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.
Bannon went home after the trial, he filed an appeal, he's not going to jail.
Correct. If he were a poor black man, the presiding judge would have remanded him immediately to Federal prison, telling him to 'appeal from your cell'.
I do think Mr. Bannon will serve time. There is nothing to appeal. The Courts have already concluded that the January 6th subpoena was valid (which only idiots would argue otherwise). The jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Bannon did not abide by the subpoena.
I do not know what the appeal time is; probably two weeks. However, note that the courts can move very quickly if they feel an appeal is wholly frivolous.
My main gripe is with the fine of $6,500. That in no way serves as a detriment to others, or reimburses the taxpayers for the money spent in prosecuting this anti-American idiot.
The basis of your objection, and the MAGA folks' position, is simply that the January 6 assault on the Capitol, and the attempt to set aside the constitution and the election, based on an absolute and provable lie perpetrated by the president, is nothing more than a simple protest. Only a rowdy parade - not important or threatening to the constitutional transfer of power. The world knows otherwise. The evidence points to a high-level conspiracy. The committee hearings were established legally and carry the full weight of Congress. One cannot choose to ignore it or pretend that it is a fake committee. The GOP attempted to sabotage the committee from the start and fosters the idea that it has no authority. That is a fool's position, and Bannon is a fool, along with any others with the same opinion. He can think about it from his cell.
I’m still waiting for January 6th, 2005 to be investigated.
There's indirect contempt, civil contempt and criminal contempt. Sometimes a court orders a person to do soemthing and sometimes to refrain. Contempt of Congress is no different.
But you keep thinking they all are the 'same violation'. It ain't necessarily so. And you deflect off the subject.
Considering Holder was selling guns to drug cartels through operation Fast and Furious and one of those guns were used to kill a border patrol agent, I imagine the contempt was a bad one.
I’m still waiting for January 6th, 2005 to be investigated.
I don't recall anyone stopping the vote certification in 2005, Kerry conceded the day after the election, no broken windows in the capital, there wasn't 63 lawsuits, no stop the steal rally on Jan 6 2005. The election in 2000 was decided by 537 votes and there was a peaceful transition, Trump lost 4 states, lost the election by 8 million votes and we had we had a riot.
Quite the change in Bannon's comments before and after the trial, he claimed he would fight them to the end before the trial now he's asking for leniency.
I don't recall anyone stopping the vote certification in 2005, Kerry conceded the day after the election, no broken windows in the capital, there wasn't 63 lawsuits, no stop the steal rally on Jan 6 2005. The election in 2000 was decided by 537 votes and there was a peaceful transition, Trump lost 4 states and we had we had a riot.
True. Why that person brought up 2005 is a mystery.
I will cite the 2000 election. I voted for Mr. Gore. The Florida count was the issue. I, being an attorney and as such willing to follow the law, quickly determined that, once the Florida Secretary of State certified the results for Mr. Bush, then the election was over. Indeed, eventually the Supreme Court took the same general view (after all the flurry of lawsuits). The law provided that, once certified, the electoral votes for said state stand. Mr. Gore, after the Supreme Court, conceded.
Mr. Gore, as outgoing VP, being a patriotic American and not insane, even presided over the counting of the electoral college votes on that January 6th, and did not try to claim that he could 'overrule' any state's slate of electors and send them back to the States. If any person had tried to claim that Mr. Gore held such power, they would have been quickly shut down.
While I disagree with Mr. Pence on many issues, when it came down to following the Constitution, he stood firm. I can't imagine the pressure he was under by people like then-President Trump and his lackeys on the days leading up to January 6th.
I don't recall anyone stopping the vote certification in 2005, Kerry conceded the day after the election, no broken windows in the capital, there wasn't 63 lawsuits, no stop the steal rally on Jan 6 2005. The election in 2000 was decided by 537 votes and there was a peaceful transition, Trump lost 4 states, lost the election by 8 million votes and we had we had a riot.
Comparing 2005 where Kerry conceded the day after the election and 31 democrats voted against the certification to 2020 where senators wanted to stop the certification, seriously.
You'll get crickets from the rabid left in here on that one.
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.
