin music
(23,002 posts)Get the party started.
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)...who was tasked with writing the Special Counsel rules after the Clinton impeachment.
drray23
(7,627 posts)In there for Barr to exploit. The rules specify that the report is given to the attorney general and not to Congress.
UniteFightBack
(8,231 posts)SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Chin music
(23,002 posts)2naSalit
(86,579 posts)malaise
(268,968 posts)Rec
lastlib
(23,224 posts)But wouldn't the president have to sign it? That ain't gonna happen.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)TruckFump
(5,812 posts)That'll teach those assholes a lesson. Screw with the House and starve!
asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)witnessing..all around....I keep asking myself, WHAT DO THEY WANT with all this undoing of norms...I have no answers....
Chin music
(23,002 posts)We pay the bills too don...and we arent your daddy.
watoos
(7,142 posts)And in rubles.
cilla4progress
(24,728 posts)for a poor drafting of the SC rules in that they do not SPECIFY the report is to kick over to Congress and not the AG?
I mean, this clearly is the "norm," if not the law. But we know how these Rs roll....
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)..but in answer to your question, he was very angry the Sunday the "summary" was released.
And surely he was not the only person to see his rules before they were adopted. Other eyes should also have seen any flaw.
cilla4progress
(24,728 posts)perfidy indeed.
Great word. Love it. Admit - had to look it up!
They are busting through all the norms. Infuriating.
Like, "don't lie. Don't cheat. Don't have biz deals ongoing with a foreign adversary at the same time you are running for Prez."
Impossible to cover them all !!!
Ligyron
(7,632 posts)attempted and excused by Republicans and they'll care less what anyone thinks concerning their actions.
Problem is: where would you even start?
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)That should include Marine 1 and Airforce 1.
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)DLevine
(1,788 posts)padah513
(2,502 posts)notdarkyet
(2,226 posts)Firestorm49
(4,032 posts)certainot
(9,090 posts)tactics of various legal forms of asking
this way the pressure from inside on barr will increase but they'll say to cut costs they had to hire homeless people and one of them used the report for toilet paper - so it's gone
the only way americans are going to see the whole thing is if mueller or his crew kept a copy or two, but he might have made sure he could say under oath - no other copies
trueblue2007
(17,217 posts)SHRED
(28,136 posts)I am sure he is awash in dark money or already wealthy.
lark
(23,097 posts)He would only use the money to fuck us over anyway so take it all.
I don't really know if this can be done, but Katyal should and since he's recommending this action, think Dems should 100% do it if Barr refuses to honor a subpoena, and that's pretty much a given. He can't let the truth get out without exposing the absolute traitorousness of himself, drumpf and the entire party.
onetexan
(13,040 posts)OnDoutside
(19,956 posts)Note to self : Don't doubt myself so much...
MarcA
(2,195 posts)Although there will be some, including on DU, who would get the vapors
and clutch their pearls over such action.
onenote
(42,700 posts)given that any legislation defunding the Attorney General's office would have to be passed by the Senate?
triron
(22,001 posts)Butterflylady
(3,543 posts)So what the hell, so go for it.
gademocrat7
(10,656 posts)Do it.
Capperdan
(492 posts)Good luck there
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)madville
(7,410 posts)To do something like that.
tritsofme
(17,377 posts)for those who have initiated such confrontations over the years.
Hotler
(11,420 posts)California_Republic
(1,826 posts)And Then the Rs shut it down until they prosecute Hillary?
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)House has funding authority and Dems have majority.
former9thward
(31,997 posts)Funding bills START in the House but must be also approved by the Senate. Then the President must sign it. None of that is going to happen. It was just a tweet to get some publicity.
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)It was his suggestion.
And the rules were written by him, so the remedy ought to be within his purview.
former9thward
(31,997 posts)If you want to take the word of someone looking for publicity with re-tweets more power to you. Whatever helps you get through the day...
onenote
(42,700 posts)Only revenue collecting bills have to start in the House.
Both the House and Senate often simultaneously consider budget bills. (You may have noticed that DeVos was testifying about the proposed budget cuts to the Special Olympics before both the House and Senate this week.
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)onenote
(42,700 posts)Yet post after post in this thread don't seem to understand the most fundamental concept of the legislative process.
It's actually a bit alarming that so many posts on this thread are so ill-informed.
Chin music
(23,002 posts)for the team. There's no there there.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)When THEY do it, its obstruction of justice. When we do it, its necessary.
Can they defund money already allocated, or can they just not fund the next DOJ budget?
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)story. The Judiciary Committee can recommend 0 dollars for FY20 for DoJ. There ain't nothing the Senate can do about it.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)We dont care about prosecuting criminals, investigating crimes or civil rights violations nearly as much as we need to see exactly whats in the Mueller report. I bet that would go over well in an election year.
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)the entire SCO report. I can assure you that any federal agency threatened with having its budget cut is going to think more than twice about continuing its defiance.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)He threatened to shut down the government, and he did. That worked out great for him.
onenote
(42,700 posts)Budget resolutions and spending bills, to have any effect, have to be passed by BOTH the House and Senate.
Kaytal's idea is a complete waste of time given that the Senate would simply amend the House bill to restore funding.
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)nt
onenote
(42,700 posts)All revenue raising measures must, per Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, originate in the House --- "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the house of representatives; but the senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills."
It is a common misunderstanding that the Constitution requires appropriations (spending) bills to originate in the House. That misunderstanding arises because, as a matter of tradition, the Senate usually defers to the House. But even when that is the case, there is nothing that prevents the Senate from amending the bill that originated in the House to add or delete provisions as they choose.
Indeed, the Senate doesn't even have to wait for the House to act on its bill before starting work on its own appropriations measures. It is more common than not for the Senate, even if it introduces its appropriations bills after the House does, to introduce those measures within days of the House and to consider them independently of the House.
To give one relatively recent example, a FY2019 Transportation, HUD, et al Appropriations bill was introduced in the Senate (S3023) on June 7, 2018. The House introduced a FY2019 Transportation, HUD et al Appropriations bill (HR6072) five days later on June 12, 2018.
The bottom line is that there is no way to "de-fund" the Office of the Attorney General without the concurrence of both houses of Congress, which isn't happening and, thus, a House passed measure trying to accomplish that end will never become effective and would be a total waste of time.
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)Without the Senate it just won't happen.
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)WillowTree
(5,325 posts)
. that says that the House can grant or cut spending on its own, without agreement from the Senate. For that matter, please cite any authoritative tract that says that either house of Congress can pass any legislation unilaterally, without concurrence by at least a majority in the other house.
Take your time. I can wait.
onenote
(42,700 posts)The House cannot unilaterally defund the Office of the Attorney General. And if it passed legislation to do so, that legislation would die in the Senate. A resolution censuring Barr would be as ineffective, but wouldn't require a Senate vote. Or they could vote to impeach Barr and force the Senate to acquit him (which they will easily).
LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,585 posts)Since the Constitution's separation of powers doesn't seem to matter to Trump (allocating funds from military projects to his ego-wall), we might as well use it to our advantage.
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)onenote
(42,700 posts)have to approve legislation, including legislation funding (or defunding) the government.
Did folks not notice that we had a lengthy government shutdown that didn't end when the House alone passed a funding bill, but only ended when funding was approved by the House and Senate?
WillowTree
(5,325 posts).......that so many politically active people know so little about our government and its workings in general.
Firestorm49
(4,032 posts)A heavy handed move may be what it takes. Again, were fighting with a tribe that has no limits to its depravity. Go in swinging.