all 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 4 points 7 months ago

Let's hope the next time she's given a subpoena, it's for her own criminal trial.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Hold her in contempt, cuff her, and drag her, if necessary to the hearing. What is this bullshit about not responding to subpoenas? Anybody else, you get a subpoena, you better be there. Bondi is not above the law.

  • source
  • 28 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 135 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    According to the ranking Democrat on the committee, the subpoena was for Pam Bondi by name, not specifically for the Attorney General. The subpoena is completely valid and legal, and her testimony could be crucial to understand the issue at hand.

    She is still legally required to testify, and that's why they're still asking for the subpoena to be withdrawn, instead of simply saying it's invalid.

    Imagine if things worked this way in the real world. Your boss notices that all of the money is missing from the cash register, so they report you to the police, but when the police come to conduct an interview, you just say, "I quit that job, so you can't do anything to me."

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 7 months ago

    Well yeah, this was probably the primary reason for Trump to fire her when he did.

    The argument is bullshit because Bondi is subpoenaed in name, not by her office. It doesn't have to be a good argument, though, because the Supreme Court just ruled that contempt of Congress is meaningless.

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Like that time I was pulled over by a cop for speeding and I said "yeah, but the car is stopped now so you can't ticket me in my capacity as a the driver."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Oh yeah everyone knows if you get fired from your job you can’t be held responsible for anything you did at that job

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    Oh darn it, she's not in the position and the new guy is only acting AG, certainly not privvy to the decisions made by his predecessor. Darn, guess there's no possible way to enact oversight then. Shame.

    On wait, actually - huh! It seems there's enough time for BOTH of them to testify! Bring her in as a civilian to answer any questions Blanche says he doesn't know. Wow, who knew 16D chess was so easy.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago

    Indeed. And, if only they originally subpoenaed her as an individual and not as the AG, they could just bring her in anyway because Congress has and exercised that power because of the information she had, not because of her job title.

    Wait! Can this be right?! She was subpoenaed as an individual! Oh, that's a relief, now Congress can just move ahead with her testimony without even waiting for Blanche or having to re-subpoena her (phwew, so much time would have been wasted)! I bet everyone involved is relieved.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Wait... Was she fired for this stupid, pathetic move?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    While I agree I sort of wonder if Trump has a request that was a bit too far, like covering up more of Epstein issues than she's already done or saying even something more incriminating to other issues.

    The scandals of this administration are like a random stage dude pulling the kerchiefs out of his sleeve, they just keep coming so when one gets buried they find a replacement.

    And that's half the battle having us guess why something happened vs what happened but they play 3 card Monty with all the possabilities.

    Yes that sounds like a sound government.... Good job united States, you went from superpower to super fucking idiot in 3 terms.i figure Bush 2 only gets super idiot in case you're curious.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago

    How are there still people surprised by this stuff? Until there are real consequences they'll keep doing what they want.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago

    "Well yes, we've already had one constitutional crisis today, but what about second constitutional crisis?" -The DOJ, probably

    It sure would be nice if these assholes could take ONE FUCKING DAY off from actively shielding child rapists, subverting the rule of law, destroying faith in government, or undermining the people's interests. I know the firehose of bullshit is the whole point, but god damn.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    How long until she commits "suicide"?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    Not true. She's trying to weasel out, but she is bound by law to testify

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    Surprised - NOT.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago*

    Fantastic, hold her in contempt, arrest her and bring her in.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago

    DANG NAB IT! They got us Good! Oh well let's send out the Fundraising Texts!

    -Democrats!

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    That's, not how this works.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    It is a private citizen now in a dangerous and chaotic world it helped to create

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Straight to jail with her then?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    What happens is she gets called again as a private person? Will she get defenestrated?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment