Do *you* think arresting and holding administration officials is a good idea?

[Stinky The Clown]

There will be huge blowback.

There will certainly be some form of retaliation; tit for tatting.

It will get people's attention.

It will give substance to the orange anal wart's claim of a "coop".

But on balance, what do YOU think of the idea.

Me? I say we do it. I say we do the equivalent of deputizing some suitable people, contracting with a sympathetic jurisdiction that has a legitimate hoosegow, and lock the fuckers up.

[babylonsister]

1. I don't think we have a choice but to do it.

Otherwise, we're hostages.

[abqtommy]

3. Like the song says,

Do it, do it, do it till you're satisfied! There's plenty of room at Guantanamo for all the rePUKES...

[jmowreader]

78. I want Guantanamo to be closed

I say we reinstate Alcatraz as an active prison. Yes, it’ll cut down the tourist trade some, but I think it’ll be worth it. The only other options are to reopen Johnston Atoll or to just go full Albert Pierrepoint on their asses.

[Bettie]

10. That is where I am on this too

there is no other recourse.

They (Trump and his minions) have chosen this by their actions.

[sprinkleeninow]

43. IOW, they wrote their own ticket.

They been asking for it, so we should grant their request. STAT.

[Cartaphelius]

17. Psstttt......

We already are hostages.....


xxxxxxx included for warmth and comfort

[dchill]

33. There you have it.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

52. Seriously, what are we waiting for... do it!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[BootinUp]

2. At some point you have to finally

Do it. I think the leaders of the party are playing it the best way they can and will do what is required when it is clear there is no other option.

[Xipe Totec]

4. Yes - A punch in the nose is the ONLY way to get their attention.

They will only respond to raw power.

[NurseJackie]

5. Yes. Please.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

6. No, but not doing it is a worse idea. They thumb their noses at the law.

[LonePirate]

7. Absolutely. The fines may mean nothing to them but some jail time might get their attention.

I say put them in the DC city jail and don't separate them from the general inmate population.

[sweetroxie]

58. And who, exactly, will extract the fines from them?

And how?

[lunatica]

8. I think a very few arrests will suffice for them to get the message

[keithbvadu2]

9. Shouldn't republicans support it as 'rule of law'?

Shouldn't republicans support it as 'rule of law'?

[Freethinker65]

11. Barr was confirmed to obey Trump's demands of harassing Trump's perceived enemies

Trump will threaten to investigate and drag through the mud whoever the Democratic Presidential nominee is.

This might be the Democrats last and best chance to try to restore any power to the legislative branch.

[bitterross]

12. Absolutely YES! We have no other choice.

Don't you think for a moment if they were in a similar situation they'd hesitate for a moment.

Just look at all the actions McConnell has taken in the Senate.

[blueinredohio]

13. DO IT TODAY!!!

[Amaryllis]

14. Salaries can be withheld in some cases...this would have much more punch than fines.

[Thekaspervote]

57. I believe they are talking about $25K a day- some serious money in a short time

Even for the wealthy

[malaise]

15. Lock them up!

Yes

[rusty quoin]

48. That's right. It actually is the right thing to do. The law demands it.

[Arkansas Granny]

16. They need to face the same consequence that any other person would.

No one is above the law.

[spooky3]

18. I agree. nt

[Golden Raisin]

19. Yes. Plus steep daily fines and/or salary garnishment.

[Progressive Jones]

20. Arrest those who fail to do what they're told to do by Congress.

I'm tired of the pussy footing and coddling.

[former9thward]

21. It is not going to happen.

People playing to the base.

[JackInGreen]

22. Bookem, Stinky

I think that's 'nuff said.

[yaesu]

23. The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world

putting a few untouchables in prison seems like a good idea to me.

[rustydog]

24. There are rules in place because our founding fathers believed in checks and balances not a dictator

People can't be arrested and jailed without cause. the rules are in place, the constitution gives the house the authority to hold those in violation failing to provide what the House can legally seek or subpoena.
If one lacks the courage to use the tools at your disposal, you are weakening your constitutional power through your fear to uphold the rule of law.
Arrest them, try them, imprison them.

