71
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] capital_sniff@lemmy.world 34 points 4 months ago

This is so confusing. I thought the DOJ due to the existence of a memo would not charge a sitting president with a crime, period. So why are these republicans wasting tax payer bucks on these investigations?

As far as releasing the tape, just do what they did with the Mueller report and lock it in a tiny room with severely restricted access. The republicans can have a cassette tape of the interview and a record player to listen, but they only get 3 minutes, and no phones or any other recording devices.

[-] toothpaste_sandwich@feddit.nl 14 points 4 months ago

Would not charge a Republican president, of course.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

This would be a possible prosecution of the attorney general, not the President.

[-] ganksy@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

Republicans: How can we waste taxpayer money with zero utility but in the most hypocritical, desperate way possible?

Enter headline here____________________

[-] twistypencil@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Ok? You ok, gop?

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 4 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans plan to move forward next week with holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for his refusal to turn over the unredacted audio of an interview that was conducted as part of the special counsel probe into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents.

The House Judiciary Committee is set to convene on May 16 to advance contempt charges against the Cabinet official, according to a person familiar with the matter who was granted anonymity to discuss plans not yet made public.

House Republicans last month threatened to hold Garland in contempt for refusing to fully comply with a congressional subpoena issued as part their probe into Special Counsel Robert Hur’s decision not to charge the president with any crimes.

Republicans — led by Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and James Comer of Kentucky — had ordered the department to turn over audio of Hur’s interviews with Biden by early April.

Assistant Attorney General Carlos Uriarte, the department’s head of congressional affairs, said in the letter to Jordan and Comer last month that the committees’ interest in these records may not be “in service of legitimate oversight or investigatory functions, but to serve political purposes that should have no role in the treatment of law enforcement files.”

But his defense did not satisfy Republicans, who insists that there is a politically motivated double standard at the Justice Department, which is prosecuting former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents after he left the White House.


The original article contains 621 words, the summary contains 254 words. Saved 59%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 12 points 4 months ago

The last paragraph in this summary is telling. There is no valid need for this information. They are attempting to make a statement. One for which the premise is yet to be proven.

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Contempt Of Congress is a Crime? Isn't the head of the Committee in Contempt Of Congress tho?

this post was submitted on 07 May 2024
71 points (93.8% liked)

politics

18933 readers
4240 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS