Something needs to be done about this aS well tho.
He has 1.5 feet out the door so far. Next 1/2 is about here.
I think it is completely embarassing how unintelligent GSCl 
wn actually is. I guess that is what happens when you 100% defend your ideology ALL of the time tho. You get lost somewhere.
Asshole follow the conversation. Bolton refused to show and they didnāt even issue the subpoena.
Thatās because heās an establishment clown with connections in DC.
Already gave an example. John Bolton.
Publicly defied Congress and basically gave them a middle finger. They didnāt even issue a subpoena. They just cowered. Pay attention.
Thatās your answer? A whataboutism?
Iāll repeat for the umpteenth time:
Why grant congress the power to subpoena if no one can prosecute if you if ignore them?
And I donāt care about why they may have NOT issued for Bolton. It doesnāt matter.
My entire point is precedent you dummy. It isnāt whataboutism. Itās direct evidence
.
Iām fine with Congress using their power. THEY have chosen to mute it. Not me.
If youāre not following the gist here, they open and close the aperture according to how much they want a person politically. As a self professed liberal, that should anger you.
But alas, youāre no such thing.
What did I side step? Please do tell.
NM you have answered it finally.
Thank you for admitting reality. Was that so hard?
Ok, so back to the actual topic of this thread, not this tangent sideshow of conspiracies you keep weaving. The DOJ following through (arrest, try, punish) on Bannon is a legit consequence of ignoring the congressional subpoena. Iām glad that you can finally admit this, even if you wonāt state it directly.
HINT If you want to have a conversation about John Bolton, you should start another thread and perhaps title it āBolton (lol).ā. Or āBolton and my conspiracies on why he was never subpoenaed.ā So on and so forth.
Outside of a constitutional amendment reversing this, it wonāt happen. Nevertheless I disagree with you on this point. Everyone has the right to not self-incriminate.
Again- not fine with them changing the way they apply the power dependent on the political loyalty of the person being subpoenad.
Djrion is no longer allowed to criticize judges who apply sentencing differently to defendants dependent on their race.
Itās within their legal power to do so statutorily.
So long as you admit that I admit your point.
And yet the burden of proof of this statement is on you. And you have shown us nothing.
Iāve already shown you the Bolton example.
The only difference between Bolton and Bannon is one turned against Trump publicly and the other continues to swear fealty.
There are several technicalities that need to be broken down before that assumption can be made. Right now, it is being used the same way contempt is, avoidance. We canāt be allowed free range to do whatever the fuck we want and then run to Congress and 5th it with no consequences.
It is worth exploration.
Criminal trial, OTOH, I agree
You claim, yet there isnāt proof of anything youāve said. You are ASSuming.
.
It is All YOUR conjecture.
Conspiracy
Mental disease.
You were when Trump did it.
I guess thatās the concern though - they are pleading the 5th in the event criminal charges may be pursued as a result of the inquiry.
Thatās fine. But any number of angles should be evaluated such as if you work in govt, you waive right to plead 5th during a congressional subpoena or you donāt getgovt job
We cannot have corrupt adminstrations, such as the trump admin, reek havoc on institutions and have no reprecuasions. We have to evaluate, then legislate it out of existence.
I donāt pretend to have an answer, just throwing some stuff out there for dialogue.
This should legit be one of the easiest bipartisan efforts weāve ever had. But we have conservatives worshipping Putin, idealizing Trump, and asserting religion back into policy-making at a terrorizing clip. I donāt know how we rebound either. Glad I have a ticket out of here if needed.