Bannon Indicted by Federal Grand Jury for Contempt of Congress

[daz28]

14 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

 

You are actually arguing the house committee is now doing criminal investigations? Is your IQ above room temperature? We literally have over a dozen law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction on Capitol Hill, how about let one of them do their job. And I can solve the future riots on Capitol Hill, when someone has a protest planned that close to the building about something going on in the building have more than 50 officers present, probably closer to 5000 since there are over 50k who can be brought in. 

Try reading, this is exactly what I said,  

 

"while the house committe is investigating to help understand what legislation may be needed to prevent another insurrection, aka their job."

 

How in God's creation did you get that I said they are doing a criminal investigation???  BTW, you're the one talking about some trial in the house and senate that happened 10 months ago.  That was so ridiculous, that I didn't even bother to ask you what the hell you were talking about.  

Edited November 13, 2021 by daz28

[BillStime]

21 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Let me restate in a different way- if he was blocking an ongoing investigation into a crime I would care but since the trial has already happened in the house and Senate I do not care. Once again since the trial happened 10 months ago I do not understand what they are doing, unless they feel the FBI is so corrupt they can't handle this.

 

You didn't mind the six different GQP Benghazi investigations did you?

 

[Backintheday544]

1 hour ago, unbillievable said:

 

 

The politicians have been ignoring subpoenas for decades. Both parties have done this. Surprised that this "Investigation" is the hill they want to die on.

 

Much like the impeachments last year, the Democrats have been breaking the "unwritten" rules. It's like they no longer care that the same thing will happen to them once the other party takes over. (not that its a bad thing.)

 

 

 

 

For decades? Proof?

[daz28]

3 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

Yea, easily. I’m sorry you lack the comprehension skills that come with more finite political conversation.

 

Ill put into the black and white you right wingers like.

 

You break the law, you face the consequences.

 

Stop. End. That’s it. 
 

These are people that know the law and are violating it.

It's mentally exhausting trying to explain to the common sense hypocrtites what their OWN common sense ideals that they've backed forever are.  Do they completely forget, or are they just messing with our heads?  Do the crime do the time, play stupid games win stupid prizes(lookin at you Kyle), just follow orders, etc

[Orlando Buffalo]

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Try reading, this is exactly what I said,  

 

"while the house committe is investigating to help understand what legislation may be needed to prevent another insurrection, aka their job."

 

How in God's creation did you get that I said they are doing a criminal investigation???  BTW, you're the one talking about some trial in the house and senate that happened 10 months ago.  That was so ridiculous, that I didn't even bother to ask you what the hell you were talking about.  

I see what you are saying and If i could ask one question- what legislation could be passed that would prevent further events like that be sides simply having more cops on site to stop it? 

[daz28]

6 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

For decades? Proof?

I think what he's trying to say is if you look at the wikipedia page that lists all instances of contempt since 1975, that you will see that up until recently most cases ended up with compliance.  This would lead any rational person to believe that people recently have been attempting to flaunt non-compliance, and it's about time we started  MAKING LAW AND ORDER GREAT AGAIN.  

5 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I see what you are saying and If i could ask one question- what legislation could be passed that would prevent further events like that be sides simply having more cops on site to stop it? 

That's like saying why bother looking into the causes of the Civil War, because all you can really do next time is have bigger armies.  Ridiculous argument.  Why bother studying anything to see if it can be handled better in the future???  I'll get back to you AFTER I find out all the facts, ok?

[Orlando Buffalo]

4 minutes ago, daz28 said:

.  

That's like saying why bother looking into the causes of the Civil War, because all you can really do next time is have bigger armies.  Ridiculous argument.  Why bother studying anything to see if it can be handled better in the future???  I'll get back to you AFTER I find out all the facts, ok?

It is not the same but says a lot that you compared January 6th to the civil war. But I appreciate you admitting you have no intelligent response on what is expected, which defines political stunts and witch hunts.

[BillStime]

5 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

For decades? Proof?

 

Good luck.. she's long gone.

 

4 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

It is not the same but says a lot that you compared January 6th to the civil war. But I appreciate you admitting you have no intelligent response on what is expected, which defines political stunts and witch hunts.

 

omg please stop lmao

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, daz28 said:

Try reading, this is exactly what I said,  

 

"while the house committe is investigating to help understand what legislation may be needed to prevent another insurrection, aka their job."

 

How in God's creation did you get that I said they are doing a criminal investigation???  BTW, you're the one talking about some trial in the house and senate that happened 10 months ago.  That was so ridiculous, that I didn't even bother to ask you what the hell you were talking about.  

