The Department of Justice said Wednesday that Pam Bondi will not appear for her upcoming deposition in the House Oversight Committee’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation given that she is no longer serving as the US attorney general.
The department argued that Bondi was subpoenaed in her official role as attorney general and not in a personal capacity. As such, she won’t appear on Capitol Hill on April 14 to discuss her role overseeing the release of the Epstein Files, Assistant Attorney General Patrick D. Davis wrote in a letter to House Oversight Chairman James Comer.
76 Comments
ceenote@lemmy.world · 233 pts · 148d
That's just a blatant fucking lie. The subpoena was for Pam Bondi by name.
Fishnoodle@lemmy.world · 98 pts · 148d
Yeah, I was going to say. She's still the same person, and she can absolutely be subpeonad
M0oP0o@mander.xyz · 29 pts · 148d
That is some sovereign citizen logic from the department
Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 147d
They have the right profile.
ArtVandelay@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 146d
Clearly they're mistake was not issuing the subpoena in all caps, thus naming the person and not the corporation or something maybe I have it backwards I don't know those people are fucking insane
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 147d
orclev@lemmy.world · 161 pts · 148d
Man, someone called this play on the day they fired Bondi. It will be interesting to see if Congress lets them get away with it or if they charge her with contempt.
evenglow@lemmy.world · 61 pts · 148d
Great example why so many in Congress are getting out while they still can. Don't have answer questions under oath.
Prove_your_argument@piefed.social · 62 pts · 148d
That's why the clintons didn't have to answer questions under oath
oh wait... not that. I guess you only have to answer under oath if the party with the majority decides it.
wewbull@feddit.uk · 1 pts · 147d
Of course they'd still have answer questions under oath if subpoenaed. And you would only subpoena the person who held the office at the time of interest. No point in talking to their successor who would know nothing.
kylie_kraft@lemmy.world · 33 pts · 148d
I know I can't be the only one, but I did!
aramis87@fedia.io · 24 pts · 148d
Congress said up front that they still expected her to appear; let's see if they let them get away with it this time. [Spoiler alert: they will.]
Town@lemmy.zip · 19 pts · 148d
Fun fact, criminal contempt of Congress requires a full vote for civil contempt, and then refers them DOJ to decide if they want to prosecute, which they likely decline.
They also can sent their Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest and bring her to Congress, and held until she complies.
https://www.findlaw.com/litigation/legal-system/contempt-of-congress-process-and-penalties.html
SaraTonin@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 148d
Also be interesting if she does appear to see what she says. I bet it’ll be very different from last time…
monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 148d
“I don’t recall”
Maeve@kbin.earth · 1 pts · 148d
Come on! You already know.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 68 pts · 147d
Hahahah, then she can be arrested as a private citizen for contempt of Congress.
Holy fuck these people are stupid.
8oow3291d@feddit.dk · 13 pts · 147d
But isn't it the DoJ who would have to bring the indictment leading to the arrest?
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 18 pts · 147d
If she's still in DC, Congress actually controls the Capitol Police.
https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/IN/PDF/IN11570/IN11570.4.pdf
It would... maybe be unprecedented for them to say, arrest her if she ever is on/in any of the areas of the Capitol they have jurisdiction over... but you can make a case that that's within their lawful powers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Capitol_Police
Wiki says they technically have nationwide jurisdiction.
If Trump gets to turn ICE into the Gestapo, why not?
Congress could theoretically turn them into something like the US Marshalls.
8oow3291d@feddit.dk · 4 pts · 147d
And remind me, which party is currently in control of Congress, to order the Capitol Police to take this unprecedented action?
ripcord@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 147d
Wiki is not the short name of Wikipedia
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 147d
Yes it is
ripcord@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 147d
No
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 147d
Y
ripcord@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 146d
no it's A wiki
but is like reading someone call facebook just "book"
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 147d
Well it sure ain't pedia
ripcord@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 147d
Also true
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 147d
Congress can find someone in contempt, and they can direct US Marshalls to round up anyone who tries to run off.
8oow3291d@feddit.dk · 0 pts · 147d
Remind me which party controls Congress?
The United States Marshals Service is part of the executive branch, not controlled by Congress. Remind me which party controls the executive branch?
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 147d
The same party that controls the Congressional committee that issued the subpoena.
Yeah, I should have said the Sergeant-at-Arms. Point being, their enforcement power, while not highly resourced, is independent of the Executive branch.
The Republicans. You can look these things up, you know.
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 147d
What's your second guess?
zd9@lemmy.world · 54 pts · 148d
Burn down every single Republican (legally and politically) and start from scratch. The whole lot of them are evil and corrupt. A decent chunk of Democrats too.
I hope she faces justice in other ways from the actual QAnon crazies who really care about the fact that Trump raped children for decades.
Triumph@fedia.io · 8 pts · 148d
You forgot "physically".
zd9@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 148d
Don't write anything online you wouldn't want read back to you in a court of law. The reader can infer whatever they want from any comment I write.
Triumph@fedia.io · 1 pts · 147d
Pretty sure I'd never see a judge or jury.
BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world · 36 pts · 148d
Chairman needs to respond with, "The only excuses for absence we'll allow are death or incarceration."
grue@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 148d
Nah, even in that second case they should have her dragged out there in an orange jumpsuit.
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 147d
Even in that first case they should have her dragged out there in an orange jumpsuit.
Gates9@sh.itjust.works · 32 pts · 148d
Oh yeah everyone knows if you get fired from your job you can’t be held responsible for anything you did at that job
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de · 32 pts · 147d
If something real would actually start happening to the corrupt pieces of filth, the world would be much better off.
ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 147d
The actual letter sent yesterday by Ro Khanna and Nancy Mace to Chairman Comer explains that the DoJ refusal to have Bondi appear has no legal substance at all. It's an easy read, so I included the text along with the source. See it for yourself.
Note especially the assertion made in paragraph 5, "As you know, Congress's oversight authority does not end when an official leaves office. In fact, just last year the Committee issued subpoenas to six former Attorneys General, spanning multiple administrations of both political parties."
Source
hitmyspot@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 147d
Given this was all predictable, why wasn't that letter sent pre emptively. They should have asserted it before the claim was made. Now it seems reasonable to reschedule, so it's just a further delay.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 147d
Because the more back-and-fourths that happen, the more times these politicians get their name in a headline.
SarcasticMan@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 148d
Oh nice just in time too, since SCOTUS vacated Bannon's contempt of congress. Fucking shower of bastards
TwilitSky@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 148d
"The department argued that Bondi was subpoenaed in her official role as attorney general"
Who wrote this slop? Lindsey Halligan?
There's only one witness who can answer what happened and why under her tenure at DOJ.
chetradley@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 148d
TwilitSky@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 148d
The department is going to lose this argumnet.
chetradley@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 148d
I hope so at the least. Anyone trying to protect child rapists deserves to be locked up.
Jarix@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 148d
Uhhh in this economy?!
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 147d
Yeah, that's not how subpoenas work. Hold her in contempt.
Furbag@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 147d
How convenient for her 🙄
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 13 pts · 147d
Good thing it's not up to the DoJ.
UnspecificGravity@piefed.social · 15 pts · 148d
Good thing Congress has the authority to subpoena whoever they fuck they want.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 147d
Yeah I... this is amazing.
If she is a private citizen, well now she can be arrested for contempt of Congress.
tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 147d
If the country survives the fascists and then no one gets held to account, I hope at least Aaron Sorkin can make a show pretending there were consequences so we can all have copium again.
CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 148d
Bullshit.
Almacca@aussie.zone · 9 pts · 147d
I support raking her over the coals, but it's not as if she'll give any kind of sane testimony anyway. Does no-one remember the 'DOW IS AT 50,000' nonsense?
prenatal_confusion@feddit.org · 1 pts · 146d
The sad part is that she isn't insane (other than politically). Very smart, but playing the game and deflecting from the truth by playing the idiot. Dangerous. Very bigglY.
Almacca@aussie.zone · 1 pts · 146d
Oh I don't think she's insane - just a fucking arsehole. Doesn't mean she can't say some insane stuff. The short clips I saw of her berating the investigators made me unreasonably angry.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 146d
"You can't charge me with bank robbery! I stopped robbing banks a week or more ago!"
BillCheddar@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 146d
Every single goddamn Republican is a traitor.
SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 147d
Just fucking face it.
The only people involved with Epstein who are ever going to face justice, are any Democrats who might be in the files.
DillDough@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 147d
But that would include Trump so also not happening.
calcopiritus@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 146d
He has gotten away with everything. He will get away from diddling kids.
Idk what the fuzz is about, he should just tell everything and move on. He's not going to be held accountable.
FauxLiving@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 148d
Just to be clear, because I've seen it in a lot of these threads.
She can't hide behind the executive from contempt of congress. She may be able to dodge a criminal charge, but congress has the power of inherent contempt.
Under inherent contempt, either chamber can direct its Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest and detain a person without relying on the courts or executive branch. The individual is brought before the chamber for proceedings and can be held until they comply or the congressional session ends.
Congress can literally physically force a person to be held in custody until they comply. It hasn't been used since the 1930s but it is very much a thing that can be done.
Just like the Judicial branch doesn't require the executive branch in order to enforce a court order or contempt. It can deputize people to see that its will is done.
The executive doesn't have exclusive rights to use force to compel obedience, all branches can but have rarely needed to.
CainTheLongshot@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 148d
Right. So we just need Congress to do something it doesn't want to do.
The purpose of a system is what it does.
I swear, this midterm is going to end up with another 45-50% voter turn out and people will continue to complain that nothing changes or has gotten worse.
People: IF YOUR VOTE DIDN'T MATTER, THEY WOULDN'T BE SPENDING SO MUCH MONEY AND EFFORT TO KEEP YOU FROM VOTING!
I don't care if you live in a +60 (your political leaning) district. Vote in spite of that and make it +61.
Vote in every god damn election you fucking can, down to School District Board elections and even HOA's. My city councilman just lost reelection by 1 fucking vote to some douchbag who will probably get bought out by some data center asshole within a week, and even though turn out was historically high, it was still only 18-20%. And when i asked my very liberal neighbor if she and her husband voted, she said "No, we just didn't have time". 🤦🏻
At least in my area, you are allowed to take time away from work to vote, it doesn't matter what the election is for.
KNOW YOUR RIGHTS AND FUCKING USE THEM!
FauxLiving@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 147d
Exactly, if you want the world the way you want it, you have to stay engaged in the political process at every level.
It's not a spectator sport.
Vote.
Jaysyn@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 147d
Oh, it may not be this year, but she will testify.
8oow3291d@feddit.dk · 4 pts · 146d
Republicans are "governing" as if they know a Democrat will never be in power again, to hold them accountable.
tidderuuf@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 148d
Anyone want to take a bet that the SC will vote that subpoenas have no power when this inevitably reaches them?
They already ruled that being in contempt has no consequences.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 148d
Congress can and should have her ass dragged in there by force if she refuses to appear.
TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com · 3 pts · 148d
absolutely. Isn't Jim Jordan still not complying with a subpoena?
FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 147d
Convenient
Maeve@kbin.earth · 2 pts · 148d
Lock em up
desmosthenes@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 148d
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT