Appeals Court Refuses to Delay Steve Bannon's 4-Month Contempt Prison Sentence

blablarg18

raphjd

What is "privileged" other than some senile old man answering questions?

Eric Holder was told by a court that he did not enjoy exec privilege. Did you intentionally leave that out or didn't your media tell you about that?

Spintendo

@blablarg18 A bigger question is whether or not your blame might be misplaced.

In several of these instances, you blame the sitting president--"Obama didn't prosecute" or "Biden didn't prosecute". But those presidents and the others I mentioned were working off of a framework -- that of executive privilege-- that existed long before they came into power, one which has been confirmed by the Congress and Courts.

It's as if you're expecting a president to suddenly say "You know what? Even though I have this ability to protect my administration, one that other presidents have used--I'm going to go out of my way NOT to use it, and hopefully no one else in my party will think I'm crazy for not doing it." You actually believe that is possible, that a president would do that?

When you're driving down the street, and you have legal abilities provided to you by the law (an ability to say, turn right on red, or change lanes in an intersection, or other privileges like taking certain tax exemptions) you're going to ignore those long-standing privileges and go out of your way to go the harder route by not taking them?

Your expectation that Obama and Biden should not avail themselves of the same rights Reagan and Bush took advatage of seems, at best, naive.

blablarg18

@Spintendo said in Appeals Court Refuses to Delay Steve Bannon's 4-Month Contempt Prison Sentence:

you blame the sitting president--"Obama didn't prosecute" or "Biden didn't prosecute".

It's an expression. The REGIME / UNIPARTY didn't prosecute.

Really - would you expect Obama to go after Lois Lerner ever? even if she stabbed children in the street? I wouldn't.

So again we agree. But maybe for different reasons.

Lerner misused IRS & violated law - and if I remember correctly, likely under White House direction as she made many many visits to White House - so badly, that, in fairness, or if Obama were honorable....

.... yes he would indeed go "I'm going to go out of my way NOT to [sheild Lois Lerner]"

Yes.

It's his lack of honor or Uniparty loyalty (same thing), that made him & cronies want to shield her.

BUT - I agree it's not just Obama, or not especially him - it's a REGIME / UNIPARTY.

Your expectation that Obama & Bush & Lerner & McCain & Holder & others aren't all in it together seems, at best, naive.

Spintendo

@raphjd said in Appeals Court Refuses to Delay Steve Bannon's 4-Month Contempt Prison Sentence:

@Spintendo
Eric Holder was told by a court that he did not enjoy exec privilege. Did you intentionally leave that out or didn't your media tell you about that?

The committee did file a lawsuit, authorized by House resolution, seeking judicial enforcement of the subpoena. The D.C. District Court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the dispute in 2013 and denied the committee’s motion for summary judgment in 2014.

But it was not until 2016—in a new Congress and after Attorney General Holder had left his position—that the D.C. District Court issued an opinion in Committee on Oversight and Government Reform v. Lynch instructing the new Attorney General to comply with the subpoena. Despite the committee’s victory, two aspects of the court’s reasoning affected Congress’s ability to obtain similar documents from Holder. Although the committee won the case, it still appealed the decision to the D.C. Circuit out of concern for the reasoning applied.

The case was held in abeyance pending a potential settlement between the committee and the Trump Administration. Although the parties reportedly reached a negotiated settlement in March 2018, that settlement was contingent upon the vacation of two specific orders issued by the district court earlier in the case.

In October 2018, the district court declined to vacate those decisions, leaving the fate of the negotiated settlement uncertain.

Spintendo

@blablarg18 said in Appeals Court Refuses to Delay Steve Bannon's 4-Month Contempt Prison Sentence:

so badly, that, in fairness, or if Obama were honorable.... yes he would indeed go "I'm going to go out of my way NOT to [sheild Lois Lerner]"

Yes.

It's his lack of honor or his Uniparty loyalty (same thing), that made him not do it.

But Obama DID go out of his way NOT to exert privilege. He refused, and she ended up taking the 5th.

blablarg18

@Spintendo ....whereupon Obama DOJ - that's an expression, don't overreact - Dropped whole thing.

As you described.

I'm just old enough to remember time when USA politicians pretended, at least, to be outraged by underling's misdeeds.

They'd go after their own underlings, in name of fairness honesty & good government.

But Obama couldn't afford to......... again,, all those Lois Lerner visits to WH.

Spintendo

@blablarg18 I mispoke, in the Lerner case it wasn't the DOJ that made that decision, it was actually the US Attorney for the District of Columbia.