Between you and BackIn arguing the same side of the coin on page 1 and 2, watching the light bulb go off that you’re on the same side on page 2, your soliloquy on political operatives politicking for…truth 😉, and your 10 month senate statute of limitation on what can be discussed, you’re a mess.  
 

Stick to the script.  

[daz28]

22 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Between you and BackIn arguing the same side of the coin on page 1 and 2, watching the light bulb go off that you’re on the same side on page 2, your soliloquy on political operatives politicking for…truth 😉, and your 10 month senate statute of limitation on what can be discussed, you’re a mess.  
 

Stick to the script.  

All I was doing was correcting him that it wasn't enumerated in the Constitution.  Then he made a point that it is still Constitutional, because the Supreme Court says it doesn't go against it.  As far as the truth goes, I said it's political theater, and a side effect of that is I get to hear the truth. I had no clue as to what Timmy was even talking about with the whole 10 month senate thing, and still don't.  No messes here, but there sure is in the Trump camp about who's gonna BEG for immunity first, so they can run to the House and testify before someone else scoops up that deal first.  There gonna slap them once to get them to talk, and then have to slap them 10 times to shut them back up.  All the questions about what they thought was supposedly election fraud is gonna be pure comedy.  Example:  " Well, I didn't really have any proof of election fraud, but I was just believeing what so and so was saying", until the whole circle jerk blames each other. Don't miss it!

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

19 minutes ago, daz28 said:

All I was doing was correcting him that it wasn't enumerated in the Constitution.  Then he made a point that it is still Constitutional, because the Supreme Court says it doesn't go against it.  As far as the truth goes, I said it's political theater, and a side effect of that is I get to hear the truth. I had no clue as to what Timmy was even talking about with the whole 10 month senate thing, and still don't.  No messes here, but there sure is in the Trump camp about who's gonna BEG for immunity first, so they can run to the House and testify before someone else scoops up that deal first.  There gonna slap them once to get them to talk, and then have to slap them 10 times to shut them back up.  All the questions about what they thought was supposedly election fraud is gonna be pure comedy.  Example:  " Well, I didn't really have any proof of election fraud, but I was just believeing what so and so was saying", until the whole circle jerk blames each other. Don't miss it!

You went from bad to worse, Daz.  I can read, I understood the posts (although you apparently struggled a bit), and you’ve spun quite a narrative in this latest post.  I’ll say this—Mr. and Mrs. Daz Senior’s lad has quite an imagination! 
 

I’ve come to believe that it’s best to let law enforcement figure out these details, at least to the extent senior law enforcement can be trusted.  These dog and pony tribunals are a farce.  
 

 

 

[daz28]

31 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

You went from bad to worse, Daz.  I can read, I understood the posts (although you apparently struggled a bit), and you’ve spun quite a narrative in this latest post.  I’ll say this—Mr. and Mrs. Daz Senior’s lad has quite an imagination! 
 

I’ve come to believe that it’s best to let law enforcement figure out these details, at least to the extent senior law enforcement can be trusted.  These dog and pony tribunals are a farce.  
 

 

 

If you can read and understand like you claim, then you'll know that I was very clear this is an investigation by the House for legislative reasons, and not a matter for "law enforcement".  The reason he will be begging for immunity won't be because he fears criminal prosecution for what they may find, but for the fact that he has ALREADY committed the crime of contempt of Congress.  It's up to the committee(and DOJ) if they want to drop it now if he agrees to give testimony.  He can't simply just show up now, and say, "sorry drop that charge i didn't mean it".  That's not how the law works.  Steve Bannon is simply being used as an example for others not to test the committee's patience.  The'yre playing 3D legal chess, and apparently you, and a lot of other people still don't see the moves.  The executive privilege thing is CERTAIN to fail(precedent), and now pretending they can avoid contempt is no longer an option.  I'm not naive.  I know the goal of the Democrats isn't to prosecute or legislate, or any of that nonsense.  It's to bring the facts to light, which will hurt the Reuplican's politically.  Even though the tribunal is indeed a farce, it carries political weight, and it was their own mistake to follow the orange doofus into the trap, even though it was largely unavoidable.  That's the Republican politician's achilles heel is that they're doomed if they stick with him, or if they go against him.  We'll see how much of this is my imagination.

 

Apparently, Meadows got his warning shortly after Bannon got his 2 count indictment.  Just read that.

Edited November 13, 2021 by daz28

[Doc Brown]

7 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

CNN and MSNBC commentators are already declaring that legal due process isn't required and Bannon will be sentenced tomorrow to 3,000 years in prison while encouraging the administration to apply water boarding and other torture methods to force a confession.  Up next CNN praises President Xi's proclamation at the party Congress making him President for life followed by an NBC news humanitarian story of the Taliban preparing Thanksgiving meals for the homeless and a concerning MSNBC story from Joy Reid about Satanic worshiping White Supremist Trump supporters seen sacrificing animals and drinking their blood on video taken during the 1/6 protests.  Meanwhile, Brandon has been sited wandering across the White House lawn after his standard 5 hour afternoon nap.   

