Steve Bannon Has Strong Legal Grounds to get His J-6 Contempt Conviction Tossed

[Independent thinker]

Weren't those taken to court? What was the outcome in those cases? Democrats are willing to abide by the courts decisions. Are the Neo-GOP willing to do the same or will the instigate more violence and chaos on the country?

Duh, they were taken to Democrat controlled courts, hence the double standard.

 

[Independent thinker]

Is that really the extent of your knowledge?

Holder was a current administration official who notified Congress of his refusal to comply with a subpoena and explained reasons to do so, citing executive privilege.

Bannon did nothing.

 

[Marener]

Despite your contrary assertion, it appears conservatives really don't want to talk about this.

Yet again, you're accusing the other side of what you're doing.

 

[BlindBoo]

Duh, they were taken to Democrat controlled courts, hence the double standard.

The Neo-GOP is full of long time America haters.

"Both the Obama administration and the House objected to aspects of her decisions, but the executive branch had the larger grievance, as Jackson rejected the Justice Department’s longstanding position that courts have no proper role in resolving battles between Congress and federal agencies over access to records."

Subpoena fight over operation Fast and Furious documents finally settled

The case led the House to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt.

www.politico.com

 

[Independent thinker]

Despite your contrary assertion, it appears conservatives really don't want to talk about this.

Yet again, you're accusing the other side of what you're doing.

That's what hypocrisy is, when you jail Bannon but don't jail either Holder or Lerner for the very same thing. The difference is the Democratic DOJ wouldn't jail Holder or Lerner but the Democratic DOJ would jail Bannon.

 

[Independent thinker]

The Neo-GOP is full of long time America haters.

"Both the Obama administration and the House objected to aspects of her decisions, but the executive branch had the larger grievance, as Jackson rejected the Justice Department’s longstanding position that courts have no proper role in resolving battles between Congress and federal agencies over access to records."

Subpoena fight over operation Fast and Furious documents finally settled

The case led the House to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt.

www.politico.com

Thanks for proving my point that the Obama administration swept this all under the rug because the accused were lefties and Biden's administration jailed Bannon because he wasn't a member of the lefty crowd.

 

[Marener]

That's what hypocrisy is, when you jail Bannon but don't jail either Holder or Lerner for the very same thing. The difference is the Democratic DOJ wouldn't jail Holder or Lerner but the Democratic DOJ would jail Bannon.

It wasn’t the very same thing and I explained how.

Holder was a current executive official who notified Congress that Obama was claiming executive privilege and would not comply with the subpoena.

Was Bannon a current executive official?
Did he notify Congress?
Did he have a claim from Trump about executive privilege?

The answer to all three is no.

 

[Lastamender]

Trump was no longer in office, he did not have Executive Privileges

If this is about J6 Trump was in office.

 

[BlindBoo]

Thanks for proving my point that the Obama administration swept this all under the rug because the accused were lefties and Biden's administration jailed Bannon because he wasn't a member of the lefty crowd.

Bannon ignored Congress and the courts made their decision. Holder worked with and negotiated in good faith and the courts made their decision in that case too. Completely different action by Holder and Bannon and completely different outcomes. It's all public record, nothing was swept under the rug. Bannon was found guilty and Holder was not.

 

[lennypartiv]

Bannon ignored Congress and the courts made their decision.

We really need a president who pardons those who are persecuted.

 

[Independent thinker]

It wasn’t the very same thing and I explained how.

Holder was a current executive official who notified Congress that Obama was claiming executive privilege and would not comply with the subpoena.

Was Bannon a current executive official?
Did he notify Congress?
Did he have a claim from Trump about executive privilege?

The answer to all three is no.

The only thing different is that a democratic DOJ let Holder and Lerner go while a democratic DOJ jailed Bannon.

 

[Independent thinker]

Bannon ignored Congress and the courts made their decision. Holder worked with and negotiated in good faith and the courts made their decision in that case too. Completely different action by Holder and Bannon and completely different outcomes. It's all public record, nothing was swept under the rug. Bannon was found guilty and Holder was not.

Ultimately, in the end, Holder refused to comply with the Congressional subpoena.

 

[Marener]

The only thing different is that a democratic DOJ let Holder and Lerner go while a democratic DOJ jailed Bannon.

So you're just going to ignore everything I wrote?

Bannon did not have executive privilege to hide behind. Holder did.

 

[BlindBoo]

Ultimately, in the end, Holder refused to comply with the Congressional subpoena.

He stood up to their attempted bullying and took it to court where it was resolved to no one's satisfaction. Are you saying his court challenge of the subpoena was somehow illegitimate? How is that in anyway way comparable with Bannon completely ignoring the Subpoena?

 

[BackAgain]

Trump was no longer in office, he did not have Executive Privileges

He could invoke it for when he was President.

 

[Independent thinker]

So you're just going to ignore everything I wrote?

Bannon did not have executive privilege to hide behind. Holder did.

Oh, now I understand. You're saying that Trump can refuse to comply with a Congressional subpoena.

 

[Independent thinker]

He stood up to their attempted bullying and took it to court where it was resolved to no one's satisfaction. Are you saying his court challenge of the subpoena was somehow illegitimate? How is that in anyway way comparable with Bannon completely ignoring the Subpoena?

He stood up to a Democratic court and surprise, surprise, the democratic court ruled in his favor.

 

[Marener]

Oh, now I understand. You're saying that Trump can refuse to comply with a Congressional subpoena.

Maybe! There are always separation of powers issues when a president is subpoenaed by Congress. These issues are far more significant when the president is actually in office but also revolve around precisely what is being demanded. A sitting president could never be indicted for failing to comply with a subpoena, however.

 

[g5000]

Great news! American Patriot Steve Bannon doesn't deserve to go to prison.

Steve Bannon Has Strong Legal Grounds to get His J-6 Contempt Conviction Tossed

Even U.S. district court judge Carl Nichols recognizes that Bannon’s contempt conviction is likely to get tossed out, which is why he took the extraordinary step of issuing a stay of sentence pending appeal. When Bannon was subpoenaed by the J-6 Committee, Trump’s lawyer sent him a letter...

thegreggjarrett.com

Bannon's whining is music to my ears.

 

[BlindBoo]

He stood up to a Democratic court and surprise, surprise, the democratic court ruled in his favor.

You can disparage the American Courts all you want. It's SOP for the Anti America Neo-GOP, when it suits them. Remember all the cases Judges appointed by Trumpybear flat out ruled against him, cause they were compromised by the Deep State.