When they put out subpeonas and a Democrat doesn't show up, watch the Marshalls showup.

[Swede]

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=Xs0zok_0xTVVQ6QbIWKZwg

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. Separation of powers means that US Marshals don't enforce Congressional subpoenas

Now, if you ignore a subpoena from a Federal Judge or Grand Jury, you can bet you’ll get a visit from the US Marshals, but so far, nobody has done that in regard to a Federal subpoena regarding January 6 (and Grand Jury investigating January 6 has been calling witnesses since February)

[Swede]

2. Oh yeah, I forgot how Republicans follow the rules.

Sorry.

[Fiendish Thingy]

7. Are you suggesting a Republican controlled congress could order US Marshals to enforce anything?

Including congressional subpoenas?

Remember, US Marshals are under control of the executive branch.

[Swede]

9. Did you watch the video?

It's all spelled out.

[Fiendish Thingy]

10. I did, and it's not all spelled out

Steele makes an ignorant throwaway comment at the end of the video.

If a GOP congress was able to order the executive branch, with the complicity of the judicial branch (since Democrats would surely seek an injunction) to use US Marshals, outside of due process, to compel compliance with a congressional subpoena, then any separation of powers would completely cease to exist.

That’s not going to happen after the 2022 election. If it (Marshals enforcing congressional subpoenas) were to happen after 2024, if Trump/DeSantis were installed in the WH, it would be a BFD, and the markets would tank, and the streets would fill.

Yes, the stakes are high, and the threat to democracy is real, but hyperbole from the former chairman of the GOP should be taken with a grain of salt, if not ignored. When was the last time a Democrat defied a congressional subpoena anyway?

The issue of enforcing congressional subpoenas is a distraction from the real threats to democracy.

Democrats, if they had the political will, could use existing processes for Inherent Contempt to send the Sgt at Arms and deputies to compel testimony or detain defiant witnesses, but there would certainly be blowback from the conservative media.

[KPN]

3. Who are all the nobody's who haven't done that in regard to federal subpoena? Any big fish?

[Fiendish Thingy]

6. The last of any note was Susan MacDougal re: Whitewater IIRC

She spent quite a bit of time in jail; there’s a reason nearly everyone shows up, even if only to plead the fifth, rather than risk being jailed for contempt of court (as opposed to contempt of congress).

[walkingman]

4. IMO, the political process has become toxic.

Now with the nation politically divided - Congress’s ability to issue and enforce its own subpoenas, because it relies on other branches of government for enforcement, is almost toothless. Most of the time compliance is voluntary but when dealing with members of a political party it usually is ignored.

I would not be at all surprised if our next POTUS election become a real constitution crisis because of the concerted effort of the GOP to cause a large percentage of America to no longer trust our election process. Even as it stand today the majority of the American people are not represented in our government.

I think our Democracy is in real jeopardy. I feel for future generations...

"You don't know what you've got till it's gone"

[magicguido]

5. qPublicans don't play at subpoenas like dems do

[Fiendish Thingy]

8. MacDougal was jailed for contempt of COURT, not contempt of congress

This is not the same as Meadows, Bannon, et al defying congressional, as opposed to judicial/grand jury subpoenas.

Apples to oranges, separation of powers, etc.