r*********t
发帖数: 4911 | 1 至少在impeach inquiry中，如果在formal impeachment里，我相信总统阻止手下作证
是违法的。下面是咱们国会的正式文件中的话。
概括说就是：如果有总统授权，总统手下不搭理国会就屁事没有。如果没有总统授权，
那么总统手下不搭理国会就犯罪了。
https://crsreports.congress.gov › product › pdf
Although the courts have reaffirmed Congress’s constitutional authority to
issue and enforce subpoenas,efforts to punish an executive branch official
for non-compliance with a subpoena through criminal contempt will likely
prove unavailing in many, if not most circumstances. Where the President
directs or endorses the non-compliance of the official, such as where the
official refuses to disclose information pursuant to the President’s
decision that such information is protected under executive privilege, past
practice suggests that the DOJ will not pursue a prosecution for criminal
contempt.The U.S. Attorney would likely rely on prosecutorial discretion as
grounds for not forwarding the contempt citation to the grand jury pursuant
to 2 U.S.C. §194.440.however, where the conduct of the executive branch
official giving rise to the contempt citation was not endorsed by the
President, for example where an official disregards a congressional subpoena
to protect personal rather than institutional interests, the criminal
contempt provision may remain an effective avenue for punishing executive
officials. | a****1
发帖数: 634 | 2 瞎扯淡。国会行使调查权，川普阻挠。这调查权就跟调查 Kavanaugh 一样意思，它不
是弹劾权，不是任命大法官权，它是调查权。 | r*********t
发帖数: 4911 | 3 我引用的是国会文件的原文。你说瞎扯淡。那么国会原文和你之间必定有一个瞎扯淡。
国会原文里面就说的很清楚，总统授权手底下人抵制国会传唤，就是屁事没有。当然，
如果是formal impeachment，我也相信总统不能那么干。
【在 a****1 的大作中提到】
: 瞎扯淡。国会行使调查权，川普阻挠。这调查权就跟调查 Kavanaugh 一样意思，它不
: 是弹劾权，不是任命大法官权，它是调查权。
| G****1
发帖数: 8414 | 4 赫赫，诈骗犯认为国会文件瞎扯淡，最后扯了自己的蛋。
【在 r*********t 的大作中提到】
: 我引用的是国会文件的原文。你说瞎扯淡。那么国会原文和你之间必定有一个瞎扯淡。
: 国会原文里面就说的很清楚，总统授权手底下人抵制国会传唤，就是屁事没有。当然，
: 如果是formal impeachment，我也相信总统不能那么干。
|
|
