The Biden Department of Justice

The odds are excellent that you will leave this forum hating someone.
Post Reply
User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 4440
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by Kismet »

Isn't it odd the DOPUS' Hail Mary EP lawsuit yesterday doesn't include Bannon. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So I guess they agree that Bannon's claim is bogus. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

OS must be apopplectic. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25756
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

old salt wrote: Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:14 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:57 pm
old salt wrote: Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:38 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:29 pm
Let's be clear, the Jan 6 Committee is examining an actual Insurrection, an effort to prevent the lawful and peaceful transfer of the highest power in the country, and the questions of who fomented and perpetrated this act of sedition, and how they did so, are far more serious than why support wasn't sent more swiftly to reach those at Benghazi, or why they were vulnerable in the first place, tragic as that event was.

But Trumpists, and yeah that's you yet again Salty despite all your denials, are only interested in protecting Trump's skin and to be able to revel in the opportunity to ignore the law and to abuse power.
So get the DoJ to indict Bannon for conspiracy or sedition instead of trying him in a political show trial.
Ohh, if that's where the evidence leads, I'm 100% for it.

But we don't for a certainty know how complicit, if at all, Bannon was in the sedition, though we do know that sedition occurred.

Could be he knows a lot about who fomented this act and how, or who acted to prevent it, or he might know very little. Either and all would be illuminating and useful to the legislative purpose and legislative oversight. But either way, he needs to provide the documents subpoenaed and he needs to testify, under oath, under pain of perjury.

If he's concerned that his testimony might incriminate him, he has a Constitutional right to take the 5th. But he has to do so in person, under oath.

And no such protection extends to documents, etc.

That's the way our Constitutional system works Salty, like it or leave it.
So you're looking to Congress to investigate Bannon's role ? What are DHS, the FBI & DoJ doing ?

Doesn't Congress usually check with DoJ before issuing a subpoena to be sure they are not interfering with an ongoing investigation ?

Who has been indicted for sedition ? I must have missed that ?
Again, we know that the Insurrection happened, we know that a crowd was encouraged to try to stop the peaceful transfer of power, a legislative process.

That is also an act of sedition, however who exactly did what and when, knew what and when, is yet to be determined, in full (though there are a bunch of people who are cooperating, as required by law, in the legislative investigation and presumably in any other legal investigations).

What a prosecutor doesn't have yet (and this is needed prior to charging), and we the public don't know, is who all the players were in that encouragement and to what extent that 'encouragement' was actually 'incitement'. Were they simply telling the Big Lie, but had no expectation of actually stopping the lawful and peaceful transfer of power, or were they indeed intending for that to happen (a whole bunch of evidence has been gathered confirming that part, the attempt to use DOJ to intimidate or cajole States into what would have been illegal acts), and did they intend for violence to be part of the means to do so.

All of this is appropriate for Legislative review and oversight.

Go ahead and ask whatever you want about what others are doing, but nothing would over ride the legislative interest. No, a subpoena doesn't need DOJ approval as not a conflict, however a plea agreement would normally be reviewed with DOJ, though it doesn't need to be.

Pretty sure none of the Benghazi subpoenas would have been reviewed with the Holder DOJ, for instance. They didn't need to be.

Any level of cooperation between DOJ and Congress would be voluntary by both.

Which is why it's not a slam dunk that DOJ will prosecute criminally the referral on Bannon.

Again, whether Bannon is directly complicit, and if so to what extent, is not known with sufficient certainty, but even if he wasn't he may well have information about who else was or was not complicit. All of that is useful to flesh out what actually went down...and what did not.

He has zero valid basis for refusal. You know that. Yet you want to defend his refusal?

Got it, Trumpist.
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25756
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

old salt wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 2:56 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:57 pm
But we don't for a certainty know how complicit, if at all, Bannon was in the sedition, though we do know that sedition occurred.

Could be he knows a lot about who fomented this act and how, or who acted to prevent it, or he might know very little. Either and all would be illuminating and useful to the legislative purpose and legislative oversight. But either way, he needs to provide the documents subpoenaed and he needs to testify, under oath, under pain of perjury.

