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 Tim]

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 Tim]

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 Tim]

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? 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

7 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.

The imagination comment had nothing to do with the political spectacle unfolding, and perhaps Bannon goes to jail for contempt of Congress (the list is long for those who have contempt for the institution), rolls over, and fesses up to leaving the side window at the Capitol unlocked and takes responsibility for the incomprehensible lack of security and police presence that (or any) day.   In my opinion, the wrong questions are being asked, but it serves the appetite for grist from the mill. 
 

If so, or if a criminal case can reasonably prosecuted in a non partisan fashion, I’ll gladly stand beside you and cheer Bannon’s incarceration.  
 

In the meantime, you seem to be of the opinion that no one else can see what amounts to a political spectacle of the scorched earth variety.  Not all that long ago, your crew attempted the public evisceration of a man with 30 years of dedicated public service with the same sort of innuendo, distortions and media manipulation.  His crime was he held different political views and was nominate by the wrong President.  For his crime(s), complete and utter destruction of his reputation in front of his wife and two daughters, and when he defended himself as any of us should, he was labeled as unstable.  
 

Theres no denying it can work, for her attempts to destroy Kavanaugh, a wildly unpopular presidential candidate was given the 2 nd most powerful seat in the land. 
 

Oops—I broke the 10 month rule.  
 

So, my simple assertion is that while you use those long arms of yours to pat yourself on the back, you’ve hardly cracked the DaVinci Code. 

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

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? 

Well, one theory is that in the face of evidence there would be a very large and potentially violent crowd of protesters that day a decision was made to not augment security and leave a standard security detail in place at the Capitol in order to allow or trigger a rather uneventful "riot" to occur that resulted in no loss of life or physical harm to anyone of consequence in order to use the chaos of the event as pretext for justifying the issuing some draconian restrictions on opposition political activity and free speech. 

[unbillievable]

1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Well, one theory is that in the face of evidence there would be a very large and potentially violent crowd of protesters that day a decision was made to not augment security and leave a standard security detail in place at the Capitol in order to allow or trigger a rather uneventful "riot" to occur that resulted in no loss of life or physical harm to anyone of consequence in order to use the chaos of the event as pretext for justifying the issuing some draconian restrictions on opposition political activity and free speech. 

 

I still find it hilarious that they took the time to scatter BLANK pieces of paper on the floor of the parlimentarian's office to stage a riot scene.

 

So the "rioters" were angry enough to break the door, but leave everything untouched, with stacks of files still organized in neat piles on desk tops?

 

 

[daz28]

10 hours 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! 

It's a goal, but not the end goal.  The testimony will be under oath, so the facts will be out, but I made clear in another post the politcal thater is for the Democrats gain.  That we agree on.

7 hours ago, unbillievable said:

 

I still find it hilarious that they took the time to scatter BLANK pieces of paper on the floor of the parlimentarian's office to stage a riot scene.

 

So the "rioters" were angry enough to break the door, but leave everything untouched, with stacks of files still organized in neat piles on desk tops?

 

 

Please elaborate?  Is there video of them staging the scene, or could it possibly be copy paper??  Asking seriously, not being snarky.  

[daz28]

8 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The imagination comment had nothing to do with the political spectacle unfolding, and perhaps Bannon goes to jail for contempt of Congress (the list is long for those who have contempt for the institution), rolls over, and fesses up to leaving the side window at the Capitol unlocked and takes responsibility for the incomprehensible lack of security and police presence that (or any) day.   In my opinion, the wrong questions are being asked, but it serves the appetite for grist from the mill. 
 

If so, or if a criminal case can reasonably prosecuted in a non partisan fashion, I’ll gladly stand beside you and cheer Bannon’s incarceration.  
 

In the meantime, you seem to be of the opinion that no one else can see what amounts to a political spectacle of the scorched earth variety.  Not all that long ago, your crew attempted the public evisceration of a man with 30 years of dedicated public service with the same sort of innuendo, distortions and media manipulation.  His crime was he held different political views and was nominate by the wrong President.  For his crime(s), complete and utter destruction of his reputation in front of his wife and two daughters, and when he defended himself as any of us should, he was labeled as unstable.  
 

Theres no denying it can work, for her attempts to destroy Kavanaugh, a wildly unpopular presidential candidate was given the 2 nd most powerful seat in the land. 
 

Oops—I broke the 10 month rule.  
 

So, my simple assertion is that while you use those long arms of yours to pat yourself on the back, you’ve hardly cracked the DaVinci Code. 

What's the 10 month rule?

 

Are you ok with the charges against Bannon?  It's kind of a slam dunk case, because he literally did exactly what they say.  I'm a little disturbed that in this war of politics a lot of people are going to end up in jail.  The only saving grace is most of them will be slimebags, who knew the risks going in.  The sad part is they will crucify anyone who attempts to end the whole political charade, leaving us with perma-political war, and a hopeless future for our country. 