[KPN]

51. THIS

[AZ8theist]

25. Munchin and Barr

Strip searched, de-loused, and put in prison jump suits and thrown in to solitary will certainly wake them the fuck up to their treason.

It will cause a very big, very happy party at my house.

EVERY Arizona DUer is invited....

[milestogo]

26. Yes.

[EveHammond13]

27. the coup happened in 2016

[CatMor]

28. YES ... definitely

[Jakes Progress]

29. Lovely fantasy.

I vote we lock them all up.

But...just who slaps on the cuffs? You use delightful words like "deputizing suitable people" and "sympathetic jurisdiction" and "hoosegow".

Can you elaborate. Which people? What jurisdiction with a hoosegow?

I enjoy the fantasy too. Are you just venting or can you explain how, specifically, the legislative branch can carry out the duties of the executive branch.

That's why they call it a Constitutional Crisis. This situation was not provided for in the constitution.

[CaptainTruth]

30. If Congress uses inherent contempt the House sergeant at arms can arrest ...

... & detain someone who is refusing a subpoena & hold them until they comply. That would cause a political firestorm, I think, & hurt Democrats. So it's possible, but I don't think it's the best option.

I think it's better for the House to pursue civil contempt, where they go to a court & ask the court to order compliance with a subpoena, & if the person doesn't comply the court imposes the penalties, which could include fines & jail. It looks like this is the way it's going & I think it's the best option.

The third option is criminal contempt, where the House makes a criminal referral to the DOJ for the DOJ to follow up on, but we all know this DOJ wouldn't do anything.

[emmaverybo]

55. Voice of reason. The lock up would give us short-term emotional satisfaction, but

unfortunately fit in with Trump and Trump party’s plan to make themselves victims. They would get the long-term benefit, calling it a stunt, a show...and since many Americans are not following all the proceedings, have a distaste for divisive politics, dramatic moves might make them question the House’s credibility.
I go for the bloodless way.
Use all legal and traditional methods. Don’t give Baby Blimp what he’s angling for.
Remember the old adage: don’t mud wrestle with a pig. You will only get dirty and the pig will love it.

[durablend]

65. Oh please

"unfortunately fit in with Trump and Trump party’s plan to make themselves victims"

I got news for you...anything we do will have them whining that they're "victims"

[emmaverybo]

66. Well, there's that... nt

[LW1977]

31. Yes

Is grass green?

[CaptainTruth]

32. Just FYI, some details on inherent contempt. Yes, Congress can arrest & detain someone.

Schiff mentioned inherent contempt a few days ago but I think it was mainly a threat, to remind Trump's attorneys that Congress does have that power. I doubt he would use it, only as a last resort.

Inherent Contempt

Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subjected to punishment as the chamber may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment, imprisonment for coersion, or release from the contempt citation).

While Congress retains its "inherent contempt" authority and may exercise it at any time, this inherent contempt process was last used by the Senate in 1934, in a Senate investigation of airlines and the U.S. Postmaster. After a one-week trial on the Senate floor (presided over by Vice President John Nance Garner, in his capacity as Senate President), William P. MacCracken, Jr., a lawyer and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics who was charged with allowing clients to remove or rip up subpoenaed documents, was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment.

[hunter]

34. It's a balance of giving them enough rope to hang themselves...

... and piously cutting them down, God have Mercy on their Souls, to bury them when they do.

I'm not cut out for that kind of work.

While I'm pissing on Ronald Reagan's grave I know he's raking leaves out of Satan's pool, silently suffering the sexual harassment of demons with cholla cactus cocks for all eternity.

It could've been worse for him. Reagan was just a feckless meat puppet like Trump. A mindless tool.

[lagomorph777]

37. "demons with cholla cactus cocks"

OWWWWW! I got nailed through my sneakers once. Welcome to AZ (not)!

