Liz Cheney Squashes Rick Wilson Rumor That 1/6 Committee Subpoenas Won't Be Enforced

[riversedge]

Liz Cheney Squashes Rick Wilson Rumor That 1/6 Committee Subpoenas Won’t Be Enforced

https://politicususa.com/2021/10/08/liz-cheney-squashes-rick-wilson-rumor-that-1-6-committee-subpoenas-wont-be-enforced.html via @politicususa

Link to tweet

?s=20




Fri, Oct 8th, 2021 by Jason Easley




Liz Cheney Squashes Rick Wilson Rumor That 1/6 Committee Subpoenas Won’t Be Enforced



https://www.politicususa.com/2021/10/08/liz-cheney-squashes-rick-wilson-rumor-that-1-6-committee-subpoenas-wont-be-enforced.html

1/6 Committee Vice-Chair Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) squashed a rumor that 1/6 Committee subpoenas will not be enforced.

The rumor was tweeted by The Lincoln Project’s Rick Wilson that subpoenas on presidential staff would not be enforced.

Rep. Cheney replied:

A decision not to enforce the subpoenas would go against everything that committee members have been saying for the past week. There is no reason for them not to enforce the subpoenas. The White House is working with the Committee, Trump’s executive privilege claim looks legally dubious at best, and there is nothing stopping the Committee from enforcing the subpoenas.

Rick Wilson’s rumor took off on Twitter, but it was unsourced and didn’t make sense.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[DinahMoeHum]

1. Don't know about the rumor, but Rick Wilson. . .

. . .was complaining about the slowness of the proceedings last night on The Breakdown:

[Ocelot II]

2. There's no point in issuing subpoenas at all if you aren't going to enforce them,

and the committee isn't going to want to look weak and gormless (which is exactly the conclusion too many people drew from Wilson's premature ejaculations). The word "subpoena" literally means "under penalty," so if there's no penalty it's not a subpoena, just an invitation. My guess is that they will first want to see the documents with respect to which the WH has just declined to claim executive privilege, and then, assuming the recalcitrant witnesses do fail to show up as directed, they'll enforce the subpoenas. Depending on what the documents contain, they will have a lot of fun questioning these d-bags.

[PortTack]

3. just take a breath and give the committee a few hours to act!

[sop]

4. Congress has three options to enforce subpoenas in face of defiance:

1 - Congress could pursue criminal contempt and ask the U.S. Attorney for D.C. within the Justice Department to bring criminal charges against a violator. If found guilty, this would be a federal misdemeanor punishable by a maximum $100,000 fine and a maximum one-year sentence in prison.

2 - Congress could file a civil lawsuit in federal court, requesting a judge to order compliance with the subpoena. This can take months or years to resolve.

3 - Congress to use its own “inherent contempt” power by sending the Sergeant at Arms to actually detain subpoena violators. This hasn’t been done since 1935.

We'll see what happens...

[SoCalDavidS]

5. Option #2 Is WORTHLESS

If that's the route they end up going, then Rick Wilson would be proven absolutely correct.

The fact that Liz Cheney chose to respond, means nothing to me. Actions will do all the talking. We'll see what happens when they don't show up next Thursday & Friday. I agree that there is nothing that can be done until then, so I'll wait.

[bucolic_frolic]

6. Sometimes I get the feeling

there's a public face on a lot of things that happen, or are "compromised" about in Congress. The parties have been working together and against one another a long, long time.

Rep. Cheney knows what needs to be done and seems determined to do it. I don't doubt that. But finding a way to do it, to put the spin on it, to smooth the path .... not so much.

[mcar]

7. Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney

[BlueLucy]

8. What happened to the people subpoenaed during the Russia investigation? nt