bannon indicted, arrest warrant issued

[RachelWalsh]

I don't find Bannon all that erotic. Tbh

 

[phrodeau]

Can't wait until the Republicans start demanding that people come before Congress under oath and start putting people in prison for refusing.

It amazes me to think that the Democrats don't realize that this will come back to bite them.

Do you not remember the “lock her up” nonsense?

 

[KeithD]

With luck, Lil Dixie will be one of those brought to ground for malicious lying.

 

[Rightguide]

How do you figure?

Technically Bannon lacked a factual defense but he may very well have a legal defense in that initially he was advised by his counsel that he did not have to comply with the subpoena because he did have executive privilege. The judge asserted six times he did not believe the legal standard for "willfulness " was wrong, saying it didn't comport with modern jurisprudence. Bannon's attorney David Schoen, one of the top defense attorneys in the nation made these comments:

"You cannot find another crime in which, misdemeanor or felony, in which a person is convicted without believing or knowing or having reason to believe he or she did anything wrong. That's the standard that was applied in this case. The government said from the start the standard they were urging on the court was, was Bannon subpoenaed, and did Bannon show up? Doesn't matter his reasons. They won the case maybe in closing today. They lost their appeal in closing today.

The overreaching by the government in this case has been extraordinary on every level. But shame on this office of the United States Attorney's Office and the Department of Justice for how far it went in this case. They put forward an argument today that completely tears asunder constitutional principle of separation of powers. They argued to the jury today that when a person gets a subpoena and executive privilege is invoked, it's for Congress to decide whether the executive privilege is valid and how broad it is. That's absolutely false.

The courts says there's a question whether the question is judiciable in court. But if it is, only the courts can be the arbiter. They likened today Congress to a referee on a playground field with children and that Mr. Bannon didn't want to listen to the referee. That's not how our constitutional structure works. Whether one believes executive privilege was properly invoked here, was valid, how broad it was, et cetera, when a former president or a current president invokes executive privilege, it's presumptively valid, period. It's not for Congress to decide that it's not valid.

Secondly, from the willfulness standard that the judge felt compelled to apply in this case and which he said he's inclined to think is wrong, again, all they had to prove was that he didn't show up. That can't be the standard in a case, especially in a case that holds the potential for a jail sentence. So think about it. Any citizen gets a subpoena from Congress, hires an experienced lawyer, the lawyer tells that citizen you may not comply, not we ought to think about it. Former president invoked executive privilege. You may not comply.

Again, you can debate whether he could have complied in part or in full. He listened to his lawyer. It's not an intuitive process. His lawyer directed him he may not apply. The Justice Department decisions, as we've said in the past, their official position has been in the past that former and current executive branch employees, when they're served with a subpoena and executive privilege is invoked, cannot be compelled to appear and in any event that this statute cannot be applied against them. There are issues for appeal in this case that are astounding."

Thus it seems he does have a good case on appeal.

 

[jomar]

^^^ Thanks. Interesting, but it’s a defense lawyer doing his thing. Meanwhile, it was a trump appointed judge doing the officiating over the trial and jury. If he hadn’t thought it legit he’d have kicked it.

ETA: As far as I know, bannon simply ignored the subpoena and is claiming all this after the fact. That is, I’m not aware that he officially filed against it. If he had we wouldn’t be here with what the defense lawyer is arguing.

 

[knownuthin]

you would agree with this

Tulsi Gabbard https://abs-0.twimg.com/emoji/v2/svg/1f33a.svg
@TulsiGabbard


Whatever you think of Bannon, the fact he was charged with contempt of Congress, but Clapper, Brennan & others who lied to Congress have never been charged, shows how the Biden admin / elite have shamelessly weaponized law enforcement into a political hit squad.

 

[butters]

^^^ Thanks. Interesting, but it’s a defense lawyer doing his thing. Meanwhile, it was a trump appointed judge doing the officiating over the trial and jury. If he hadn’t thought it legit he’d have kicked it.

ETA: As far as I know, bannon simply ignored the subpoena and is claiming all this after the fact. That is, I’m not aware that he officially filed against it. If he had we wouldn’t be here with what the defense lawyer is arguing.

he had communicated with the committee about the subpoena, and was told he needed to produce certain documents to the committee who would then determine when he would come in to testify. He never produced the documents and simply ran out the clock, not taking avail of legal filings for extensions etc....

 

[jomar]

he had communicated with the committee about the subpoena, and was told he needed to produce certain documents to the committee who would then determine when he would come in to testify. He never produced the documents and simply ran out the clock, not taking avail of legal filings for extensions etc....

Ah. Sounds like he pretty much just blew it off hoping executive privilege would save his ass.

 

[butters]

Ah. Sounds like he pretty much just blew it off hoping executive privilege would save his ass.

sounds pretty much that yeah. And then the sudden turnaround was a stunt to keep him out of the courtroom because he'd be needed by the committee. ffs.

 

[Rotadom]

This sounds like Reichguide worshipping Trump.

 

[butters]

well, that clears everything up, doesn't it? bannon chose not to testify because he thought the optics of taking the fifth would look bad. ffs

Bannon attorney David Schoen appeared on CNN Friday hours after his client was sentenced and explained why the media executive chose not to testify before the committee.

“Why didn’t he just go before the committee and do what so many other potentially prosecutable suspects in the investigation have done … and just assert the Fifth Amendment for any answers that might incriminate him?” CNN host Jake Tapper asked Schoen.