That's the way our Constitutional system works Salty, like it or leave it.
Here's the smoking gun. :lol:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-hou ... 021-10-18/
According to the report, Bannon in a podcast on Jan. 5 told his listeners, "All hell is going to break loose tomorrow... So many people said, 'Man, if I was in a revolution, I would be in Washington.' Well, this is your time in history."

The committee also said that Bannon has "had multiple roles" relevant to its investigation, including helping to construct and participate in the "stop the steal" public relations effort that helped motivate the Jan. 6 attack.


https://news.yahoo.com/law-expert-wonde ... 05276.html

Law Expert Wonders Why A Grand Jury Isn't Mulling Sedition Charges Against Steve Bannon

Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe is wondering why the Department of Justice isn’t convening a grand jury to consider sedition charges against Donald Trump ally and former White House strategist Steve Bannon.

Tribe was referring to Bannon’s boast the previous day on his “War Room” podcast that “we told” Trump before the Jan. 6 insurrection: “You need to kill this administration in the crib.”

Bannon also had a “war-room-type meeting” with Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s former personal attorney, and others in Washington on the eve of the insurrection, Washington Post journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa reported in their new book, “Peril.” They also reported on Bannon’s comment that night about killing the Biden presidency “in the crib.”

Bannon played a clip on his podcast of an MSNBC interview with Woodward and Costa discussing Bannon’s role, and he didn’t deny it.

Bannon repeated the Biden comment but attempted to reframe it as a metaphorical death of his administration through “its own incompetence and its illegitimacy” — implying that he wasn’t calling for the violence that erupted Jan. 6.

Tribe tweeted Wednesday after Bannon’s podcast that it was “mounting evidence of a criminal conspiracy to commit sedition against the US Government and to give aid and comfort to an insurrection.”

According to an account in “Peril,” it was Bannon who persuaded Trump, who’d been at Mar-a-Lago in Florida, to return to Washington to prepare for Jan. 6.

“You’ve got to return to Washington and make a dramatic return today,” Bannon said to Trump, according to the book. “You’ve got to call [Vice President Mike] Pence off the f***ing slopes and get him back here today.”

He added, according to “Peril”: “We’re going to bury Biden on January 6th, f***ing bury him.”
We need legislation or Congressional oversight to prevent this sort of seditious speech. Dust off the Alien & Sedition Acts.
Legislative oversight of the Executive branch, whether the White House, DOJ, DoD, DHS, or whatever agency includes the interactions between people in those groups, between each other, and with private citizens.

The legislative imperative is to prevent future attempt at Insurrection, and any attempt to overturn or interfere with lawful processes by the executive branch.

It's really, really obvious.

On Bannon specifically, we know that he had many direct communications with members of the Executive branch on this topic. Exactly who, when, and what was communicated is all the purview of the legislative investigatory process.

He has no valid basis for refusal to comply with the subpoena. Period.

But of course, as a Trumpist, who gives a sh-t about the law, right?
Farfromgeneva
Posts: 22325
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:53 am

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by Farfromgeneva »

MDlaxfan76 wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:37 am
old salt wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 2:56 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:57 pm
But we don't for a certainty know how complicit, if at all, Bannon was in the sedition, though we do know that sedition occurred.

Could be he knows a lot about who fomented this act and how, or who acted to prevent it, or he might know very little. Either and all would be illuminating and useful to the legislative purpose and legislative oversight. But either way, he needs to provide the documents subpoenaed and he needs to testify, under oath, under pain of perjury.

That's the way our Constitutional system works Salty, like it or leave it.
Here's the smoking gun. :lol:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-hou ... 021-10-18/
According to the report, Bannon in a podcast on Jan. 5 told his listeners, "All hell is going to break loose tomorrow... So many people said, 'Man, if I was in a revolution, I would be in Washington.' Well, this is your time in history."

