I've seen it mentioned that Sensenbrenner broke the law...

[Pacifist Patriot]

not just House rules. Can someone please explain to me why his actions today were illegal and not just poor form?

Thanks!!!

[LiberalFighter]

1. Be more specific

[Pacifist Patriot]

2. I can't. That's what is driving me crazy.

In quite a few places several posters have indicated that Sensenbrenner's shut down of the House Judiciary hearing on the PA was illegal. I'd like to know what law he broke besides House procedural rules.

[LiberalFighter]

4. OK...

Posters do need to provide the basis for their claim. Unfortunately, many don't.

Most likely if it involved just the procedure in conducting the meeting then it would only be a violatino of their House Rules and nothing more.

Now if it involved information that involved National secrets, etc then it would involve federal law.

[Pacifist Patriot]

7. My apologies. I made an assumption since the topic was

all the rage at DU. I'm still not getting the answer even though I'm seeing newer posts saying that he broke the law. I'm getting the impression that he technically didn't, but what he did was certainly egregious.

[annabanana]

6. Randi made some mention

of the differences between meetings called by the majority, and those called by the minority..I'm not sure if these differences are a matter of rules or laws, though.

[reprehensor]

3. LAWBREAKER!

[undeterred]

5. I would bet that he broke the rules on conducting a meeting by

refusing to recognize people who wanted to speak. I don't know that this is breaking a law, however.

[tsuki]

8. What Tex did was illegal under the Rules. He illegally shut the

meeting down.

This was a special meeting. Democrats cannot call a judiciary meeting. Hence, the election fraud and media bias "forums" were not meetings. But, the Judiciary Committee called the Patriot Act hearings. Tex and his buddys took control of the "witness" list and only allowed cheerleaders to testify.

Because the meeting was called, because they were allowed no witnesses, the minority members invoked House Rule #11. Tex was already upset with the election fraud and media bias forums, but now they were threatening his sweep to absolute power by questions and exposing the 16 provisions in the Patriot Act, including sneak and peek, eliminating Habeas Corpus, rendition, writing laws outside checks and balances, etc.

Because this meeting took place under House Rule #11, he could not unilaterally shut the meeting down. He either had to ask for unanimous consent or entertain a motion. He unilaterally shut the meeting down. Because he did not follow the rules, he illegally shut the meeting down.

Why? Watch. It was scripted. He's a lawyer. He did it to prove to the Democrats that there are no laws, no rules in the US that he has to follow. That he is above any rule of law.

Tex is a dangerous man.

[undeterred]

9. Why are you calling him "Tex"?

[tsuki]

15. Official bio - Sensenbrenner is "the heir to a paper fortune."

Reality - Grandpappy made the family money off vaginas. He invented the Kotex.

Tex kinda reminds me of who he really is.

[undeterred]

16. I never knew that!

Kotex = Overpriced paper that rips women off!

[tsuki]

17. That is why he is Tex, and he hates it. Good enough for me.

[MsTryska]

10. so are there any reprcussions for his actions on the books?

or was this jsut a show of megalomania?

[tsuki]

12. Megalomania. The Thugs have closed down the Ethics

Commission. That's why his trips are not being investigated.

[newscott]

14. I have only heard audio so far and it did seem scripted

from what I heard.

[lasttrip]

11. heres a related thread i was following

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3833811

[Spazito]

13. Here is an explanation of how the House rules were breached

1. The most egregious abuse was that the Chairman clearly violated the Rules of the House by adjourning the hearing based solely on his own authority. In order to end a hearing, the Chair must make a Unanimous Consent request or a motion to adjourn. Mr. Sensenbrenner did neither. Additionally, he adjourned the hearing based solely on his own authority while Mr. Nadler was attempting to raise a point of order (arguably to highlight this fact), which constitutes a clear abuse of House Rules. Subject to our discretion, this could constitute a privilege to be raised on the House floor. It can also be argued that this violation was particularly egregious given that this was the Minority’s day of hearings. (begins at 1:51:00 on video)


From Randi Rhodes' site:

http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/randirhodes/messageboards/index.php?act=ST&f=131&t=54355

Randi Rhodes has a special weekend edition on her site with lots on the Friday debacle:

http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/index_weekend.php

[Just Me]

18. He intentionally prevented testimony about abuses,...

,...of the unpatriotic act. I'd call that, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE,...wouldn't you?

[Spazito]

19. It was the most appalling behavior by a Chair I have ever

seen from the very beginning of the hearing to the breach of the rules at the end. I think he breached many house rules during that debacle, for example, he refused to recognize Sheila Jackson Lee's point of order at all whereas he should have recognized the member to state her point of order then ruled on it.

As to limiting the parameters of the testimony, the Chair can do that providing he has informed the members of those limitations before the hearing, there is a time frame for notification but I can't remember exactly what it is. It would be interesting to know what was sent to both minority and majority members from Sensenbrenner, prior to the hearing, that related to any limitations.