debeda

Not Ricks job to give you a civics lesson.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Listen carefully, with an impartial and objective mind

You might also study the Constitution of the United States rather than parrot the Marxist Manifesto or quote from Mao's "little red book".

Radiance3

==================
Nonsense! DOJ and FBI are holding millions of ILLEGAL documents of Hillary Clinton, Obama, Comey, Rosenstein, Mueller and his illegal gangsters, the FBI.

All those documents under subpoena must be presented to Congress.
DOJ is under the president. The president could fire Session. Session could fire Rosenstein. And the FBI's are all under DOJ. Mueller's appointment and his gangsters were all illegal. Mueller's stay for fishing expedition has been illegal.
Mueller needs to go, along with everyone in his army.

Mueller will end up under investigation.

old marine Loc: America home of the brave

The longer Mueller d**gs his feet in presenting his findings to the House of representatives the more it looks like he has been bought off by the swamp dwelling Demon-Rats to wait until after the mid term e******ns hoping to get control of both houses so they can railroad the President.

The evidence, found by Mueller will be presented to the House of Representatives and they will consider it and will dismiss or charge the President then a bill of charges will be presented to Congress who shall act as the jury and return a guilty or not guilty decision.

Republicans need to get out and v**e to prevent this is you love the American freedoms and way of life.

God bless America and President Trump

buffalo Loc: Texas

LOL! May my avatar blatantly offend you. What has it got to do with the topic at hand which you are so ignorantly contending that Congress, especially the House Judiciary Committee, has no oversight authority of the DoJ. YOUR WRONG, Rosey!

https://fas.org/irp/congress/2016_hr/doj-oversight.pdf

"A review of the historical experience pertinent to congressional access to information regarding
the law enforcement activities of the Department of Justice indicates that the vast majority of
requests for materials are resolved through political negotiation and accommodation, without the
need for judicial resolution. Absent an executive privilege claim or a statute barring disclosure
there appears to be no court precedent imposing a threshold burden on committees to demonstrate
a “substantial reason to believe wrongdoing occurred” in order to obtain information. Instead, an
inquiring committee need only show that the information sought is within the broad subject
matter of its authorized jurisdiction, is in aid of a legitimate legislative function, and is pertinent
to the area of concern. In the last 85 years, Congress has consistently sought and obtained access
to information concerning prosecutorial misconduct by Department of Justice officials in closed
cases; and access to pre-decisional deliberative prosecutorial memoranda—while often resisted
by the Department—is usually released upon committee insistence, as well.

The Legal Basis for Oversight
Constitutional Authority to Perform Oversight and Investigative
Inquiries
Generally, Congress’s authority and power to obtain information, including, but not limited to,
classified and/or confidential information, is extremely broad. While there is no express provision
of the Constitution or specific statute authorizing the conduct of congressional oversight or
investigations, the Supreme Court has firmly established that such power is essential to the
legislative function as to be implied from the general vesting of legislative powers in Congress.7
In Eastland v. United States Serviceman’s Fund, for instance, the Court stated that the “scope of
its power of inquiry ... is as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and
appropriate under the Constitution.”8
Also, in Watkins v. United States, the Court emphasized that
the “power of the Congress to conduct investigations is inherent in the legislative process. That
power is broad. It encompasses inquiries concerning the administration of existing laws as well as
proposed or possibly needed statutes.”9
The Court further stressed that Congress’s power to
investigate is at its peak when focusing on alleged waste, fraud, abuse, or maladministration
within a government department. Specifically, the Court explained that the investigative power
“comprehends probes into departments of the federal government to expose corruption,
inefficiency, or waste.”10 The Court went on to note that the first Congresses held “inquiries
dealing with suspected corruption or mismanagement of government officials.”11 Given these
factors, the Court recognized “the power of the Congress to inquire into and publicize corruption,
maladministration, or inefficiencies in the agencies of Government.”12"

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42811.pdf

In other words, we do not live in the United States of the DoJ and the DoJ is not its own little rogue government within a government.

Bet you didn't know that Congress can even overturn a decision of the Supreme Court.

Louie27 Loc: Peoria, AZ

Current Practice
Hearings are most commonly held for three reasons: to consider pending legislation; to investigate issues that may require legislation in the future; and, to investigate and oversee federal programs. They reflect the most important issues of the day and what occupies congressional attention. This means that Congress holds hearings on a variety of issues, from steroid abuse in professional sports to the use of weather satellites. Hearings have also been used to further the rights of minority groups. Congressional investigations not only help legislators make better policy decisions, but they are central to the system of checks and balances. Investigatory hearings can uncover p**********l abuses of power and corruption, such as the Teapot Dome scandal in the 1920s or Watergate in the 1970s. But hearings have also been used for less noble purposes, such as the blacklisting of private citizens during the “un-American activities” hearings in the 1950s. While the power to investigate is broad, the Supreme Court has since ruled that Congress must confine itself to “legislative purposes” and avoid the strictly private affairs of individual citizens.
I believe this answers the question of the rights of a Congressional investigational committee.

Stevewhatchamacallit Loc: Tennessee

I agree Congress has constitutional duty to oversee the FBI and the justice dept because they're the ones who started the two. The two also agreed that Congress would have oversite over them. Problem is... A few are appointed to head those departments and then can hire those who agree with their political agendas. Once a new head is appointed the agendas may change but those who were hired are left behind
As I've stated elsewhere, Congress has the responsibility in over seeing them or we could end up right where we are today. The oversite committees has the same clearances as do those in those two departments and there's no reason not to be able to see all documents!
If they prevent the oversite committees ability to see documents, all kinds of tyranny can come about!

debeda

old marine Loc: America home of the brave

Clearly to any sane person but I don't think the swamp dwelling Demon-Rat uderstand.

They have been sniffing the swamp/sewer air way too long. 😆😎


God bless America and President Trump

Ricktloml

There is of course plenty of information to corroborate Congressional oversight, and the corruption currently happening. The problem with providing facts to l*****ts is, they won't believe them anyway. So if they can't, or more likely don't want to believe the obvious, I am not wasting my time explaining it to them

Ricktloml

Ricktloml

Thanks for taking the time. Most likely it won't matter. Facts usually don't

buffalo Loc: Texas

No, like cockroaches, when the light of facts exposes their ignorance, they attack you personally (my avatar offends rumi's delicate little sensibilities) and then run and hide.

debeda