The committee also said that Bannon has "had multiple roles" relevant to its investigation, including helping to construct and participate in the "stop the steal" public relations effort that helped motivate the Jan. 6 attack.


https://news.yahoo.com/law-expert-wonde ... 05276.html

Law Expert Wonders Why A Grand Jury Isn't Mulling Sedition Charges Against Steve Bannon

Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe is wondering why the Department of Justice isn’t convening a grand jury to consider sedition charges against Donald Trump ally and former White House strategist Steve Bannon.

Tribe was referring to Bannon’s boast the previous day on his “War Room” podcast that “we told” Trump before the Jan. 6 insurrection: “You need to kill this administration in the crib.”

Bannon also had a “war-room-type meeting” with Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s former personal attorney, and others in Washington on the eve of the insurrection, Washington Post journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa reported in their new book, “Peril.” They also reported on Bannon’s comment that night about killing the Biden presidency “in the crib.”

Bannon played a clip on his podcast of an MSNBC interview with Woodward and Costa discussing Bannon’s role, and he didn’t deny it.

Bannon repeated the Biden comment but attempted to reframe it as a metaphorical death of his administration through “its own incompetence and its illegitimacy” — implying that he wasn’t calling for the violence that erupted Jan. 6.

Tribe tweeted Wednesday after Bannon’s podcast that it was “mounting evidence of a criminal conspiracy to commit sedition against the US Government and to give aid and comfort to an insurrection.”

According to an account in “Peril,” it was Bannon who persuaded Trump, who’d been at Mar-a-Lago in Florida, to return to Washington to prepare for Jan. 6.

“You’ve got to return to Washington and make a dramatic return today,” Bannon said to Trump, according to the book. “You’ve got to call [Vice President Mike] Pence off the f***ing slopes and get him back here today.”

He added, according to “Peril”: “We’re going to bury Biden on January 6th, f***ing bury him.”
We need legislation or Congressional oversight to prevent this sort of seditious speech. Dust off the Alien & Sedition Acts.
Legislative oversight of the Executive branch, whether the White House, DOJ, DoD, DHS, or whatever agency includes the interactions between people in those groups, between each other, and with private citizens.

The legislative imperative is to prevent future attempt at Insurrection, and any attempt to overturn or interfere with lawful processes by the executive branch.

It's really, really obvious.

On Bannon specifically, we know that he had many direct communications with members of the Executive branch on this topic. Exactly who, when, and what was communicated is all the purview of the legislative investigatory process.

He has no valid basis for refusal to comply with the subpoena. Period.

But of course, as a Trumpist, who gives a sh-t about the law, right?
Obviously patriots

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhcreVY_qLI
Same sword they knight you they gon' good night you with
Thats' only half if they like you
That ain't even the half what they might do
Don't believe me, ask Michael
See Martin, Malcolm
See Jesus, Judas; Caesar, Brutus
See success is like suicide
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17510
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by old salt »

Kismet wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:22 am Isn't it odd the DOPUS' Hail Mary EP lawsuit yesterday doesn't include Bannon. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So I guess they agree that Bannon's claim is bogus. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

OS must be apopplectic. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
Not at all. No surprise. I did not expect exec priv to apply since Bannon was long gone from gov service at the time in question.

My issue is more basic. Whether Congress has adequate grounds to drag him in & compel him to divulge his private conversations as a private citizen.

Congress is not a law enforcement agency. The oversight excuse is a dodge. This is an abuse of Congressional oversight to punish a political enemy & suppress his political free speech when they can't get him on a criminal violation.

Are you sure you want to go down this path. You'll have to burn your ACLU card.
User avatar
dislaxxic
Posts: 4509
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 11:00 am
Location: Moving to Montana Soon...

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by dislaxxic »

They got Capone with a tax charge...for all the chit HE did.

Trump is a master at lying and at obfuscating...hiding his wrongdoing, his crimes, his immorality (etc!)

Bannon seems to have been involved in a "public/private partnership" (if you will) of potential criminal activity. Not sure of the law specifically, but i would be doubtful that you can only be charged for sedition if you are IN government.

An "abuse of congressional oversight" is a sorry, vapid excuse, IMO. One that the perps will, undoubtedly, also make. It should not, and likely WILL not, deter AG Garland of throwing the book at these clowns. Good on him. Uphold the "no one is above the law" standard for us ALL.

..
"The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog." - Calvin, to Hobbes
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14443
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by youthathletics »

Crazy how the orange man has likely been the most investigated person in US history, has had more so-called journalist kicking over every rock looking for rattle snakes.....and he is a free man, not convicted of any crime.

Look, i'd like nothing more than to see him go away forever, but its crazy how you all run around like keystone cops convicting the guy when our top law enforcement agencies cant get anything to stick.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
Farfromgeneva
Posts: 22325
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:53 am

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by Farfromgeneva »

youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:03 pm Crazy how the orange man has likely been the most investigated person in US history, has had more so-called journalist kicking over every rock looking for rattle snakes.....and he is a free man, not convicted of any crime.

Look, i'd like nothing more than to see him go away forever, but its crazy how you all run around like keystone cops convicting the guy when our top law enforcement agencies cant get anything to stick.
Maybe the law enforcement agencies aren’t s**t either.

Let me ask you an honest question: do you think he’s honorable and/or violated any laws of which he should and is deserving to be convicted of? Don’t need the “well there isn’t evidence that’s incontrovertible” or some rule based arbitrage. In the spirit of what a criminal is, someone who violates society in a manner that’s taking from others, do you think he’s a criminal? And do you think he’s a decent person? Does he represent the ideals and values you have?

I think we agree on a number of things from what I can tell but note you spend a lot of time trying to defend his existence in all of our lives, maybe just to f**k with the leftward ones, 2-3 particularly bellicose and annoying ones in particular. But what do you really think? Cards in the table, open the kimono, pick your metaphor.
Same sword they knight you they gon' good night you with
Thats' only half if they like you
That ain't even the half what they might do
Don't believe me, ask Michael
See Martin, Malcolm
See Jesus, Judas; Caesar, Brutus
See success is like suicide
User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 4440
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by Kismet »

old salt wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 5:10 pm
Kismet wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:22 am Isn't it odd the DOPUS' Hail Mary EP lawsuit yesterday doesn't include Bannon. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So I guess they agree that Bannon's claim is bogus. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

OS must be apopplectic. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
Not at all. No surprise. I did not expect exec priv to apply since Bannon was long gone from gov service at the time in question.

My issue is more basic. Whether Congress has adequate grounds to drag him in & compel him to divulge his private conversations as a private citizen.

Congress is not a law enforcement agency. The oversight excuse is a dodge. This is an abuse of Congressional oversight to punish a political enemy & suppress his political free speech when they can't get him on a criminal violation.

Are you sure you want to go down this path. You'll have to burn your ACLU card.
Don't need to be with the ACLU to understand that in this country, a citizen served with a lawful subpoena needs to show up and comply with document requests as specified. Congress has the power to issue lawful subpoenas as enumerated by the Judicial Branch.

It is not a First Amendment issue as the subject has the right to take the 5th when answering any questions with regard to those conversations. Hence why all those alleged organized crime figures I referenced showed up and took the 5th.
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14443
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by youthathletics »

Farfromgeneva wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:41 pm
youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:03 pm Crazy how the orange man has likely been the most investigated person in US history, has had more so-called journalist kicking over every rock looking for rattle snakes.....and he is a free man, not convicted of any crime.

Look, i'd like nothing more than to see him go away forever, but its crazy how you all run around like keystone cops convicting the guy when our top law enforcement agencies cant get anything to stick.
Maybe the law enforcement agencies aren’t s**t either.

Let me ask you an honest question: do you think he’s honorable and/or violated any laws of which he should and is deserving to be convicted of? Don’t need the “well there isn’t evidence that’s incontrovertible” or some rule based arbitrage. In the spirit of what a criminal is, someone who violates society in a manner that’s taking from others, do you think he’s a criminal? And do you think he’s a decent person? Does he represent the ideals and values you have?

