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.
This is not a legitimate Congressional Committee. It isn't following any House rules.
Lol. You sure do know your legal stuff.
There’s no appealing a federal grand jury? He will/can ask for a dismissal- very very unlikely.
He can go to trial (jury) and will win or lose.
He can plead guilty and negotiate a sentence.
FYI. Over 90% of federal indictments lead to guilty.
Did you feel the same when when Holder was found in contempt? Because he refused to turn over documents related to tax-payer funded guns being put into the hands of Mexican cartels, that were later found at the scene of a shootout that killed a Border Patrol agent?
I'm going to go out on a limb and say "no".
Irrelevant and not even remotely of the same scope, but entirely within their purview. So "yes". It was later resolved by the court.
An implicit Constitutional role of the legislature is investigation, so it is entirely within their mandate to seek to punish those who do not cooperate.
Indicted does not mean convicted. Also, Contempt of Congress is punishable by a sentence of no more than 1 year in jail. He's got a long way to go before he has to worry about seeing the inside of a jail cell.
He received two indictments. That's two years, and his loose cannon act on MSNBC didn't help his position a bit. The DOJ doesn't indict unless and until they have sufficient evidence to go into court and expect a win. If Navarro is offered a plea deal for leniency, he would be an abject moron to want to go to trial.
There’s no appealing a federal grand jury? He will/can ask for a dismissal- very very unlikely.
He can go to trial (jury) and will win or lose.
He can plead guilty and negotiate a sentence. FYI. Over 90% of federal indictments lead to guilty.
Indeed they do. Whatever else you may think about them, the Boys in Black don't play. You decidedly do not want them on your trail.
The "right" thing to do would be for Navarro to comply with the subpoena and turn over the documents. If Trump is innocent then there will be no incriminating evidence in them.
The "right" thing to do would be for Navarro to comply with the subpoena and turn over the documents. If Trump is innocent then there will be no incriminating evidence in them.
Nah, continue to make them work for everything on this goosechase. They deserve no cooperation.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,040 posts, read 12,125,187 times
Reputation: 10214
Quote:
Originally Posted by RhodyRepub
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuure ya do
First the NY Times reported there was no collusion.
Then Mueller testified before Congress and said there was no evidence of collusion.
Then the Left said Bill Barr was hiding the evidence to protect Trump.
Now the Dems control the Executive Branch, and are desperately (and pointlessly) pursuing January 6th (!!!!!) - why are they doing that? With Barr out of the way couldn't they just release the Russia collusion evidence and be done with it?
I can't believe people exist that still buy into this garbage, the same people who will go after a Bro for posting a Gateway Pundit article as "FAKE NEWS!"
What an absolute joke the Left is.
Your electoral demolishing this November, and subsequent political wilderness over the next decade - is more than well deserved.
IF the Dems had it they would have released it, either outright give it to the press or leak it(since they're notorious leakers). Crickets from them proves there is nothing and there never has been anything.
The "right" thing to do would be for Navarro to comply with the subpoena and turn over the documents. If Trump is innocent then there will be no incriminating evidence in them.
As we have been saying for five years. Anyone who was innocent or thought they were would go out of their way to prove it at the first opportunity. If Navarro is innocent he would have nothing to gain by drawing the process out.
The laughable part is that he is going to act as his own attorney instead of hiring one and spending his retirement, and he doesn't even understand what "executive privilege" is and who it extends to.
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.