Trump Uses the Passing of General Colin Powell to Mock Him; Courts and Congressional Subpoenas

 On the day we learned Colin Powell died, Donald Trump issued the following statement:

Could there not be any better proof that Donald Trump lacks the character and integrity to be in any position of authority, much less President of the United States?  Powell volunteered for the army and had a military career 35 years long in which he rose to the rank of General and held several leadership positions.  As a young man, he had two tours of duty in Vietnam.  During the first he was wounded when he stepped on a punji stake, making it difficult to walk.  During the second, he survived a helicopter crash and single-handedly rescued three passengers from the burning wreckage.

Meanwhile, Donald "Bone Spurs" Trump was dodging the draft.  Later he said his Vietnam was trying to avoid STDs as a young man.

But let's put aside Trump's lack of character and cowardice.  Trump is also an extremely ignorant, poorly educated man.  He put that on display yesterday as well; 

Of course, Jefferson was in France during the Constitutional Convention and played no part in drafting the Constitution, much less being its "principal writer."  (James Madison is considered the "principal writer" of the Constitution.)  But why should we expect the President of the United States to have an understanding of how our Constitution was developed?  Of course, Trump displayed a complete disregard for our Constitution when he was President.

To clarify, the above statement came from Donald Trump and was posted on Twitter by his spokeswoman, Liz Harrington.  Being the great communication person she is, she wrote it as if the statement were being directed to Donald Trump rather than being from him.

For the record, I don't support the removal of the Jefferson statue. I think you have to judge people in the historical climate they lived, considering their entire historical achievements along with their flaws.  Washington also owned slaves as did many of the Founding Fathers.  Yet they left a legacy of government that is undeniable, and for that, they and their work should be celebrated.

****

I wrote this as a comment on the Bulwark's bulletin board yesterday.  

Speaking of Bannon, the fact he, Trump and their ilk are using the courts solely for the purpose of delaying the January 6th's Select Committee's investigation of the insurrection until it's too late really ticks me off. I've been an attorney for 34 years. In civil and criminal proceedings, if someone ignores a subpoena or makes an obviously bogus argument like executive privilege, the matter gets resolved in days, a week or two tops. There is no reason for drawn out legal proceedings to decide these rather simple issues. And when it comes to their judicial proceedings, courts generally are extremely intolerant of people using legal proceedings to "win" via delay. Why then do courts treat legislative action differently? 

Contrary to public perception, courts can act quickly when they want to. You have your regular docket, then you have emergency type matters that are expedited. When someone is making bogus legal arguments to effectuate delay, the courts should expedite the matter and give the recalcitrant litigant a boot to the backside. 

But there is no reason for Congress to continue running to courts to enforce their own subpoenas. Courts have ruled that Congress has inherent contempt powers, i.e. Congress can enforce its own subpoenas. I don't care that Congress hasn't done it in a 100 years, now is time to start doing it again. Put a few low level people in jail to send a message that these orders are going to be enforced. (I know Congress doesn't have jail cells any more, but jurisdictions needing jail cells rent them all the time. I'm sure DC has a few cells available.) Also, Congress needs to start hitting these people with fines which increase each day that there is non-compliance. Those fines can attach as a lien to property they own, even without a separate enforcement action. That will get their attention.

Since I wrote that yesterday morning,, the January 6th Select Committee unanimously approved a criminal referral for Steve Bannon for refusing to comply with its subpoena.  Thursday, the full House is expected to approve the referral and send it to the Justice Department for consideration.  My question is what is the backup plan if Attorney General Merrick Garland says "no" to prosecution?  Garland thus far has been inclined to give Trump and his associates a pass on pursuing possible criminal conduct.  I again would emphasize that Congress needs to start enforcing its own subpoenas and stop running to courts for assistance.  Even if Garland takes up the issue, Bannon will still be using the courts to run out the clock.

Again, what is the backup plan, Congress?