I think we agree on a number of things from what I can tell but note you spend a lot of time trying to defend his existence in all of our lives, maybe just to f**k with the leftward ones, 2-3 particularly bellicose and annoying ones in particular. But what do you really think? Cards in the table, open the kimono, pick your metaphor.
No, I am not a trumpist, as some like to parrot the term at all costs. And no, I do not like the man that we see in public, at all, I do not approve of how he conducted himself while in office....but I certainly understand why he attracted so many. I have no clue if he's done anything to be convicted of, not in my realm of purview, which is why I made my original statement in this thread, and if he has, fry him. But sure, I can certainly there is plenty of smoke.

My perceived defense of him, is that I was pro new-blood in politics, someone that did something productive in the private sector, and not an entrenched career politician, understands laborers and the importance of skilled labor, our military, and first responders. Much of my defense during his term in office, was his eagerness to bring things back to the states. For what its worth, I've seen unions be nothing more than a cash cow for the democratic candidates, promising the world only to scratch the back of the top leaders of those unions after they siphoned cash from their brethren...more and more are flipping red.

And his latest note on Colin Powell, infuriates me.

Anecdote: Our company was and still is a crucial part of Trump Hotel in DC, I've sat at the table with his team weekly, negotiating CO's, etc.....we were paid on time and in full at every turn. Although, I am close friends with the electrical foreman from that project and they had to settle out of court. But I can understand some of the reasons why (vague jargon in contract and verbal promises). That Old Post office was an effed up project after dozens of renovations over the decades. The BIM that was used by the architects and engineers, only made matters worse. Trump walked the project in the evenings on occasion, and stopped to shake hands with the contractors, asking them how is life, their family, etc. I share this to say, he did not short us on a high 6 figure contract and took the time to engage with the peons, when others on this team avoided them like the plague.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
Farfromgeneva
Posts: 22325
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:53 am

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by Farfromgeneva »

youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 7:54 pm
Farfromgeneva wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:41 pm
youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:03 pm Crazy how the orange man has likely been the most investigated person in US history, has had more so-called journalist kicking over every rock looking for rattle snakes.....and he is a free man, not convicted of any crime.

Look, i'd like nothing more than to see him go away forever, but its crazy how you all run around like keystone cops convicting the guy when our top law enforcement agencies cant get anything to stick.
Maybe the law enforcement agencies aren’t s**t either.

Let me ask you an honest question: do you think he’s honorable and/or violated any laws of which he should and is deserving to be convicted of? Don’t need the “well there isn’t evidence that’s incontrovertible” or some rule based arbitrage. In the spirit of what a criminal is, someone who violates society in a manner that’s taking from others, do you think he’s a criminal? And do you think he’s a decent person? Does he represent the ideals and values you have?

I think we agree on a number of things from what I can tell but note you spend a lot of time trying to defend his existence in all of our lives, maybe just to f**k with the leftward ones, 2-3 particularly bellicose and annoying ones in particular. But what do you really think? Cards in the table, open the kimono, pick your metaphor.
No, I am not a trumpist, as some like to parrot the term at all costs. And no, I do not like the man that we see in public, at all, I do not approve of how he conducted himself while in office....but I certainly understand why he attracted so many. I have no clue if he's done anything to be convicted of, not in my realm of purview, which is why I made my original statement in this thread, and if he has, fry him. But sure, I can certainly there is plenty of smoke.

My perceived defense of him, is that I was pro new-blood in politics, someone that did something productive in the private sector, and not an entrenched career politician, understands laborers and the importance of skilled labor, our military, and first responders. Much of my defense during his term in office, was his eagerness to bring things back to the states. For what its worth, I've seen unions be nothing more than a cash cow for the democratic candidates, promising the world only to scratch the back of the top leaders of those unions after they siphoned cash from their brethren...more and more are flipping red.

And his latest note on Colin Powell, infuriates me.

