General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThings are so messed up...
It seems to be clear as day that the President had tear gas fired at peaceful protesters so he could have a photo op and Im not hearing impeachment? Shit is that crazy when it comes to standards.
Immediate congressional investigations. It should be a pretty quick investigation. Chain of command for the order to fire. Did the order originate from outside of the chain of command. Wouldnt planning this out be a pretty damn high crime?
onecaliberal
(32,848 posts)I dont hear any of our Dems saying anything. Loved the Biden speech this morning but I have no clue where Congress is theyre saying nothing.
SideStep
(93 posts)In my mind. The broader concept being protested is civil rights. Justice should be the motivator. This was a plan put together in a short period of time. It would be a very limited and focused investigation. Nothing confusing about it.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)They've been on television, on Twitter and issuing statements all day. Some of them are out in the streets with the protesters. For example, Elizabeth Warren joined the protesters at the White House just a few hours ago.
I don't understand how you could have missed all of this.
onecaliberal
(32,848 posts)Ive seen a clip of Pelosi and thats it. So no. I want to hear them.
In edit: I saw Warren at the protest. Thats not what Im talking about. And most people are not on twitter. I want to know what they plan to do about a president who gassed peaceful protestors for a photo op.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)They are speaking out but since none of them own any media outlets, they are dependent on the media to get their message out.
What would you like for them to do about it?
onecaliberal
(32,848 posts)crickets
(25,965 posts)condemning the use of tear gas and rubber bullets on peaceful protestors, but Mitch blocked it.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213530380
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)SideStep
(93 posts)You investigate it, flush out the facts, and move forward according to what the investigation reveals.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)What would "moving forward" look like. What outcome are you hoping to achieve?
SideStep
(93 posts)Its depends on what the facts flushed out tell you. What is the reason for not holding an immediate investigation? The apparent firing of tear gas on peaceful protesters In order to have a photo op seems to warrant just that, dont you think?
If this isnt a case for an immediate congressional investigation then I cant really see why there ever would be the case for one.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)House Judiciary Chairman Announces Actions to Hold AG Barr Accountable
Chairman Nadler proposes funding cuts, court filings, and Committee oversight hearings
Washington, June 2, 2020
Washington, D.C. Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) announced a series of actions to counter Attorney General William Barr's continued defiance of Congress and improper politicization of the Department of Justice (DOJ). The announcement comes following the Attorney Generals refusal to appear before the House Judiciary Committee, the second time he has failed to do so this Congress.
Chairman Nadler and the Judiciary Committee will take steps to protect the integrity of the Department of Justice, including the following:
This week, Chairman Nadler will introduce legislation to slash the budget of the Attorney General's personal office at DOJ by $50 million.
In the coming weeks, the Committee will hear testimony from DOJ whistleblowers and former Department officials. These individuals are prepared to describe specific incidents of misconduct, as well as the unprecedented politicization of the Department of Justice under President Trump and Attorney General Barr.
Chairman Nadler and other members of the Committee will file an amicus brief in the case of United States v. Michael Flynn in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Flynn case is one of many cases in which Attorney General Barr has improperly interfered for the benefit of President Trump and his political allies.
Chairman Nadler released the following statement on these actions to hold Attorney General Barr accountable:
Attorney General Barr has been given ample opportunity to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, and he has refused to appear once again. In fact, Mr. Barr has taken every opportunity to avoid oversight by the Committeehe also failed to appear before the Committee during his first tenure as Attorney General in the H.W. Bush Administration.
The Attorney Generals behavior is unacceptable. He continues to undermine his career staff in a flailing effort to erase the findings of the Mueller investigation. He refuses to answer questions about actions taken by the Department during the coronavirus epidemic. He told the Committee that he could not find the time to testify because of that epidemicbut took the time to tour the peaceful protests at Lafayette Park just minutes before riot police fired tear gas into the crowd. Mr. Barr has thoroughly corrupted the integrity of the criminal justice system, he has shown contempt for Congress, and the Committee has an obligation to hold him to account.
I am not going to spend months litigating a subpoena with an Attorney General who has already spent years resisting the courts and legitimate congressional oversightbut neither will we stand by and allow Mr. Barr to continue to corrupt the Department. We do not take these actions lightly or with any sense of joy. We have both a duty and a moral obligation to protect the rule of law in our country, and we intend to do just that.
https://judiciary.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=2979
I first heard it about it on cable news this morning and then went to the House Judiciary Committee website for more information.
Given how interested you are in all of this, you may want to pay closer attention before criticizing the Democrats for supposedly not doing what they're already doing.
stillcool
(32,626 posts)also was the last to use the Insurrection Act in 1992, putting U.S. military on U.S. soil during the Rodney King riots.