Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Navarro should take a good listen to Michael Cohen. Covering for Trump, and going to prison for him is not worth it. The insane part. Trump expects you to do this for him.
True. Then he'll deny he ever knew you when the caca hits the fan. Loyalty with him has been repeatedly demonstrated to be a one-way street.
OP left out the fact that Navarro publicly stated that he had a great deal of information to share but I guess he doesn’t want to do it under oath. He has already told us about his conspiracy for a coup on national TV, what’s left to tell.
OP left out the fact that Navarro publicly stated that he had a great deal of information to share but I guess he doesn’t want to do it under oath. He has already told us about his conspiracy for a coup on national TV, what’s left to tell.
Hard to say, but I can hear a few republican congresspeople sweating all the way down here.
Nothing will happen. This will make it ways through the court system, and when the GOP takes over Congress they'll request DOJ to drop the contempt of Congress charge.
Same was said by Roger Stone and others then they were convicted, congress can’t overturn criminal convictions. This indictment was through a grand jury, not democrats. Trump won’t be around to pardon Navarro.
OP left out the fact that Navarro publicly stated that he had a great deal of information to share but I guess he doesn’t want to do it under oath. He has already told us about his conspiracy for a coup on national TV, what’s left to tell.
What exactly did he say about his supposed conspiracy for a coup on national TV, and please be specific?
This laughable headline reminds me of an old Mae West scene. She's on trial for something (maybe soliciting?), and giving her usual snarky answers to the judge. Finally, the judge demands, "Young lady, are you trying to show contempt for this court?"
She answered, "On the contrary, Judge, I'm doing my best to conceal it."
Any one who does NOT have contempt for the liars, witch hunters, and Adam-Schiff-type fanatics in Congress, shouldn't be in a position to help make laws or advise those who make them.
DOJ indicts former Trump adviser Peter Navarro for contempt of Congress
by Paul Conner, Chad Pergram | Fox News
Published June 3, 2022 12:25pm EDT
A federal grand jury indicted former Trump White House adviser Peter Navarro on criminal contempt of Congress charges after he refused to comply with a subpoena issued by the House Jan. 6 committee.
The Department of Justice announced the indictment Friday. The department has previously indicted former Trump adviser Stephen K. Bannon for contempt of Congress, throwing its weight behind the committee's subpoenas.
The system of checks and balances depends on a properly functioning separation of powers, and the separation of powers in turn depends on each branch being able to exercise the whole of its constitutionally vested authority. Laws should be passed by Congress, not the executive branch; enforced by the president through agencies he controls, not independent agencies; and all government actions should be subject to review by the federal courts.
This has been established and upheld primarily by conservative supreme court justices dating back to Roosevelt.
From what is being said it seems that the DOJ should not be independent and should abide by the whims of what ever party you currently believe in.
The 1/6 Committee will be long finished with their business before the Midterms. If the GOP takes Congress they can certainly request anything they want, but they cannot control the DOJ and Merrick Garland's decisions. They may or may not get satisfaction depending on what else is happening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Same was said by Roger Stone and others then they were convicted, congress can’t overturn criminal convictions. This indictment was through a grand jury, not democrats. Trump won’t be around to pardon Navarro.
While it's true that the Congress can't tell the DOJ what to do: if the US Congress rescinds the request to the DOJ to charge Contempt, the jury will have a hard time convicting. In general in such cases, the DOJ drops the case. However, knowing Garland and his corrupt DOJ they'll push forward anyway only for the judge to throw out the case or a not guilty verdict.
While it's true that the Congress can't tell the DOJ what to do: if the US Congress rescinds the request to the DOJ to charge Contempt, the jury will have a hard time convicting. In general in such cases, the DOJ drops the case. However, knowing Garland and his corrupt DOJ they'll push forward anyway only for the judge to throw out the case or a not guilty verdict.
All of this is such a clown show.
When were there "such cases"? Can you site?
Also, do you think congress will turn over after the 70 day(interval II) to trial requirement?
And as far as throwing out the case, I'm sure that motion has already been filed and will be dismissed as it is almost impossible to overturn an indictment.
I'm not sure where you are getting these ideas that this is the way it goes with a federal trial.
Hard to say, but I can hear a few republican congresspeople sweating all the way down here.
Summer is near.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
