badbobby Loc: texas

A full House of Representatives v**e to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt of Congress is likely where the complaint begins and ends.

That's because what happens next is that the case will be turned over to the Department of Justice or the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C. It's unlikely they'll move forward with prosecuting their own boss.

Congress may instead opt to take Barr and the Trump administration to court and try to put Barr in jail until he turns over the unredacted Mueller report. It's a risky move for Congress. A ruling in their favor could strengthen their argument for gaining access to the documents they're requesting. But a ruling against them could hurt them not only in this case but in future related cases, and even set a precedent for future administrations.

It's been 92 years since they've done it, but the House could send the Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest the attorney general. That is even more unlikely.

And though it may not have much real impact, the act of holding a political official in contempt is not uncommon. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and Commerce Secretary Rogers C.B. Morton were charged in 1975. White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and White House counsel Harriet Miers were held in contempt of Congress under President George W. Bush. Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder became the first A.G. held in both civil and criminal contempt in 2012.

Kissinger's charge was dropped. Morton was cited by a subcommittee, but not the full committee — he gave up the documents the day of the full v**e. The House took Bolten to court and won, but a court of appeals stayed the decision. Miers was cited by the House, but Republicans stood by her. Holder continued on as Obama's A.G.

In all likelihood, this isn't going to produce the unredacted Mueller report, nor is it likely to weaken Barr's position.

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

The i***t from Georgia Johnson said this morning...what we have known for many months...He said "If we DONT have report,how can we IMPEACH President?"...This is what its all about!!!..I wish Rats would stop pretending that they want to uphold the law,when in reality its an IMPEACHMENT hearing....D********g!!

Noraa Loc: Kansas

I thought Barr said the House could see the report, on their own, but not one Democrat has asked to see it?

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Exactly...Its all downstairs with only 2% redacted...Grand Jury testimony has to be redacted Its a law...Democrats want AG Barr to brake the law,and he will NOT do it!!!

badbobby Loc: texas

and you folks wonder why I h**e politics

Noraa Loc: Kansas

bahmer

Amen and Amen

bahmer

Amen and Amen

archie bunker Loc: Texas

All they have to do is pass an amendment, and change the law. This is all a show to keep the sky screamers screaming. Pure, and simple.
They know that two percent doesn't hold the silver bullet that will take Trump down. They just need to keep the scy screaming mucous miners digging, so they will keep coming back to eat the fruits of their labor.

EmilyD

What's ironic is that the law Dems want Barr to break is the law the Dems themselves put in place when Ken Star released unredacted reports regarding Bill Clinton's investigation. They were outraged that the public got to see Clinton's dirty laundry, so they passed the law that says Grand Jury information cannot be released to the public....therefore, they want Barr to break their own law! Can't make this stuff up!

Having said that, though, I hope they keep on with their antics. It sure shows Americans what they are capable of doing, all because the don't like that they lost the e******n.

okie don

Political Grand Standing.
Total BS

promilitary

Nadless Nadler and his ilk need only go to Barnes and Noble Book Stores where the
report is there, just pick it up, may for it and read it.

Carol Kelly

But hopefully Democrats, not Socialist Democrats, will have their eyes opened by all this senseless postering.

Carol Kelly

Too simple!

Carol Kelly

Ditto