Thanks for that image. I hope you're right!

[Fiendish Thingy]

35. Yup, do it.

Lock up contemptuous obstructors, perhaps one per week; I bet the obstruction stops and the testimony flies loose and free by July.

[kimbutgar]

36. Most definitely

Make it so with the quickness!

[cynatnite]

38. With Barr as an AG who is complicit and aiding them? Never will happen...

The notion gives me an icky feeling inside as it is. I don't like anything that smacks of political retaliation.

Although in this instance, we're looking at an above-the-law administration with an AG who is providing them cover in order to violate the law.

It's like asking the burglars to guard the bank and expecting them to turn in their buddies who are robbing it.

[barbtries]

39. i think every possible remedy under the law

is called for in the face of a lawless administration.

[MFM008]

40. I personally

Like the idea of public hanging but ill settle for lock up of republicans.

[sprinkleeninow]

41. I'm down with it. eom

[Laura PourMeADrink]

42. Blowback schloback. Trump is already blowing back with a vengeance.

And probably 70% of the voting population has stopped listening. We didn't act asap once Mueller report released so we lost the moment. But perhaps anything big we can do at this time to make a splash might be worth a try.

[plimsoll]

44. Not any choice really.

It's a "rule of laws not men" issue.
If you don't appear for a subpoena bad stuff happens. To men, emperors maybe not.

But it won't be tit for tat. That's what Democrats have been thinking the game was for 24 years. That would be normal. The GOP switched to hawks and doves with Newt "have a cold dear I want a divorce" Gingrich. So this is more likely to look like a scene from Charles II, arresting parliamentarians in the house of commons.

[defacto7]

45. It sounds good, but whatever they do it had better work.

[Gore1FL]

46. I think it's the law. nt

[Doreen]

47. I think

we should load them into a 737MAX and fly them to Russia and/or NK and leave them there.

[MontanaMama]

49. If we don't arrest them...

Why have the law? Gawd, why is this hard?

[Mr. Evil]

50. Unequivocally, yes.

We have to decide, sooner or later, what kind of society we want to line in. For ourselves and our descendants.

We have the truth on our side along with a firm grasp of reality. They haven't had a passing relationship with the truth in several decades. They could give a shit. They are motivated by power, money and control. That's the dystopian morass they desire for everyone on this planet. As if we exist only to be herded into a 'one-size-fits-all' conservative christian hell. They use hate, anger and fear to destroy whatever they deem is in their way. We cannot hesitate to do what is right based on facts and adherence to the law simply out of fear that they may do the same to us one day soon x10 based on lies, spite and propaganda. They must finally be called out. The truth is on our side.

These monsters are daring the Democrats to put them in jail figuring that the Democrats are simply too weak and wimpy. It's time we showed them the new truth. The new direction. The new reality. And that we are actually the party and people of law and order. Decent people don't lie, cheat and steal as if it's normal. Decent people don't put separate children from their parents and put them in cages. I could go on but, I think everyone here gets the idea.

Arrest these monsters, NOW!

[WhiskeyWulf]

53. Yes. It should have been done sooner. nt

[wasupaloopa]

54. Yes they are crooks and are violating their oath of office

If we roll over we end separation of powers and co-equal branches of government.

[Kablooie]

56. Yes! To not do it when it's required is to deny the rule of law.

And be part of the movement to destroy the foundation of our nation

[kentuck]

59. I think they should use the court system first, to validate their premise...

...then, if the judicial system fails....

[wryter2000]

60. Hell, yes

The only way to get them to obey the law. Also, the notoriety will grab headlines for what the criminal enterprise is up to.

[csziggy]

61. YES, when they are not doing their job and following the law

They swore oaths to uphold the law. If they decide to not follow the law they have broken their oath and need to be held accountable. If that requires arresting them until they are willing to do what they swore to, so be it.

