House conservatives file articles of impeachment against Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein

[GMDino]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/07/25/house-conservatives-file-articles-impeachment-against-rod-rosenstein/838899002/

Quote:Members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus escalated their battle against the Justice Department on Wednesday, filing articles of impeachment against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for what they allege is his failure to hand over documents to Congress about the Russia investigation.

However, it was not clear when — or if — the measure would come to the House floor for a vote. House members are scheduled to adjourn Thursday afternoon for a five-week recess.

Rosenstein oversees Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Rosenstein is in charge because Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation because he served as an adviser to the Trump campaign.not our friend

"With Attorney General Sessions’ recusal, Rod Rosenstein has been in charge of the Department of Justice as the agency has made every effort to obstruct legitimate attempts of Congressional oversight," said Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., chairman of the Freedom Caucus. He filed the articles of impeachment along with Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and nine other conservatives.

The Department of Justice has already handed over about 880,000 documents to Congress, but Meadows and his conservative allies are seeking more. Justice officials had no comment Wednesday night.

Quote:
[/url]Mark Meadows

@RepMarkMeadows





I just filed a resolution with @Jim_Jordan and several colleagues to impeach Rod Rosenstein. The DOJ has continued to hide information from Congress and repeatedly obstructed oversight--even defying multiple Congressional subpoenas.

We have had enough.
7:01 PM - Jul 25, 2018

• 
  39.2K
• 
  [url=https://twitter.com/RepMarkMeadows/status/1022255468461391872]46.4K people are talking about this
  

Twitter Ads info and privacy



Meadows alleged that lawmakers have "caught" Justice officials hiding information from Congress, withholding relevant documents and ignoring congressional subpoenas. 

"For nine months we’ve warned them consequences were coming, and for nine months we’ve heard the same excuses backed up by the same unacceptable conduct," Meadows said. "Time is up and the consequences are here. It’s time to find a new Deputy Attorney General who is serious about accountability and transparency."

The odds that Rosenstein will actually be impeached are slim. The extreme remedy has not been carried out against an executive branch employee — other than a president — in 122 years. It is reserved for what the Constitution calls "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

The last executive branch employee who was impeached by the House was Secretary of War William Belknap, who was charged in 1876 with bribery "for accepting payments in exchange for making official appointments," according to the House Office of the Historian. He was acquitted by the Senate a few months later.

The 11 conservatives who introduced the articles of impeachment on Wednesday represent a small but influential faction of the 236-member GOP majority. Even if they could get the House to impeach Rosenstein, the closely divided Senate is unlikely to follow suit.
"These articles of impeachment against Rod Rosenstein were filed in bad faith and show extraordinary lengths to which House Republicans will go to protect Trump," tweeted Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. "History will record these Members as willing accomplices in the most serious threat to the rule of law in a generation."

Democrats have charged that House conservatives are targeting Rosenstein in an effort to undermine the larger Mueller investigation and protect President Trump. The president has repeatedly denounced the Russia probe as a "witch hunt."
Last month, the House voted to approve a non-binding resolution "insisting" that the Justice Department hand over scores of documents about the ongoing Russia investigation.

Lawmakers voted 226-183, along party lines, to pass the resolution, which Meadows introduced.

[*michaelsean*]

Does anyone know if there is anything to their charges or are they just playing politics? Do they even have a right to see everything they requested?

[jj22]

I honestly don't know. But I'd assume this was just politics.

[GMDino]

(07-26-2018, 10:57 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Does anyone know if there is anything to their charges or are they just playing politics?  Do they even have a right to see everything they requested?

After all this time you have to ask?  

It's politics.  They probably don't have the votes for impeachment, they are just making noise to cover for Trump, etc.

But I knew the "impeachment of Trump is hyperbole" crowd would get a kick out of making fun of their own for awhile. 

[hollodero]

(07-26-2018, 10:57 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Does anyone know if there is anything to their charges or are they just playing politics?  Do they even have a right to see everything they requested?

I don't know, I speak anyway, deal with it. I sure hope they don't have that right. For there seems to be a tendency to leak everything they see. In more severe cases, there are memos written and unclassified. Yeah those guys should not have the right to see everything they want to see in an ongoing investigation. It would be odd if they were entitled to.


PS The freedom caucus sure had a really proud moment there.

[BmorePat87]

(07-26-2018, 10:57 AM)michaelsean Wrote:  Do they even have a right to see everything they requested?

If their subpoena is relevant to their legislative powers and an on-going investigation then they have the right to request it and hold anyone who ignores the subpoena in contempt of Congress.

Of course, the person who then enforces that, the US attorney for DC, is part of the DOJ...

[jj22]

If they did their investigation (really did which they didn't) wouldn't they uncover the same type of info Rosenstein has? Seems like the House @GOP are exposed for not really doing the investigation they claimed to have done (and cleared Trump of). if they are suddenly wanting more info. According to them their investigation is finished.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-led-house-panel-clears-trump-his-aides-in-russia-probe-1524839510

IF this is true and they completed their investigation, then they shouldn't still be after information about the investigation.

Unless they are willing to reopen the investigation due to the "new" evidence the DOJ has. Which we all know they aren't. They probably want the evidence so they can give it to Trump which is really what Rosenstein is trying to avoid.

Could you imagine if this was Dems doing all of this to cover for Hillary? Hillary had no problem tho testifying to (the Republican majority) Congress under oath for 16 hours. Like a soldier. She didn't need saved. That's how innocent people act. We are seeing how guilty people (and those who know they are guilty) act.

[fredtoast]

Just a symbolic move to stir up the base and fire up more conspiracy theories.


Material in an ongoing investigation is usually protected. Like some one already said, they just want the info to give it to Trump.


Once the investigation is closed they can have all the info. If anything was improper than can take it up then. So it is not like the DOJ is going to get away with anything by just delaying the release.

[Au165]

Ryan has come out and says he doesn't agree. At least it seems there is some common sense emerging.

[*PhilHos*]

Suppose Meadows is right and Rosenstein ignored Congressional subpoenas. What is the normal procedure for commiting this "crime"? What is the normal punishment? Wouldn't it normally be a fine and/or prison time?

Also, shouldn't we ALL want Rosenstein to get in trouble for ignoring Congressional subpoenas? (Assuming, of course, this claim is true)

[Au165]

(07-26-2018, 02:56 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Suppose Meadows is right and Rosenstein ignored Congressional subpoenas. What is the normal procedure for commiting this "crime"? What is the normal punishment? Wouldn't it normally be a fine and/or prison time?

Also, shouldn't we ALL want Rosenstein to get in trouble for ignoring Congressional subpoenas? (Assuming, of course, this claim is true)

Why didn't they hold him in contempt? 

[*PhilHos*]

(07-26-2018, 03:02 PM)Au165 Wrote: Why didn't they hold him in contempt? 

Good question. I don't have an answer, but can anyone hold him in contempt? Or can that only come from a committee chairperson or someone higher? If it's the latter and this person decides for reasons of bias to not hold him in contempt, is the only course left for the rest of Congress to take?

[Au165]

(07-26-2018, 03:11 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Good question. I don't have an answer, but can anyone hold him in contempt? Or can that only come from a committee chairperson or someone higher? If it's the latter and this person decides for reasons of bias to not hold him in contempt, is the only course left for the rest of Congress to take?

The committee can I think. I feel like that would have been the appropriate actions and this is the political one. 

[*PhilHos*]

(07-26-2018, 03:22 PM)Au165 Wrote: The committee can I think. I feel like that would have been the appropriate actions and this is the political one. 

That's why I asked. The article states that Meadows claimed Rosenstein is ignoring Congressional subpeonas. I know that doing so is a big no no, but I would think there would be other ways of "punishing" him without going for the impeachment option.

[fredtoast]

"Contempt of Congress" is not a criminal act as far as I know. So I am not sure what they can do to punish him.

"Contempt of Court" is a crime, but a Congressional investigation is not a Judicial proceeding.


At least I think that is how it works.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-26-2018, 06:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: "Contempt of Congress" is not a criminal act as far as I know. So I am not sure what they can do to punish him.

"Contempt of Court" is a crime, but a Congressional investigation is not a Judicial proceeding.


At least I think that is how it works.

So it it doesn’t carry any penalty or anything? Now that I think about it, Congress probably shouldn’t be sending anyone to jail.

[*PhilHos*]

(07-26-2018, 09:43 PM)michaelsean Wrote: So it it doesn’t carry any penalty or anything?  Now that I think about it, Congress probably shouldn’t be sending anyone to jail.

And I think it's safe to say that NO American, conservative OR liberal, wants Congress to have this power.