That's ridiculous.  Tomorrow's a Saturday.  It would be funny if he was arrested on a Chinese businessman's 28 million dollar yacht again.

Edited November 13, 2021 by Doc Brown

[Backintheday544]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

That's ridiculous.  Tomorrow's a Saturday.  It would be funny if he was arrested on a Chinese businessman's 28 million dollar yacht again.

What do you think the odds are?

[Governor]

 

“It’s not going to happen like you think it’s going to happen. It’s going to be extraordinarily different, and all I can say is strap in. You have made this happen and tomorrow it's game day. All Hell is going to break loose tomorrow."

— Steve Bannon, January 5

 

Total loser.

[Orlando Buffalo]

42 minutes ago, Governor said:

 

“It’s not going to happen like you think it’s going to happen. It’s going to be extraordinarily different, and all I can say is strap in. You have made this happen and tomorrow it's game day. All Hell is going to break loose tomorrow."

— Steve Bannon, January 5

 

Total loser.

Why is the FBI not going after him? I am serious, if he knows something why is the FBI not checking him out? Congress virtually no power,FBI does.

[SoCal Deek]

6 hours ago, daz28 said:

If you can read and understand like you claim, then you'll know that I was very clear this is an investigation by the House for legislative reasons, and not a matter for "law enforcement".  The reason he will be begging for immunity won't be because he fears criminal prosecution for what they may find, but for the fact that he has ALREADY committed the crime of contempt of Congress.  It's up to the committee(and DOJ) if they want to drop it now if he agrees to give testimony.  He can't simply just show up now, and say, "sorry drop that charge i didn't mean it".  That's not how the law works.  Steve Bannon is simply being used as an example for others not to test the committee's patience.  The'yre playing 3D legal chess, and apparently you, and a lot of other people still don't see the moves.  The executive privilege thing is CERTAIN to fail(precedent), and now pretending they can avoid contempt is no longer an option.  I'm not naive.  I know the goal of the Democrats isn't to prosecute or legislate, or any of that nonsense.  It's to bring the facts to light, which will hurt the Reuplican's politically.  Even though the tribunal is indeed a farce, it carries political weight, and it was their own mistake to follow the orange doofus into the trap, even though it was largely unavoidable.  That's the Republican politician's achilles heel is that they're doomed if they stick with him, or if they go against him.  We'll see how much of this is my imagination.

 

Apparently, Meadows got his warning shortly after Bannon got his 2 count indictment.  Just read that.

Ha! “The goal of the Democrats is to bring the facts to light”…hilarious. No it’s not! You must be terribly naive. (By the way, it wouldn’t be the goal of the Republicans if the shoe was on the other foot. There’s one goal here: Do as much damage as possible to your past, present, and future political rival for the Presidency. Period! 

Edited November 13, 2021 by SoCal Deek

[Albwan]

haha libtard deflection is hysterical. 

[All_Pro_Bills]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Ha! “The goal of the Democrats is to bring the facts to light”…hilarious. No it’s not! You must be terribly naive. (By the way, it wouldn’t be the goal of the Republicans if the shoe was on the other foot. There’s one goal here: Do as much damage as possible to your past, present, and future political rival for the Presidency. Period! 

That's it.  And to stack the deck further that's why Nancy vetoed all Republican committee appointment names that would be unfriendly to a politically motivated course of business.  That's not how the house committee appointment process works.  The majority does not have veto power over minority appointments.  In my view, one reason why this committee is illegitimate and nothing more than a political show to placate the base hungry for a win.  In the end they'll prove nothing but provide lots of suspicions and conclusions that will allow the faithful to still believe the narrative.

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

That's it.  And to stack the deck further that's why Nancy vetoed all Republican committee appointment names that would be unfriendly to a politically motivated course of business.  That's not how the house committee appointment process works.  The majority does not have veto power over minority appointments.  In my view, one reason why this committee is illegitimate and nothing more than a political show to placate the base hungry for a win.  In the end they'll prove nothing but provide lots of suspicions and conclusions that will allow the faithful to still believe the narrative.

Well said. What I find interesting is that they impeached Trump for supposedly looking into the truly corrupt dealings of his rival on a phone call. But this ‘committee’ can look into the dirty dealings of their rivals to the point where they can indict citizens who don’t go along with it. Washington is a mess! What this committee SHOULD be looking into is how security failed at the Capitol that day. Unfortunately, they’re not the least bit interested…why?