Spintendo

@blablarg18 That's because even though the House adopted a resolution citing Lerner for criminal contempt of Congress, they did not choose to approve a resolution authorizing the committee to pursue civil enforcement of the subpoena in federal court, as had been done in the past. Thus, it was handled by US attorneys in the District of Columbia.

blablarg18

@spintendo Your precious Regime DOJ, jailed Bannon for political comments.

See below.

"Mock[ery]" and "name calling" are looooooooooooong USA-1A tradition

Even if Bannon has guilty conviction - wrong as it is - Still no need to jail him.

Fragile USA Regime said quiet part out loud

But, wave your hands now & explain it away

1717777350555-6d5f62a2-f169-45df-bcec-7f698dbbccfd-image[1].png

blablarg18

@Spintendo said in Appeals Court Refuses to Delay Steve Bannon's 4-Month Contempt Prison Sentence:

That's because even though the House adopted a resolution citing Lerner for criminal contempt of Congress, they did not choose to approve a resolution authorizing the committee to pursue civil enforcement of the subpoena in federal court, as had been done in the past. Thus, it was handled by US attorneys in the District of Columbia.

It's weird how you think that could make it better.

Soooooooooooooooo weird.

will say again: it's a REGIME...a UNIPARTY... a club or culture of people, who may pretend to fight, but, who misuse institutions, laws, circumstances & personnel appointments - to protect each other.

Look at its END RESULTS. Look at who fought for what to happen - or, who failed to fight ie. who sat there delighted, when certain things conveniently never happened.

If anyone deserves jail, it's Lois Lerner. But again - That would implicate Obama, old dead McCain, etc. Regime can't have that happen.

blablarg18

@Spintendo House to WITHDRAW ARGUMENTS they previously asserted.

https://thehill.com/homenews/4740358-speaker-mike-johnson-steve-bannon-appeal/

“The amicus brief will be submitted after Bannon files a petition for rehearing en banc and will be in support of neither party,” Johnson, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), and House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said in a joint statement. “It will withdraw certain arguments made by the House earlier in the litigation about the organization of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol during the prior Congress. House Republican Leadership continues to believe Speaker Pelosi abused her authority when organizing the Select Committee.”

“We’re working on filing an amicus brief in his appellate work there in his case because the Jan. 6 committee was, we think, wrongfully constituted,” Johnson told Fox News’s Sean Hannity. “We think the work was tainted. We think that they may have very well covered up evidence and maybe even more nefarious activities.”

blablarg18

To sum up:

USA DOJ never prosecutes Contempt of Congress, when it involves Executive Privilege issues.....
as @spintendo showed, at length.....
......UNTIL it's Bannon & Navarro (or Executive Privilege for President Trump)
even then, it's only white-collar misdemeanor......
.....EXCEPT Bannon & Navarro, they get max jail

Decode key is: USA Regime shields its friends, of any political party.......... ...and jails dissidents

2 systems of "justice"

blablarg18

@Spintendo Congress continues to find Garland way wrong:

https://x.com/i/status/1806044838531666311

Perhaps Garland will go to prison like Navarro & Bannon. But I don't hold my breath.

blablarg18

More libs say quiet out loud.... now MSNBC:

"We’ll hear more from Steve Bannon, but then he's gonna be locked up for 4 months, where he’ll be unable to do his War Room podcast..that will be the greatest service to democracy we see from this."

https://x.com/i/status/1807560794843828280

But - Bannon did nothing wrong.

He's a martyr now for Free Speech & USA Constitution.

& War Room podcast will go on; if not from Bannon's prison cell, then by key friends who already are as famous.

& MAGA draws strength from it all. "Good job, libs"

Bannon's own comment: It's not about him.

“I’m excited…I don’t give 2 FUCKS about going to prison.

We’re gonna take down Merrick Garland and Donald Trump is gonna win in a landslide.

On July 11, they’re going to try to put Trump in prison for a bookkeeping charge. Yet, the bought and paid for media accuse MAGA of wanting “retribution."

There Is NOTHING These People Won’t Do… They Have 56 AMERICANS In Federal Prison On A Charge That They Made Up That Was So Egregious That Even Justice Brown-Jackson Wrote An Opinion That Was On Our Side

HERES WHAT I GIVE A FUCK ABOUT. WE’RE GONNA TAKE DOWN MERRICK GARLAND, LISA MONACO AND THE CORRUPT DOJ, FBI.

Hey libs: When you tear out a man's tongue … you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say