[Hortensis]

62. Done right, and that's the kicker, yes.

It's worth noting that most conservatives, but especially authoritarians, have natural biases toward upholding authority and against criminals, and for punitive action. (The worst of them will turn viciously on anyone given the right excuse, and don't their handlers know and use that!) Arrest and jailing, especially if prosecution lead to prison, could change images from respectable and worthy of admiration to the corrupt, betraying criminals they are.

Older DUers experienced the enormous change in attitude toward drunk drivers after stronger laws lead to jail. The indulgent disapproval and even chuckles at the end of gatherings in earlier decades became strong societal disapproval, believing losing licenses, jobs, custody of children and going to jail were all appropriate and often leading to exile from social groups.

Of course, the new image might be as the heroic and patriotic victim of evil Democratic fascists for some critical period instead. It'd be later, after the image of winners in suits was replaced with prison clothing and cells that most, influenced by that, would just accept they were criminals.

Imo, this would be the best reason for a purely symbolic impeachment that would leave Trump or any other official in office -- to take a stand that the president is a crook for the sake of principle, and the hope that a few would eventually be influenced.

[spanone]

63. Either that or lose our country to trump.

[BKDem]

64. They've left us no other choice

They will defy every law we throw at them, but we have to keep throwing.

[X_Digger]

67. Fuck blowback. Follow the goddamned law. n/t

[JCMach1]

68. Impeach them, they are breaking the law

[bubbazero]

69. NOT A DEMOCRATIC THING---NOT A REPUBLICAN THING

"That to secure these rights, governments are instituted amongst men, deriving their JUST powers from the consent of those governed" Under the inherent contempt laws--congress has this power and has used it in the past. Congress is tasked with oversite responsibilities and is given these powers by the people to use when necessary. To not comply with lawful subpoenas, to ignore the legislative branch of government, is to show contempt and disregard for the people from which any and all government power is derived. Our government's power, including that of the executive branch--is only that which is specifically enumerated or defined in law. ALL OTHER POWER RESIDES ULTIMATELY WITH THE PEOPLE! This is not democratic vs republican ---THIS IS A STRUGGLE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO CHECK AND CONTAIN AN OUT OF CONTROL CHIEF EXECUTIVE.

[Hekate]

70. Go for it

[JonLP24]

71. Consider the criminal justice system comes down hard on the poor

I hate the double standards when it comes to the rich & elite.

[Vinca]

72. Just think for a moment. Would Republicans do it?

We can't be shrinking violets. When we play nice we lose Supreme Court seats. Lock 'em up.

[Dave Starsky]

73. I think it's a terrific idea, but only if...

They are forced to shit in a bucket in front of each other, and--once per day--they are each fed one piece of stale pumpernickel and a bowl of thin broth with a piece of pork fat floating in it.

[McKim]

74. Stop Acting Like a Battered Wife!

Our party needs to stop acting like a battered wife and stand up for the law!

[Amishman]

75. No, we are extremely vulnerable to retaliation because of sanctuary policies.

8 USC 1324 has some frighteningly vague and broad language criminalizing any sort of harboring or aid of people without legal immigration status. A lot of Democrats at the state and local level could easily be swept up using this pretext, especially if cases can be funnelled towards newly appointed Trumpy judges.

This is not a road we want to go down.

[vlyons]

76. yes I do

It's a great idea. They are all a bunch of cowardly sycophants to Trump, who himself is an even bigger coward. It will show them that
WE MEAN BUSINESS and will not be intimidated by their corrupt neoFacist treason.

[lark]

77. They are a criminal cabal and need to be treated accordingly.

They are actively trying to break the constitution so that no laws apply to any Repugs at all ever and are only used against Democrats. They want to the dictators in essence and are daring us to try and stop them - that is a dare we need to take. Criminals aren't coddled, they are locked up and that's what we need to do. Democrats need to state constantly to the cameras that unconstitutional illegal acts against America will not be tolerated by anyone - say this constantly and in unison and we'll be ok if we can stop Russia/Israel/UAE from stealing the next election for their chosen one.