1/6 committee to 'swiftly consider' criminal contempt for Steve Bannon, others who ignore subpoenas

You just admitted that this an illegitimate criminal inquiry rather than a legitimate legislative function. Core to the separation of powers that secures our Liberty is that the same branch that makes laws is not the same branch that conducts criminal investigations.

Congress has the authority to conduct investigations “in aid of its legislative function.” That authority can extend to investigations for the purpose of deciding whether legislation is appropriate, to information gathering on matters of national importance, to oversight of federal departments and executive agencies.

Congressional authority to investigate is not unlimited and is directly tied to its authority to legislate limited to Congress’ constitutional authority.

The doctrine of separation of powers places limits on congressional authority to investigate. Congress cannot, under the guise of an investigation, usurp the power of another branch of government. Congress cannot investigate matters committed to the President’s discretion.

Congress lacks the authority to bring criminal charges or otherwise initiate a criminal prosecution. What you desire is a criminal investigation of Trump, and the DOJ or any US prosecutor has the ability convene a Grand Jury and with their concurrence, compel the production of evidence. President Trump enjoys the 5th amendment protections of an impartial Grand Jury just as every other American does.

No person shall be held to answer for an infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury...​

This attempt to usurp the Grand Jury protection that we all enjoy against illegitimate inquisition is yet another stain on the corrupt Pelosi Congress. So horribly have they gone astray in their obsession with Trump rather than their legitimate legislative work on behalf of the American People, that I do not expect the current majority leadership to survive the election.

If the AG and the US Attorney for DC had the necessary predication to launch a criminal investigation, they would have. If they try to mount your argument in order to enforce the Bannon subpoena, they will quickly lose the case. If they have the balls to make a filing to the court, you will see a completely different rational put forward than what you have here, though I agree that what you stated in their actual illegitimate intention.

I know that it's utter nonsense. The Brandenburg test for criminal incitement was clearly established in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969) and is controlling legal authority. Trump didn't come within a country mile of a criminal incitement, if he had, he would already be under indictment.

 

EP doesn't mean they are hiding anything criminal. Like pleading the 5th does not mean that you're hiding anything criminal.

I know its popular to think "why not speak up if you're not hiding anything nefarious?!?!" but that is NOT how our system works. And frankly I think that such thinking only leads to more mischief than actually solving anything. To me it is a coercive tactic. There could be many reasons that a person doesn't want to speak up. Being afraid of getting your words twisted is one reason, and a great one quite frankly. Its not unheard of that a person was sent to prison simply because their words were twisted by the prosecution. Its why every single defense lawyer will tell you to shut up and not answer any questions except for your name and address of where you live. And that is just in our justice system. When it comes to politics the risk is at least 10 times more likely your words will be twisted and taken out of context. At least the police are held to SOME type of protocol. Politicians? There is none.

 

I gave you FOUR links, the one you only acknowledge is the reporters subjecting couching and doesn't explain what is "scant evidence". What is this "scant evidence" of what concerning who especially who at the White House. It says 95% were by themselves on only 5% may called someone else and said let's go together, there was no great conspiracy or preplanning for an overthrow the government let alone involving the White House.

Now where are YOUR links with evidence there was a grand conspiracy to overthrow the government including at the highest levels of the White House.

Your turn.

 

I will. My prediction is that all swing districts will go against the Trumpists no matter how fast they try to run from him and the Democrats will retain the house and increase their margin this time around. By that time the whole Trumpy insurrection will be fully exposed in live Congressional hearings in living color. Many Republicans whose favorite candidate will be ousted by a crackpot Trumpist candidate will either vote Democrat or not show up at all. Trump is a cancer infesting the GOP and I believe they will pay for supporting this scoundrel. If the COVID pandemic is under control by late spring and the economy is back on track, I believe the Democrats and anti Trumpists will carry the day next October. It shoud be interesting to watch at any rate.

Cheers

 

Four links, all based on the Reuters article. So they are meaningless. The only article that matters is the original source. Reuters. The links you gave just provide spin on the Reuters article. They are meaningless.

You started your claim with, “The FBI said”. So where is the FBI statement? Please provide a link. And don’t pretend that some anonymous sources in one article is equivalent to the official position of the FBI. We endured four years of you and others dismissing anonymous sources if you didn’t like what they said. Now you embrace them as the official position of the FBI?

No. Provide a link to the FBI statement.

And why are you asking me to defend something I didn’t assert?

 

We'll see what happens this week.

 

You're right about something. We'll have to wait see what happens next.

 

I'm right about everything I've said. :shrug:

 

Pretty strange to have such confidence after I proved you wrong.
:shrug:

 

You're welcome to think you did. You ignoring everything except one little word when the rest of the article gives no evidence of anyone trying to overthrow the government is not my problem. You're perfectly well with in your rights to be partisan.

 

Show me the statement from the FBI.

 

No they mean QUITE a lot, scant as in no evidence to charge anyone, no evidence to claim there was an organized and preplanned attempt to overthrow the government. You have the links and the reporting now refute it if you can. Post links to where the FBI has said there WAS an organized preplanned attempt to overthrow the government and to kill people. Post the names of the persons who have been charged with insurrection and an attempted overthrow of the government or attempted murder.

 

You claimed the FBI said something. Prove it. Provide a link to the FBI statement.

And you are asking me to prove an assertion I never made. Straw man.

 

Yes as three of my links showed and the one tried to couch as "scant evidence" as in not substantial, not plausible, nothing of any meaning which can mean NO evidence to support a charge.

Post evidence that they have found evidence and what it is of this grand conspiracy and levied charges of insurrection and attempts to overthrow the government.

"Among Those Who Marched Into the Capitol on Jan. 6: An F.B.I. Informant
A member of the far-right Proud Boys texted his F.B.I. handler during the assault, but maintained the group had no plan in advance to enter the Capitol and disrupt the election certification."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/25/us/politics/capitol-riot-fbi-informant.html

 

Your links were all based on the Reuters article. That article referred to anonymous sources.

You claimed, “The FBI said”. So I’m asking you for a link to the official statement of the FBI.

 

Interesting counter-predictions there... My prediction is the GOP will gerrymand themselves a tiny margin in the House, but the D's will expand to a legitimate majority in the Senate, perhaps by 2 seats...

I believe the D's will hang on in Nevada and NH, while Ron Johnson is toast, if he even bothers running again, and Penn goes blue, either with that goofy Fetterman guy or the much more sensible Josh Shapiro (State AG)..

I predict the tightest Senate race will actually be in NC, as that state slowly turns into Georgia and Arizona...

Speaking of "Trumpy insurrection", so much more new reporting of the activities at the Willard Hotel the first week of the year... The Willard Hotel could eventually be known as the Surratt Boarding House of the 2020 elections

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_...se in Washington,September 1864 to April 1865.

 

Legislation to prevent future insurrections, duh!

 

This idea that congress doesn't have the right to investigate an attack on it's capitol is mindbogglingly absurd.

How many times does it have to be explained to you?

 

Not a merit worthy argument.

If I called you a jerk, that is not an argument.

Capiche?

 

I've been quoting from the Electoral Count Act of 1887, but that's obviously not getting through..

Your explanation might just do the trick.... it's simple, for simple minds...

Also, I don't think such legislation could be created, since it's in the GQP DNA to find loopholes in everything...

 

How much you want to bet that no legislation will come of this?

 

Yeah, and they are finding a lot of witches!

 

I'll file that in the wishful thinking file.

 

Yet that is not what this is about.

 

All the wishful thinking is on your side. Pretty obvious.