Eegore wrote on 12/12/19 at 09:44:30:"The first part of your statement is true, not so sure about the second."
It depends on if we are asking if Obama ordered someone to not reply to a subpoena, or if the person chose not to, or refused to answer questions.
For instance when Lois Lerner made a statement but refused to answer questions. To me, that is contempt but not a violation of subpoena since Lerner did indeed appear. I consider it the same result with Ben Rhodes.
In the case of David Simas it was Neil Eggleston who sent forth the order to not testify. That could be considered Obama, but to me, it's not the same as Trump making the statement himself, however the end result is indeed the same.
Holder was found in criminal contempt contempt.
Just heard Alan Dershowitz explain this......
It was something like, on matters of privilege, its is for the court to decide, when its application is used, but called into question....
To allow the house to issue a contempt, or obstruction charge, would then in fact be granting the house, more power than it has and ignoring the separation of
powers......
In other words they would be guilty of what they charge the executive branch with.
You might have heard the excuse it would take to much time, to go that route, and he needs to be removed
BEFORE the election.....Nadler said as much yesterday, where he couldn't trust the people to vote properly......
WHOAHowever, that is where this argument resides,
NOT in the house, where it serves as judge, and jury........
Get a order from them, after arguments, and then enforce it, if granted in the house favor, or give it up.....