Bannon (LOL)

You’re technically wrong on this. Trump didn’t “waive” the privilege. He didn’t “invoke” the privilege. There is a difference.

Judges make mistakes and violate their jurisdiction and mandate all the time. It’s why we have appellate courts and the SCOTUS. It’s why Congress can impeach them. A judge ruling a certain way isn’t proof your argument is right . At least not until other judges affirm it consistently.

Irrelevant to the argument. It would be like me telling these people abortion guys, all a woman has to do is raise the child. It’s not dealing with the point I’ve raised.

It’s possible but I still wouldn’t see how it would be relevant to our discussion.

Your personal opinion of him doesn’t erase his 50+ years of expert jurisprudence and being a recognized leader in his field. No one hated Dershowitz before Trump.

Huh? The judge arbitrarily made a decision that the jury wasn’t allowed to consider the argument. He took Bannon’s defense off the table.

And it’s not done. It will be shortly appealed and considered.

So………either way you’re admitting Bannon didn’t have it. Awesome.

Word.

Irrelevant? Had he shown up and plead the 5th, would he be where he is right now?

:man_facepalming:t2: I can’t with this guy. That’s the entire question.

If Trump actively waived it I would agree with you.

But Trump didn’t waive it. He simply didn’t invoke it. There’s a difference.

That’s the entire legal question Bannon wants the court to answer. And he was denied that right.

Omg 51. Try to listen.

I’m not saying that Bannon couldn’t invoke his 5th.

I’m not saying that he is smart or stupid for not doing so.

I’m not saying it wouldn’t have been efficacious for him. (Although it does have risks).

I’m saying it has nothing to do with the argument about his legal defense that we are discussing above.

His right to the fifth is has no bearing on that question.

Max sentencing incoming!

I did.

Juries don’t get to decide if executive privilege counts for a guy who wasn’t even in the administration at the time. You just don’t have the ability to be honest, do you? It’s almost amazing…it’s like kryptonite to you. How in the fuck does someone trust you enough to pay you? Jersey must be just as sleazy as everyone thinks

I rarely do. He’s just a talking head at this point.

The point is, lawyers and judges disagree all the time. That’s part of the system. In this case, the judge didn’t buy it.

Great. So your point is irrelevant either way.

It was a jury trial. And if the judge allowed the defense they would have been able to consider it. The judge unilaterally pulled that defense off the table. So not sure what you’re really saying here outside of getting a false preamble to get yet another shot of a moral attack on me .

Stop whining! Didn’t you play sports growing up, join a fraternity or something? Such a wuss…I’m buying you a new set of pearls this Christmas. I’m sure the ones you clutch all the time are torn up

Were you an only child?

Egg…were the little fat kid?

Boy, good thing you didn’t grow up in the South. You’d have been eaten alive, poor little thing. Bless your heart

Certainly not whining. It’s the old saying “when everything is an outrage nothing is an outrage”

That’s what you’re doing here. Everything I say is immoral? Come on man. Even you don’t believe you.

Nah, you’re honestly far less immoral than Bikki. You have actual ideals by which you’ve spent time developing and this and that. BUT, I feel you derive your concept of morality from your religion and its dogma. Historically, that’s a terrifying position to take and allows for widespread immorality in its positioning and usually results in a lot of death if common at the time and place. In practice, you appear to want a fascist, Christian nationalist nation. From that, quite a bit of what would be considered immoral in today’s sense. But, for you, slavery is fine…(as an example), because your religion doesn’t say shit about having slaves being bad. To the rest of us, that’s horrifying. To you, whatever the book says in relation to how you interpret it IS morality.
Beyond that, you’re dishonest by nature. Not sure if its how you were raised, your career, being in Jersey, whatever. But, you definitely are not honest in these debates and an overwhelming hypocrite. At times, it seems like Trump for you was like Tony Robbins is for losers who can’t keep a job for more than a week.

So, I definitely think you’re a shitbag. I don’t think you have integrity, honestly. I’m not being hyperbolic in that. I think it defines you. The lessons we teach our kids growing up you seem to somehow have diametrically opposed yourself to, real basic shit.
I think you’re Cliff Claven, with the internet, and without his honesty and goodness. Like, if Cliff Claven was raised by Carrie’s mother and a dad who ran a used car place in Jersey. That being said, I know lots of people who’ll make you look like a model of virtue. Shit, my oldest brother makes you look like Jesus.

I think Bikki is a bad soul. From the early moments on here it seems pretty apparent. Eloquent, funny at times…but, yeah, not a good person in any way.

I am by no means a model of virtue. Dallas has known me for 25 years and knows nearly all my secrets. Ask him. The thing that differentiates us is that I TRY to be good, TRY to be honest, TRY to question my snap judgements or instincts. I can admit when I’m wrong. I’m not always trying to engineer a way out of fault by utilizing semantics or obfuscating the argument. But, put our base instincts on the table between you and I in a grand judgement and you might win. Without my conscience telling me I’m wrong all the time, I’d be a war criminal. You definitely don’t want me to be President.

But, I also look around us and see we just might end up in a civil war. If that happens, your gun is aiming at me and mine at you. I don’t ever let that escape my mind when I’m writing you. One day, I might have to take your face as a souvenir, in which case I’ll make it into underwear.

Lolz

Stockpile that arsenal

Grown man typed that^

Better than nothing. Should be much more harsh tho

Persecution of political opponents.

Banana Republic tactics and the mutants cheer it on in the name of democracy.

Again, more LIES from GSCl :lying_face: wn.

If you ignore a subpoena from Congress, there is a price to pay.

Not an ounce of honesty in GSC. He’d applaud if William Barr had ignored a subpoena and got 4 months.

But it happened to his guy so it’s not ok.

Guy is an embarassment

Not true.

From Reuters 2019

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-congress-subpoena-explainer/explainer-how-powerful-are-congress-subpoenas-contempt-citations-idUSKCN1S81FP

You guys just need to stay away from the purely legal topics. You’re just bad at it.

So for the record- Congress basically has 3 options to enforce a subpoena.

  1. They can have their Sargent at arms detain the person until they testify. Highly unlikely but would be used for other members of congress- not the public or other agencies.

  2. They can refer criminal contempt charges but this has rarely been done because these matters are usually highly political so the DOJ would most likely refuse the request AS THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE HERE.

  3. The usual and PRUDENT/REASONABLE step is they can petition the judicial branch to review and take action.

Why they skipped this step is immediately apparent. They have mid terms to energize the public for. This is completely political in nature.