8 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Well, one theory is that in the face of evidence there would be a very large and potentially violent crowd of protesters that day a decision was made to not augment security and leave a standard security detail in place at the Capitol in order to allow or trigger a rather uneventful "riot" to occur that resulted in no loss of life or physical harm to anyone of consequence in order to use the chaos of the event as pretext for justifying the issuing some draconian restrictions on opposition political activity and free speech. 

A large group of Kyle "good" Rittencehouses could have had the same effect

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, daz28 said:

What's the 10 month rule?

 

Are you ok with the charges against Bannon?  It's kind of a slam dunk case, because he literally did exactly what they say.  I'm a little disturbed that in this war of politics a lot of people are going to end up in jail.  The only saving grace is most of them will be slimebags, who knew the risks going in.  The sad part is they will crucify anyone who attempts to end the whole political charade, leaving us with perma-political war, and a hopeless future for our country. 

A large group of Kyle "good" Rittencehouses could have had the same effect

 

I’m neutral on the charges.  I’m a realist, the party in power pushes forward on issues they know appeals to their base, the party out of power resists.  The party in power would object to the other party proceeding on the same grounds and so on.  I think if you look at the charges filed, and the reaction to them as some sort of grand purity test, you’re naive.      I believe Bannon should fight, argue, condemn, litigate, trash talk and do anything in his power to resist.   Why?   That’s what those people do.  Plus, it appeals to his base, whatever that might be, just like the political charade appeals to you. 
 

Were you ok with the public disembowelment of Brett Kavanaugh?  It was a slam dunk obvious that it was a case of innuendo, manipulation, and character assassination. 

[daz28]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I’m neutral on the charges.  I’m a realist, the party in power pushes forward on issues they know appeals to their base, the party out of power resists.  The party in power would object to the other party proceeding on the same grounds and so on.  I think if you look at the charges filed, and the reaction to them as some sort of grand purity test, you’re naive.      I believe Bannon should fight, argue, condemn, litigate, trash talk and do anything in his power to resist.   Why?   That’s what those people do.  Plus, it appeals to his base, whatever that might be, just like the political charade appeals to you. 
 

Were you ok with the public disembowelment of Brett Kavanaugh?  It was a slam dunk obvious that it was a case of innuendo, manipulation, and character assassination. 

Bannon don't have a case though.  There will be zero juries, that the statute will be described to, that won't convict him.  His best option is to ask for it to be dropped if he complies rapido.  The other options aren't good, and I still don't buy into threat there's enough coup-laid drinkers out there to vault all these convicted criminals into the political startosphere.  OAN and Newsmax would consider them martyrs, but even they aren't gonna want America's most wanted DC edition on their prime time slot every night.  These people are going to have to give up the documents, and testify.  ALL of them like it or lump it.  

 

As for Kavanaugh, which is irrelevant(man crush?), I blame the media, and I rarely blame the media, because they don't make anyone dumb, they were born that way.  The accusations should have been followed up much better by the FBI, and given whatever time they needed.  THEN they should have proceeded with the hearings AFTER he was cleared.  He didn't need to be pushed through like poop thru a goose. 

  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

8 hours ago, daz28 said:

Bannon don't have a case though.  There will be zero juries, that the statute will be described to, that won't convict him.  His best option is to ask for it to be dropped if he complies rapido.  The other options aren't good, and I still don't buy into threat there's enough coup-laid drinkers out there to vault all these convicted criminals into the political startosphere.  OAN and Newsmax would consider them martyrs, but even they aren't gonna want America's most wanted DC edition on their prime time slot every night.  These people are going to have to give up the documents, and testify.  ALL of them like it or lump it.  

 

As for Kavanaugh, which is irrelevant(man crush?), I blame the media, and I rarely blame the media, because they don't make anyone dumb, they were born that way.  The accusations should have been followed up much better by the FBI, and given whatever time they needed.  THEN they should have proceeded with the hearings AFTER he was cleared.  He didn't need to be pushed through like poop thru a goose. 

  

Bannon isn’t prosecuting a case, silly.   He’s the target of a political operation, we’ve already agreed on that.  I think we’ve agreed that he may ultimately be held accountable for his contempt of Congress, perhaps including going to jail.  Finally, I think we agree that outside dog n pony Washington politics, if Bannon engaged in criminal activity leading up to the criminal events on 1/6, he should be held accountable.
 

Beyond that, I have no idea what you’re talking about with respect to injuries, OAN and Newsmax. 

What, in your view, does it look like when Bannon complies? 
 

Now, you’ve mentioned the committee actions and request for testimony, documents and truth.  What documents do Steve Bannon and Mark Meadows have in their possession that have apparently eluded federal, state or local law enforcement agencies to this point? Please, be specific.

 

As for the Kavanaugh case, I wanted to get some sense of your standards as it related to other partisan political operations.  Thanks for the reply. 

[SoCal Deek]

If I understand this correctly Bannon isn’t accused of anything other than resisting a congressional inquiry. He isn’t being indicted for anything that happened on, or leading up to, January 6th. At some point, somebody’s going to have to stand up to these politically motivated congressional hearings. I guess Bannon decided that now’s the time. I have no problem with it. If he crosses the line and is found to be destroying evidence like Hilary did…that’s where I have a problem.

