dc bar offers Moscow Mueller for indictiments

contempt of congress doesn't hold a lot of power as contempt of court.. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Why not? What 'power' does it actually have then, to find someone in contempt of congress?

Why not? What 'power' does it actually have then, to find someone in contempt of congress? Originally Posted by garhkal

problem is its the executive office (namely the president) that has to enforce it. If the president won't enforce it, there's not much value in having a contempt of congress on the presidents' officers.

it only works on people outside of the agencies like CEO's or lawyers, they'll do that.

Thank you Alan Doucheowitz!

problem is its the executive office (namely the president) that has to enforce it. If the president won't enforce it, there's not much value in having a contempt of congress on the presidents' officers.

it only works on people outside of the agencies like CEO's or lawyers, they'll do that. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

So 'contempt of congress' is meaningless.. In that case WHY KEEP the bloody law on the book?

So 'contempt of congress' is meaningless.. In that case WHY KEEP the bloody law on the book? Originally Posted by garhkal

the law has some value.

I think its useful to be used on people outside Washington D.C. who has to testify in front of congress but won't "cooperate" in sharing info or lie about certain facts.

bear in mind, the committee is not a court room. different standards may apply.