Anecdote: Our company was and still is a crucial part of Trump Hotel in DC, I've sat at the table with his team weekly, negotiating CO's, etc.....we were paid on time and in full at every turn. Although, I am close friends with the electrical foreman from that project and they had to settle out of court. But I can understand some of the reasons why (vague jargon in contract and verbal promises). That Old Post office was an effed up project after dozens of renovations over the decades. The BIM that was used by the architects and engineers, only made matters worse. Trump walked the project in the evenings on occasion, and stopped to shake hands with the contractors, asking them how is life, their family, etc. I share this to say, he did not short us on a high 6 figure contract and took the time to engage with the peons, when others on this team avoided them like the plague.
Thanks for the straight reply. All I was looking for.

You must know some of the developers I dealt with when I was in DC like Douglas Jemal, Charles Smith (Vornado now) & JBG, amongst others. I was on the finance side sounds like you are either a GC or Sub. Maybe you should chat with my father in law sometime, do some business together. Despite whatever I’ve shared about the wife he’s a great dude. Moved around a few times as a kid but finished up at John Carroll and lived in Bel Air in HS. Only came down to Atlanta because he couldn’t afford RPI, wanted to play hockey there and took a shot at baseball having a tryout w the Orioles but went to Ga Tech because it was cheaper, his dad was a mechanical engineer but convinced him to do electrical because “he’d always have work doing that”. Been with the same company he owns 6-7% of since graduating in 1982 (my sister in only about 6-7yrs younger than he is, generational gap)
Same sword they knight you they gon' good night you with
Thats' only half if they like you
That ain't even the half what they might do
Don't believe me, ask Michael
See Martin, Malcolm
See Jesus, Judas; Caesar, Brutus
See success is like suicide
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25756
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

old salt wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 5:10 pm
Kismet wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:22 am Isn't it odd the DOPUS' Hail Mary EP lawsuit yesterday doesn't include Bannon. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So I guess they agree that Bannon's claim is bogus. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

OS must be apopplectic. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
Not at all. No surprise. I did not expect exec priv to apply since Bannon was long gone from gov service at the time in question.

My issue is more basic. Whether Congress has adequate grounds to drag him in & compel him to divulge his private conversations as a private citizen.

Congress is not a law enforcement agency. The oversight excuse is a dodge. This is an abuse of Congressional oversight to punish a political enemy & suppress his political free speech when they can't get him on a criminal violation.

Are you sure you want to go down this path. You'll have to burn your ACLU card.
Absolutely they have 'adequate grounds' to investigate the Insurrection, who encouraged it and how...and he has zero grounds to refuse a subpoena. It's quite ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

If he doesn't want to testify, he can take the 5th. That's up to him.
Or he can respond to the questions under oath and under penalty of perjury...so, tell the truth, or take the 5th.
Again, up to him.

Private citizens are often subpoenaed by Congress, though most are simply invited to testify and do so willingly, even if reluctantly for many. Subpoenas only happen when people try to avoid cooperation.

And almost never do citizens or government officials refuse to comply with a subpoena.

That's the law...why are you so eager for people to defy or break the law?

I don't know where or why you think there's any "suppression of speech" happening in this, quite the contrary, what is sought are the communications he already chosen to have, and examination of what others told him and what he told others, and why. It's revealing 'speech' that's already occurred, not suppression of a darn thing...unless you mean that people would be forewarned that they shouldn't incite an Insurrection or for that matter any sort of violence against the United States and its authorities. Yup, be forewarned.

Listen, this is a guy who only got off from a criminal fraud, of all things defrauding small dollar Trump supporters of millions of dollars, because Trump pardoned him for that crime at the very last minute as he left office...and this is the guy you want to protect from answering questions under oath???
Last edited by MDlaxfan76 on Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25756
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

Farfromgeneva wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:05 pm
youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 7:54 pm
Farfromgeneva wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:41 pm
youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:03 pm Crazy how the orange man has likely been the most investigated person in US history, has had more so-called journalist kicking over every rock looking for rattle snakes.....and he is a free man, not convicted of any crime.

Look, i'd like nothing more than to see him go away forever, but its crazy how you all run around like keystone cops convicting the guy when our top law enforcement agencies cant get anything to stick.
Maybe the law enforcement agencies aren’t s**t either.

