In case you missed it (I did): Jan. 6 panel will issue 'criminal referrals' for subpoena defiers

The "Garland won't do anything" crowd arrives...

arrived before the paid lobby! It's a good day!

Yup

Republicans have also made criminal contempt referrals when it was their turn in power.

They did this nine years ago, when Eric Holder had enough of their Fast & Furious nonsense:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/06/28/155928783/house-set-for-vote-on-holding-attorney-general-holder-in-contempt

And if you lie under oath, I think they will criminally prosecute for that as well.

Let's go Dems!

Let's go Dems!

...and, if and when they get around to prosecuting the contempt charges, how long can the people charged drag out that fight in court?

This mess can probably only be fixed by Constitutional amendment, which probably means it'll never get fixed at all.

Where are the subpoenas?!? We DEMAND subpoenas!!! You're never going to subpoena them!!!

{We just issues subpoenas}

So WHAT?! They're not going to show up. Where are the contempt charges?!?! You'll never charge them with contempt!!!

{Anyone who doesn't show up will be charged with contempt of Congress}

So WHAT?! You'll never enforce contempt charges!!! We DEMAND that you enforce them!

{We'll refer contempt of Congress charges to DOJ for criminal prosecution}

So WHAT?! It will only get dragged out in court. We DEMAND a constitutional amendment!

…, on the likelihood that Congress will file charges for contempt as needed, or even in the idea that the DoJ will (in the fullness of time) prosecute for contempt.

My well-founded concern is the alacrity of the DoJ and how badly the courts will be abused to play for time and try to run out the clock.

You don’t understand how this works.

It doesn’t matter what YOU say. Someone else said something else. Therefore YOU are a hypocrite for saying something different than what someone else said.

That’s how bunker mentality works. Anyone who sees things differently from you is part of a hive mind of others who all think the same thing. So if any people among those others differ, then they are all hypocrites and goal post movers because they do not all agree on exactly the same thing.

Since you only got a personal attack so far, your answer is here:

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45653


"Congress’s ability to issue and enforce its own subpoenas is essential to the legislative function
and an “indispensable ingredient of lawmaking.” That said, the prevailing enforcement
mechanisms of criminal contempt of Congress and civil enforcement, both of which rely on the
assistance and participation of the other branches of government, have certain drawbacks that
arguably limit their effectiveness in ensuring timely compliance with congressional subpoenas by
executive branch officials."


These referrals have been made before. Nothing has ever come of them, so there is no answer to your question. That’s why you only got a personal attack instead of an answer.

If I had my way (which I won't ever have), I'd amend the Constitution to put a strict time limit on appeals of Congressional subpoenas, force courts to take any appeals on a speedy emergency basis, and give Congress its own small police force to arrest and detain those who evade subpoenas, and to confiscate subpoenaed evidence.

To prevent abuse of this power members of Congress would be subject to criminal consequences for abusing their subpoena power, but THAT would be the battle that could be allowed to drag out in court for months or years. In the meantime benefit of the doubt goes to Congress, testimony and evidence would come first, with no more delay than a month, and with any disputes and possible penalties wrapped up later.

The actual article has the chairman saying to reporters:

"The committee will probably for those who don’t agree to come in voluntarily..."

The word "probably" got lost somewhere on the way to DU, and it's not as if the committee has discusses, let alone resolved, to do so.

It's really just a hypothetical at this point.

Wow, you must have some really good sources of information, in order to be sure.

And very revealing.

Link to tweet