And here we go, another week gone by and Bannon still not complying with the subpoena or

[Escurumbele]

Garland doing anything about it.

Question of the day: Will other subpoena recipients feel compelled to refuse to comply or will they follow Bannon's example, plus the knowledge that it seems that Garland will not do anything to enforce it?

[pfitz59]

1. The rule of law apparently does not apply

to douche bags

[calguy]

2. Bannon is the example.

Nothing's happening to him as he thumbs his nose at Congress. Expect the rest of them to do the same until somebody ends up sitting in jail.
I'm not holding my breath.

[mitch96]

17. wrap him up and send his ass to Gitmo. He is a terrorist...nt

[Ocelot II]

3. Another hour gone by and someone complains about Bannon not having been arrested.

[luv2fly]

6. No kidding

People can find the time to complain about Bannon not being arrested yet, but apparently can't find the time to look at some of the reasons why this might be the case.

[GemDigger]

11. And at least a dozen people here on DU have explained why or linked

several articles explaining why.

[Escurumbele]

22. Please enlighten us on why its happening and also why republicans where able to jail, in 9 days,

someone who refused to answer the subpoena...Judith Miller went to jail for not answering a subpoena, and like her many others have been jailed for the same reason as well.

I would love to know why Bannon is still at large and why I should not complain that more than 15 days have passed since Congress sent their request to Garland...

Looking forward to learning what the reasons are.

Once you provide the reasons I will let Glenn Kirshner know about it, he has been complaining, not only about Bannon but about trump, so please let us know, maybe we can stop Kirshner from doing those videos about Bannon.

Just in case, I have read the reasons, that is if you are referring to Garland, and they all seem to be invalid, but I may be looking at the wrong place. I look forward to being set straight in this.

Thank you

[luv2fly]

30. As you yourself wrote

"... a couple of people opinions mean nothing when they do not know the reality of what is going on, and neither do I but..."

Ta da!

[FoxNewsSucks]

7. When something happens, the complaining will stop.

I truly do not understand the failure of some to comprehend the extreme urgency of getting these prosecutions. These traitors, and the tRump family criminals, are counting on the change of power next year. Unlike cases such as Enron, or a mobster, when power changes hands they will go away. There is a clock ticking, a short one, and far too much has been used up.

I'll be glad to admit I was wrong should everyone get charged, convicted and jailed at the last minute. But that's looking less and less likely. And I'll bet that not one of the people bleating for "patience" will admit THEY were wrong when these scumbag criminals walk free.

[CrackityJones75]

9. And the hourly posts on it here are helping how?

We get it. We know.

[FoxNewsSucks]

12. They help in the same way that being told to "be patient"

helps.

And the 'we need manchin for the caucus count" posts help that same way.

We get it. We know.

But remember, we also saw the crimes committed openly. It's unbelievable that NO ONE could be arrested and jailed while working on all the cases.

[CrackityJones75]

13. No One has been arrested and jailed?

News to me.

Seems there have been a bunch.

[FoxNewsSucks]

14. None of the tRump crime family

tRump committed his own crimes publicly. He should be arrested for those things, then other charges added on.

[Escurumbele]

23. I will admit to being, not only wrong but impatient when/if something happens and Bannon

Last edited Fri Nov 12, 2021, 03:57 PM - Edit history (1)

as well as the others are made accountable, but so far nothing has happened, only excuses from Garland.

Glenn Kirshner was a prosecutor for many years, he too is impatient because he knows this should not take as long as it is taking, and I am sure that if Garland finally does his job that he will gladly do a video explaining why it took so long, etc. but until then, we should complain.

Some people here seem to know the reasons why this is taking so long, and I really hope they can tell us why.

[CatWoman]

31. ****THIS****

[Wuddles440]

4. Answering your..

question with another, would you comply if there were no consequences for your ignoring the subpoena? As it's become increasingly obvious that the DOJ has no desire to pursue enforcement, Congress needs to do so by exercising its authority through Inherent Contempt. It may not compel the non-compliant to testify or provide the requested material, but at least the prospect of incarceration would act as a possible deterrent for those considering their options.

[Escurumbele]

24. That is the point, you hit the nail in the head, Garland is AWOL on this so why comply?

But to second-guess that he is doing things behind the scenes making sure there are no leaks, blah, blah, blah...Same story as with Muller.

Why hasn't Garland allowed the publishing of the unredacted Muller report?

If Garland does not make Bannon and the rest accountable for not answering the subpoenas we can kiss our DOJ and all these rules goodbye, this is of extreme importance at this time.

[PortTack]

5. How many threads have we had about this?

Let the DOJ do their job!

Link to tweet

?s=21

[FoxNewsSucks]

10. Thank you for that

That kind of info doesn't just pop up for us non-lawyers

I do still think it would help if there was a clear indication they understand the extreme urgency and short time frame they have left.

[Escurumbele]

25. We all let Muller do his job, and we all know what happened.

If roles were reversed, Bannon were a Democrat, trump or any other republican was in office with republican majority, do you really believe that it would take this long for Bannon to be in jail?

Time is running out, there are about 30 more subpoenas which will not be answered, so how long do you want this to take?

The tweet exchange is from people who are assuming everything is going as it should, but none of those two people know exactly what is going on, as I said, they are assuming, it is a she said/she said without proof.

Sorry, but a couple of people opinions (I know Joyce is good) mean nothing when they do not know the reality of what is going on, and neither do I but I do know Bannon is still running around, trump with all the proof out there is still causing chaos, and republicans are passing laws that will screw as all.

We all waited for Muller, and what happened?

[Ohio Joe]

8. Why the Justice Department is Taking So Long to Indict Steve Bannon

https://www.lawfareblog.com/why-justice-department-taking-so-long-indict-steve-bannon

[Silent3]

15. What the fuck ever happened to "ignorance of the law is no excuse"?

But critically, the question for a prosecutor deciding whether or not to charge Bannon with a crime is not whether Bannon’s interpretation of the law is correct or not. It is whether the department can prove to a unanimous jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Bannon did not believe his assertion of privilege to be credible. After all, it is not inappropriately stubborn conduct to refuse to testify in the presence of a valid assertion of privilege. The burden is thus on the prosecution to prove that Bannon could not in good faith believe his assertion of privilege to be valid.

Why the fuck should it matter whether Bannon thinks he's privileged to act in this contemptuous way, rather than what the law says he can or cannot do?

I sure as fuck wouldn't get that kind of leniency if I violated the law, but you couldn't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the I personally knew my crime was actually illegal.

Even at the most generous allowance for what Bannon "thinks" (really, what he pretends to think while he damned well knows the game he's playing), I see no excuse for him not to show up IN PERSON IN FRONT OF CONGRESS to play this game of feigned privilege not to testify.

I'll take Lawrence Tribe's word for it, thank you very much, that this issue isn't really so complicated and Garland should have acted by now.

[Ohio Joe]

16. As best I understand it from the article...

It has to do with is this 'a valid assertion of privilege' never being ruled on by the SC.

[LenaBaby61]

18. You mean, Moscow Mitch's & tRump's Federalist, hand-picked woman-hating High Court?

If they are allowed to rule on anything all of these racist, right-winged, terrorists and tRump will all walk free. Wouldn't surprise me though, because I've seen it happen so many times in our country's history--where the elite, white and wealthy "get away with it."

[Ohio Joe]

20. So what is your alternative?

Break the law? That would gain nothing.

Also... If the SC puts privilege into an ex-presidents hands it would break many things. They have ruled against TFG before and I expect they would in this instance.

[bottrott]

19. The one thing constantly missing from this discussion

is the fact that his failure to appear before the Committee is the predicate act here, not his assertion of Executive Privilege. In refusing to even show up for questioning, Bannon is asserting that everything the Committee asks is privileged, which is an absurdity. "What's your name," is not 'effn privileged. He's free to claim EP during questioning, and that assertion would rightfully go through the courts as part of a separate contempt charge, but he was not free to simply ignore the subpoena in total and fail to appear thus denying any opportunity to the Committee. There is no question he failed to appear and the indictment on that is clear cut.

What I see happening is the DOJ finally issuing a warrant that will be set aside when Bannon agrees to appear only to then exert EP during questioning, drawing things out once again. Indict him on FTA today and continue to prep for the inevitable assertion during questioning. This is all part of their delay tactics and the DOJ and courts need to stop playing footsie with these fascists and act on what they have to force the issue.

[Silent3]

21. I have it on good authority from others on DU that playing footsie is how you preserve democracy!

Otherwise, apparently, chaos and mayhem and we become the destroyers of democracy and Bannon wins!

[Escurumbele]

27. Interesting but the reasons given by the author do not seem to justify the speed as it is being

processed.

As I have said before, I am relying in part from Glenn Kirshner's comments on this, he was a prosecutor for 30 years, he understands what is involved, and he is not happy at what is happening.

Garland's comments are not encouraging either.

Thank you for providing the link.

From the link:
Bannon’s claim that executive privilege prevents his testimony has faced a great deal of ridicule. Donald Trump, as a federal judge put it yesterday, is “not president,” and the current president has not asserted privilege over Bannon’s testimony. Bannon was not even an executive branch official at the relevant time, and the privilege—whatever its true contours—cannot cover podcast hosts. And Bannon has refused even to show up for testimony in response to the subpoena. Executive privilege does not excuse a witness from appearing in the first place; it merely protects testimony. The witness has to show up and assert privilege in response to specific questions.

[Escurumbele]

28. Do you really need to call anyone a "ninnie"? I am not in the practice of reporting people for

their language abuse, but you do need to stop insulting people and instead provide a productive and constructive comment.

I do not report people because I feel everyone has the right to express themselves, but using insults is out of bounds, it you don't have a counter argument is best not to post.

[Crunchy Frog]

29. It's no longer considered polite to mention it here.

[Hav]

32. Oh? What happened? (n/t)

[Escurumbele]

34. Read my post below, your sarcasm is appretiated

Nothing will bother me at this point, my initial blog came early, but I am very happy with the outcome of today's actions.

[Escurumbele]

33. OK, I happily admit that I was skeptical, and angry, about the lack of action in Bannon's case

I have to say that I was not alone, Nicole Wallace admitted to Neal Katyal that she too was skeptical, as well as a bunch of lawyers and people in office.

I congratulate those who were patient and still believed the right things would be done. As I said, I am very happy to admit I was skeptical any accountability would be done in the Bannon case...now on to trump...