I'll ask again---Why should the House not exercise it's inherent contempt power, have the

[Atticus]

Sergeant at Arms or a deputy arrest Bannon, have him brought before the January 6th Committee and asked if he will comply with the subpoena? If he refuses, why not jail him in a rented cell and tell him he will remain there until he changes his attitude? This could be done IN ADDITION to a criminal contempt referral to the AG.

If funding for the cell rental is an issue, I'll bet a Go Fund Me account would quickly overflow with contributions from people eager to invest in democracy. Put me down for a Ben Franklin.

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. I like it, then if he succumbed and then when, not if, he took the 5th on everything, then what?

Not asking to be a jerk, making the point that our system is not prepared for people to openly, brazenly be ANTI AMERICAN to the point of trying to totally destroy the country and everyone in it.

So I dont know what we could do then, does anyone?

[Atticus]

3. If appropriate, one option would be some form of immunity which would remove the 5th as

an alternative for him. A refusal then would be contempt for which he could be jailed.

[Eliot Rosewater]

4. OK, there is the answer then. I would fully support immunity if he then told the truth.

Bannon is on record several years ago along with Putin, they said almost identical things, that America's institutions needed to be destroyed.

[grantcart]

2. A fully serviced detention facility with security would have to be established

with armed officers and 24 hour guards.

A more significant obstacle is not developing such an independent force that could be used by a Speaker loyal to Trimp

[Atticus]

5. Nothing says he must be detained in the Capitol. They could rent a cell in the DC jail. Renting

cells in an established facility is done all the time if a county has more prisoners than it can safely confine.

[rso]

6. Bannon

There is a four cell detention area in the basement of the Capitol. I have seen it personally.

[onenote]

7. Because his lawyers would file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus minutes after he was taken

into custody.

There's a reason that inherent contempt hasn't been used in a very very long time.

[Silent3]

8. So Bannon's lawyers file for the writ, they get it...

...Congress has to release Bannon for a court appearance... but then what? Why wouldn't Bannon be turned back over to Congress in pretty short order after making the necessary appearance in court?

[onenote]

9. The reason for abandoning inherent contempt is that the proceedings drag on

There has to be a proceeding before the House. Due process and all that. And if there is an executive privilege issue, the courts probably won't allow him to be jailed by the house pending its resolution.

People seem to think that Congress stopped dealing with inherent contempt (which actually resulted in someone actually being found guilty a handful of times) because they're a bunch of wusses. The real reason is that once the law was changed to provide a criminal contempt option, Congress took that route because it was less time consuming and didn't tie up Congress and was just as effective in getting recalcitrant witnesses to comply with a subpoena.

[Atticus]

10. I disagree with your opinion of how futile an exercise of inherent contempt would be.

IF a writ of habeas was issued, the person would be brought before the court to determine if there was "lawful authority" to confine him.

Is not the long-recognized and court-approved inherent authority of each house of Congress to compel compliance with its own subpoenas "lawful"?

Without that inherent authority, is not the power to issue subpoenas useless?

Why should the legislative branch of our government need to enlist the cooperation of another branch in order to compel compliance with their subpoena? Was "separation of powers" a naive mistake?

[onenote]

11. There is precedent for the use of habeas corpus in inherent contempt proceedings.

And given that the procedure hasn't been used in nearly 90 years, i would expect a court to cast a skeptical eye, particularly since Congress has (and is pursuing) an alternative, judicial-based remedy.

All rather academic, because the chances that the House will resurrect the inherent contempt concept at this point -- again, after commencing the criminal contempt process -- are exactly zero.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

12. Our laws seem to be designed to protect corrupt, wealthy fascist criminals from prosecution,

to the greatest degree possible.

Even after a few are prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned, too many of these are pardoned. Hunter and Collins come to mind.

Sick of it. Sick, sick, sick of it.

[kentuck]

13. It would destroy all hope for any type of partisan compromise...

if there is any hope left?

It would be nice to see a few Republicans defend our Constitution and our democracy.