Schoen responded: “Because he’s Steve Bannon.”
“He doesn’t like the optic of taking the Fifth Amendment,” the attorney added of Bannon, the ex-chairman of Breitbart News and ardent supporter of former President Trump.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...pc=U531&cvid=69afbeab803444a2a2a8fe1545351f81

 

[KeithD]

I think the bottom line on Bannon is that he wants to have the credentials of being the rebel on the right martyr. The punishment for this particular aspect is pretty easy for him to swallow to get the public and financial result from it. That in separate conviction he's been fingered for fleecing his own followers for personal financial gain would only come into it if his followers had any brains. They don't.

 

[phrodeau]

Will they let him wear two jumpsuits?

 

[jaF0]

Well, of course he did!!!

Viktor Orbán Calls Steve Bannon a 'True American Patriot' After Sentencing​

The Hungarian prime minster blasted Bannon's sentencing as part of a "witch hunt" on Sunday.


Duh!!!

 

[jaF0]

Even his lawyers think he's a piece of crap.

Bannon’s lawyers ask to quit wall case, citing ‘differences’​

14 minutes ago
NEW YORK (AP) — Steve Bannon’s lawyers want out of his border-wall fraud case, telling a judge Thursday that he is unwilling to speak with them directly and that they have “irreconcilable" differences about how to proceed.



.

 

[butters]

bannon's own lawteams suing him for non-payment of their fees resulting from 2 cases... the first he got a pardon for and the second a conviction; donald would be proud of him.

The law firm, Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP, claims that Bannon stiffed his legal team on the bulk of his $855,487.87 legal bill. Bannon paid $375,000 of the tab, leaving $480,487.87 outstanding, according to the firm’s lawsuit.

Bannon remains in legal hot water—and not just for contract disputes. He has a pending criminal case in state court accusing him of defrauding donors of We Build the Wall, a crowdfunding effort to build a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. They are similar allegations that inspired a related federal prosecution, along with three other co-defendants.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...p&cvid=07c25443f6bb404b99a04189b914cc4c&ei=78

 

[LLCox]

bannon's own lawteams suing him for non-payment of their fees resulting from 2 cases... the first he got a pardon for and the second a conviction; donald would be proud of him.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...p&cvid=07c25443f6bb404b99a04189b914cc4c&ei=78

trump only pays His lawyers for wins. bannon is a chip off the old block

 

[phrodeau]

In 2020, Bannon was arrested for fraud by postal workers while he was on a yacht, the Lady May. The yacht was owned by Guo Wengui, who subsequently lost it in bankruptcy proceedings.

Yesterday, Guo was arrested and charged with fraud over a billion-dollar investment scheme.

 

[butters]

In 2020, Bannon was arrested for fraud by postal workers while he was on a yacht, the Lady May. The yacht was owned by Guo Wengui, who subsequently lost it in bankruptcy proceedings.

Yesterday, Guo was arrested and charged with fraud over a billion-dollar investment scheme.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...p&cvid=53f91cc70c1c4ecebda94fa8c2819677&ei=88

Guo Wengui’s $32.5 million Manhattan apartment caught on fire Wednesday, mere hours after the Steve Bannon ally was arrested there on a federal indictment accusing him of masterminding an over $1 billion fraud conspiracy.

is the fraudster just having a bad day, or was evidence being destroyed?

He’s had close ties to Bannon for years, including providing the former Trump adviser with a lucrative consulting gig ($1 million per year since 2018) as part of what the Washington Post described as a “sprawling disinformation network” through media entities that “spread election and covid falsehoods.”

 

[butters]

so he received a four month sentence, but remained free pending his appeal

Steve Bannon appealed Wednesday his four-month sentence for contempt of Congress by arguing he wasn't allowed to explain his reasons for defying a House subpoena at trial, which his lawyer said violated his 5th and 6th Amendment rights under the Constitution.

Bannon was convicted in July 2022 of defying a subpoena for documents and testimony to the House committee investigating the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021. He remains free while appealing the case.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...&cvid=d73dd9d22c3844dbbdd0fb07ff8d532a&ei=111

 

[Pad_Foot]

No one is above the law, but with enough money you never have to go to jail, even after being found guilty

 

[butters]

bannon's own lawteams suing him for non-payment of their fees resulting from 2 cases... the first he got a pardon for and the second a conviction; donald would be proud of him.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...p&cvid=07c25443f6bb404b99a04189b914cc4c&ei=78

judge orders bannon to pay close to half a million dollars for services received

A New York state judge has ordered former White House adviser Stephen K. Bannon to fork over nearly half a million dollars in unpaid fees to a law firm that says it represented Bannon in several high-profile matters, including helping him obtain a pardon in the final hours of the Trump presidency.

“Defendant cannot receive the benefit of plaintiff’s legal representation and then insist he need not pay for it,” said New York Supreme Court Justice Arlene P. Bluth in her ruling Friday.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...&cvid=99c0bf9d8c494619bb1556be827a2929&ei=244

 

[butters]

stiffing one's lawyers isn't such a great move for bannon

For his part, Bannon has asked a judge to keep Costello's law firm from reviewing his bank statements, with Pagliery writing, "a request that has required Bannon to awkwardly concede that his personal finances likely have evidence that could bolster the Manhattan District Attorney’s case against him," involving fraudulent fundraising to build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

According to the report, Bannon's current attorney, Harlan Protass, admitted as much in a recent filing, writing of Costello's law firm, "DHC’s taking of post-judgment discovery from Mr. Bannon poses a significant risk of compromising Mr. Bannon’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination."

tots and peas, bannon, you fucking greaseball

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...&cvid=b5406128e97944cbe1e1764efcfcc0ff&ei=108

 

[Lazaran]

stiffing one's lawyers isn't such a great move for bannon




tots and peas, bannon, you fucking greaseball

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...&cvid=b5406128e97944cbe1e1764efcfcc0ff&ei=108

The legal system is maddening in cases like this.

That an attorney can even raise such an objection is farcical.