Let me ask you an honest question: do you think he’s honorable and/or violated any laws of which he should and is deserving to be convicted of? Don’t need the “well there isn’t evidence that’s incontrovertible” or some rule based arbitrage. In the spirit of what a criminal is, someone who violates society in a manner that’s taking from others, do you think he’s a criminal? And do you think he’s a decent person? Does he represent the ideals and values you have?

I think we agree on a number of things from what I can tell but note you spend a lot of time trying to defend his existence in all of our lives, maybe just to f**k with the leftward ones, 2-3 particularly bellicose and annoying ones in particular. But what do you really think? Cards in the table, open the kimono, pick your metaphor.
No, I am not a trumpist, as some like to parrot the term at all costs. And no, I do not like the man that we see in public, at all, I do not approve of how he conducted himself while in office....but I certainly understand why he attracted so many. I have no clue if he's done anything to be convicted of, not in my realm of purview, which is why I made my original statement in this thread, and if he has, fry him. But sure, I can certainly there is plenty of smoke.

My perceived defense of him, is that I was pro new-blood in politics, someone that did something productive in the private sector, and not an entrenched career politician, understands laborers and the importance of skilled labor, our military, and first responders. Much of my defense during his term in office, was his eagerness to bring things back to the states. For what its worth, I've seen unions be nothing more than a cash cow for the democratic candidates, promising the world only to scratch the back of the top leaders of those unions after they siphoned cash from their brethren...more and more are flipping red.

And his latest note on Colin Powell, infuriates me.

Anecdote: Our company was and still is a crucial part of Trump Hotel in DC, I've sat at the table with his team weekly, negotiating CO's, etc.....we were paid on time and in full at every turn. Although, I am close friends with the electrical foreman from that project and they had to settle out of court. But I can understand some of the reasons why (vague jargon in contract and verbal promises). That Old Post office was an effed up project after dozens of renovations over the decades. The BIM that was used by the architects and engineers, only made matters worse. Trump walked the project in the evenings on occasion, and stopped to shake hands with the contractors, asking them how is life, their family, etc. I share this to say, he did not short us on a high 6 figure contract and took the time to engage with the peons, when others on this team avoided them like the plague.
Thanks for the straight reply. All I was looking for.

You must know some of the developers I dealt with when I was in DC like Douglas Jemal, Charles Smith (Vornado now) & JBG, amongst others. I was on the finance side sounds like you are either a GC or Sub. Maybe you should chat with my father in law sometime, do some business together. Despite whatever I’ve shared about the wife he’s a great dude. Moved around a few times as a kid but finished up at John Carroll and lived in Bel Air in HS. Only came down to Atlanta because he couldn’t afford RPI, wanted to play hockey there and took a shot at baseball having a tryout w the Orioles but went to Ga Tech because it was cheaper, his dad was a mechanical engineer but convinced him to do electrical because “he’d always have work doing that”. Been with the same company he owns 6-7% of since graduating in 1982 (my sister in only about 6-7yrs younger than he is, generational gap)
That's indeed youth's straight perspective and it's consistent with what he's shared before on his personal, direct experience. Very fair.

I've shared another experience that told me quite the opposite about Trump's character.

So, I don't think youth's a Trumpist, he's not pretending on that. He's straight on all this, whether we agree at each turn or not.

Totally agree, youth, the Colin Powell statement is infuriating.
And, I'd suggest that it, like ohh so many others, is totally revealing of the man's character.
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17510
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by old salt »

dislaxxic wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 5:46 pm They got Capone with a tax charge...for all the chit HE did.

Trump is a master at lying and at obfuscating...hiding his wrongdoing, his crimes, his immorality (etc!)

Bannon seems to have been involved in a "public/private partnership" (if you will) of potential criminal activity. Not sure of the law specifically, but i would be doubtful that you can only be charged for sedition if you are IN government.

An "abuse of congressional oversight" is a sorry, vapid excuse, IMO. One that the perps will, undoubtedly, also make. It should not, and likely WILL not, deter AG Garland of throwing the book at these clowns. Good on him. Uphold the "no one is above the law" standard for us ALL.