[Sherlock Holmes]

On 11/12/2021 at 7:50 PM, 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.   

What flavor ice cream was Brandon holding?

[B-Man]

 

 

Where are the posts ??

 

 

[Tiberius]

So inciting a riot to overthrow the election and kill politicians is a crime, how wild 

2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Where are the posts ??

 

 

This the same jail Trump

had Epstein murdered in? 

[BillStime]

A call for violence.... Bonnie, please get this message out to the cult ATOP.  

 

 

 

[BillStime]

Hysterical

 

 

Follow the money

[Chef Jim]

33 minutes ago, BillStime said:

A call for violence.... Bonnie, please get this message out to the cult ATOP.  

 

 

 

 

 

Lying again I see.  

 

 

[B-Man]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

So inciting a riot to overthrow the election and kill politicians is a crime, how wild 

This the same jail Trump

had Epstein murdered in? 

 

 

Wow, not just around the bend, but a few miles downstream.......😂

 

 

27 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Hysterical

 

 

Don't be so hard on yourself.

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

6 hours ago, Tiberius said:

So inciting a riot to overthrow the election and kill politicians is a crime, how wild 

This the same jail Trump

had Epstein murdered in? 

Overthrow an election? Is that even the correct terminology? Please get your trigger phrases straight and then get back to us. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

On 11/14/2021 at 7:27 AM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Bannon isn’t prosecuting a case, silly.   He’s the target of a political operation, we’ve already agreed on that.  I think we’ve agreed that he may ultimately be held accountable for his contempt of Congress, perhaps including going to jail.  Finally, I think we agree that outside dog n pony Washington politics, if Bannon engaged in criminal activity leading up to the criminal events on 1/6, he should be held accountable.
 

Beyond that, I have no idea what you’re talking about with respect to injuries, OAN and Newsmax. 

What, in your view, does it look like when Bannon complies? 
 

Now, you’ve mentioned the committee actions and request for testimony, documents and truth.  What documents do Steve Bannon and Mark Meadows have in their possession that have apparently eluded federal, state or local law enforcement agencies to this point? Please, be specific.

 

As for the Kavanaugh case, I wanted to get some sense of your standards as it related to other partisan political operations.  Thanks for the reply. 

@daz28  we were having a civil conversation on Mr. Bannon and the Democrat beacon shining the light of truth on what happened on 1/6.  Then, you were gone.  
 

What is Bannon and/or Meadows going to produce to bring down the Rs?  What truths shall they reveal that have you so revved up?   
 

 

 

[daz28]

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

@daz28  we were having a civil conversation on Mr. Bannon and the Democrat beacon shining the light of truth on what happened on 1/6.  Then, you were gone.  
 

What is Bannon and/or Meadows going to produce to bring down the Rs?  What truths shall they reveal that have you so revved up?   
 

 

 

Christmas is coming up, so let's use that analogy.  How do you know what's in the gift box before you open it?  Maybe we will find out that they knew there was nothing in the election fraud box. but peddled the conspiracy anyways.  Politics is a dirty business, but undermining democracy by creating a false election fraud narrative, followed by legislation that will alter outcomes isn't dirty politics, it's a threat to all we hold sacred.  Lewandowski came out as saying Trump KNEW he lost, but made the claim anyways.  So if he testified to that under oath, and we find out Trump did indeed try many ways to undo the election anyways, is that a crime?  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

47 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Christmas is coming up, so let's use that analogy.  How do you know what's in the gift box before you open it?  Maybe we will find out that they knew there was nothing in the election fraud box. but peddled the conspiracy anyways.  Politics is a dirty business, but undermining democracy by creating a false election fraud narrative, followed by legislation that will alter outcomes isn't dirty politics, it's a threat to all we hold sacred.  Lewandowski came out as saying Trump KNEW he lost, but made the claim anyways.  So if he testified to that under oath, and we find out Trump did indeed try many ways to undo the election anyways, is that a crime?  

This sounds dramatic enough, with “undermining democracy”, “peddled…conspiracy” and wondering aloud about thought crimes that have yet to occur.  It means nothing.  Still, you’re clearly pro-tribunal and pro-dirty politics, and you don’t seem to have any idea what it is that they plan to find.  I’m not surprised, of course, because they haven’t said what they expect to find when interviewing Bannon, Meadows or anyone else.   They use the same nonsensical  argument over and over and over, and that is “We’re going to dig, speculate, leak and manipulate the American people because we can….”.  
 

If history is any indication, it won’t be too long before you’re humming along with the inevitable “If they have nothing to hide, they should just submit”.  There’s nothing sacred about that.  
 

Oh, and where was your moral high ground when dem leaders ran the grift on Trump stealing the election, or staging his coup when he beat Clinton?  You don’t have to be their rube, Dazzy. 

Almost forgot—thank you for the honest reply.  I disagree with all of it but I appreciate the time spent. 

Edited November 16, 2021 by leh-nerd skin-erd