..
Is Congress a law enforcement agency ? This is the largest Fed investigation in history. > 9 mos in, how many indictments for sedition ?
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17510
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by old salt »

MDlaxfan76 wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:37 am
On Bannon specifically, we know that he had many direct communications with members of the Executive branch on this topic. Exactly who, when, and what was communicated is all the purview of the legislative investigatory process.

He has no valid basis for refusal to comply with the subpoena. Period.
How do we know ? Woodward's book ? Ask the govt employees what they did on govt time or in their official capacities -- that's legit oversight.
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17510
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by old salt »

MDlaxfan76 wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:09 pm ..and this is the guy you want to protect from answering questions under oath???
I want to protect the next guy from being dragged before the Congressional tv cameras for a political show trial when law enforcement can't make a legal case against him. Congressional oversight. :lol:
seacoaster
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by seacoaster »

old salt wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:53 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:09 pm ..and this is the guy you want to protect from answering questions under oath???
I want to protect the next guy from being dragged before the Congressional tv cameras for a political show trial when law enforcement can't make a legal case against him. Congressional oversight. :lol:
Like Carlo Gambino? Frankie Five Angels? Jesus, you really have just lost your way.
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25756
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

old salt wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:42 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:37 am
On Bannon specifically, we know that he had many direct communications with members of the Executive branch on this topic. Exactly who, when, and what was communicated is all the purview of the legislative investigatory process.

He has no valid basis for refusal to comply with the subpoena. Period.
How do we know ? Woodward's book ? Ask the govt employees what they did on govt time or in their official capacities -- that's legit oversight.
Lots of reporting on this.
And no one's saying otherwise, including Bannon.

We also know what he said publicly.

What we don't know is who said what to whom, who knew what and when, etc. All of that is pertinent to the investigation.

And no, oversight and legislative purpose is not in any way limited to direct examination of government employees (nor only in their "official" capacities; also at issue is their interactions and communications with private citizens and entities, etc when such is potentially in breach of their duties as government employees, or for that matter involves any matter of legislative interest. And often that's best attained from the private parties.

Again, why do you defend violating the law?
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25756
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

old salt wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:53 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:09 pm ..and this is the guy you want to protect from answering questions under oath???
I want to protect the next guy from being dragged before the Congressional tv cameras for a political show trial when law enforcement can't make a legal case against him. Congressional oversight. :lol:
:lol: :roll:
a fan
Posts: 17723
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: The Biden Department of Justice

Post by a fan »

youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 7:54 pm My perceived defense of him, is that I was pro new-blood in politics, someone that did something productive in the private sector, and not an entrenched career politician, understands laborers and the importance of skilled labor, our military, and first responders. Much of my defense during his term in office, was his eagerness to bring things back to the states.
But we've been over this...... that's not what he did, YA. He didn't bring doodly back to the States, YA. He exploded Federal spending, and made his base in "taker States" MORE dependent on the Federal Government than ever.

And I keep asking you guys how you're going to "bring things back to the States", when more than half our States can't keep the lights on without MASSIVE Federal spending.

And you guys just move on in the conversation, and ignore the question.

You can't tell me. OS can't tell me. Kram can't tell me. Pete B sure as heck couldn't tell me. And yet you all believe this silliness that States can work without money from NYC, Chicago, Silicon Valley et. al.

When, for example, Trump handed Billions in cash for farmers for no reason whatsoever....none of you so much as took note. You just let it go.

Your entire party's fiscal theories are built on sand. I don't understand why you can't see that. These States can''t make it without Federal handouts. Period. Which is why, as I have told you guys for two R Presidents now, the R's keep spending, and keep increasing the size of the Federal government every chance they get.

And Trump was worse than Bush, for heaven's sake.....

youthathletics wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 7:54 pm And his latest note on Colin Powell, infuriates me.
I have to admit, when I saw that, I moved on because I thought it HAD to be fake news.

Nope. Good luck getting this out of your Republican tent. It's going to get worse.....I'd be happy to wager the over/under at 20 years of tinfoil hats running your party.

I'll take the over. ;)
Post Reply

Return to “POLITICS”