Steve Bannon Defies Jan. 6 Committee Subpoena

Trump ordered four of his associates to refuse to cooperate with the House committee investigating the Capitol attack. At least one is following his demands.

As well they should. These subpoenas have no legislative purpose and are therefore not binding or legal.
[I inserted a link from Huff Post but it must have been sent to PF heaven......]

 

Nothing says you have nothing to hide like ducking a subpoena.

 

They are just buying time, Steve's gonna have to sing one way or another. He can always take the 5th.

 

Good! The absurdity is a showing of Marxist tyranny. There are people that are still incarcerated for that who did not commit any violence whatsoever. Many have bonds of $200,000 and more. And yet, the kid in Texas who shot four people at that school this week was out in 24 hours with a bond of only $75,000. What happened to all those who beat people, killed people, looted stores and burnt building including government buildings in Seattle, Portland and many other major Democrat run cities? Nothing!!!

 

Huh?

Whataboutism, much?

 

Biden's approval is at 38% from a Democrat leaning polling company. Even some Demorats are now waking up to the American Marxist Administration of Biden. Others just think it's funny.

 

This time, Bannon cannot be saved by a presidential pardon.

He faces a year in prison.

 

Imprisoned for what?

 

What does "legislative purpose" mean, and who decides what subpoenas have a legislative purpose and which don't?

 

Oh you know! We been thru all this at length, the left will just start a rolling list of bullshit like "well what about this" or "Well how about that" for a couple of years until they run out of walls and noodles

 

Lock all their asses up,if they don't to wan to conform and obey our laws lock their butts up. Not responding to legal subpoena is a crime.​

 

Actually, this one is real simple: Contempt of Congress. BTW, what free and functioning democracy we are, that this crime is a thing.(also, contempt of court.). Basically incarcerating people because important people had their feelings hurt. While a democracy doesn't have a king or queen, it does have unaccountable people appointed to life tenure positions.

 

Trump has no executive privilege since he is not the President just a citizen

Bannon was never a employee of the administration so again as a citizen he has no executive privilege

Anyone who does not respond to a summon should be fined and jailed

 

I think you summed it up perfectly

 

Trump was the President on January 6, so sorry to inform you, the Executive Privilege applies. Too bad lefties.

You mean like those Democrats in Arizona and Georgia that refuse to turn over data and hardware for the audits???? Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

Looks like someone is refusing to play, yet again, in another scam investigation....

But I agree totally .... and ya'll can stick your whataboutism right up next to your head in the dark and smelly place... to a liberal whataboutism is the definition of a two faced hypocrite. Liberals can do it , but you can't.
"""Anyone who does not respond to a summon should be fined and jailed"""

Biden says he would not comply with a Senate subpoena in Trump's impeachment trial

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...-with-a-senate-subpoena-in-trumps-impeachment

 

The republicans who run Georgia already did a recount and told trump repoeteadly his conspiracy theories are BS
Trump is executive of a private business now. His privilege expired.

 

I don't know why Trump continues the failed "executive privilege" gambit, there are other legal arguments against the commission's request. Specifically, the 4th amendment guards against unwarranted searches and seizures. You want my electronic devices, communications, etc better show me the warrant and fine print.

 

Why don’t you learn what subpoenas are before you say ridiculous things lol
https://austinlrs.com/blog/warrants-subpoenas-mean/

 

You are thumping upon a fallacy, I believe. But even if you weren't, there is definitely no basis for your determining that there could be no legislative use for the information they would learn about how this threat to our government came together; for example, there are a ton of prospective legislative ways to try to institute safeguards against this, from specific laws, to funding requirements, which are also part of Congress's purview: the budget, funding different agencies, even creating a new agency (though I personally think we have more agencies than are necessary, or efficient). Here is an article by lawyers, answering "what exactly does Congress have the authority to investigate?

<SNIP>
Simply put, almost anything. Although the Constitution does not expressly authorize Congress to conduct investigations, Congress – and the courts – have long recognized that Congress has an inherent, constitutional prerogative to conduct investigations. In fact, the first congressional investigation occurred as early as 1792, when the House of Representatives convened a committee to investigate the defeat of General Arthur St. Clair in the Battle of the Wabash in what was then known as the Northwest Territory (and now known as Ohio).

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. As a result, a congressional committee has broad discretion regarding both the scope of its investigation and the relevance of the information it requests.

Although congressional authority to investigate is broad, it is not unlimited. Because Congress’s authority to investigate is tied to its authority to legislate, limits on congressional investigations are necessarily linked to the limits on Congress’s constitutional authority. For example, Congress has no general authority to investigate the purely private affair of an ordinary citizen.

The doctrine of separation of powers also places limits on congressional authority to investigate. Congress cannot, under the guise of an investigation, usurp the power of another branch of government. It cannot investigate matters where the means of redress is purely judicial. Nor can Congress investigate matters committed to the President’s discretion. For example, Congress could not undertake an investigation to determine an individual’s entitlement to a pardon because the Constitution granted the pardon power to the President, not Congress.

While Congress can investigate conduct that may be criminal, Congress itself lacks the authority to bring criminal charges or otherwise initiate a criminal prosecution. If a congressional investigation uncovers evidence of criminal activity, however, Congress may refer the matter to the Department of Justice for investigation and, potentially, prosecution...

Ultimately, nearly any matter can be anchored in some fashion to Congress’s legislative authority, making its authority to investigate almost boundless in practice. That reality is compounded by expansive interpretations of congressional authority and a hesitation by the courts to intervene in congressional investigations.

<End Snip>

https://www.mololamken.com/knowledge-What-Exactly-Does-Congress-Have-the-Authority-To-Investigate

So, let's review, though I think that last paragraph says it all: anything that could in any way be tied to legislation, qualifies for Congressional inquiry; merely for even gathering information (on matters of national importance), is enough (which could conceivably inform future legislation). Also, oversight of federal departments and executive agencies, cuts mustard for legitimate Congressional oversight. The first Congressional investigation, was on a military battle!

Basically, other than a matter which is totally under the authority of another branch of government, or a strictly private matter, Congress's power to investigate is valid.

I personally wish that all these people who think they are above the law, are immediately levied with heavy, daily fines. And, as soon as they fall behind in payment of said fines, I say the Congress should throw them in jail, for contempt of Congress. As effective as this approach would be, all signs have been that Congressional Democrats just don't have the balls for it.

 

I would do the same and I have nothing to do with it either. Why waste your time? Plus it benefits his pocket book to give the democrat facists the finger.

 

You can investigate to make educated decisions too! Doesn't mean you or they get to break law or the constitutional protections to do so.

 

What is the point of your comment? If you are presented with a Congressional subpoena, it is not optional, as to if you comply with it. Who is breaking the law, by this, other than those who act as if they are above being compelled by subpoena? And, if they chose, they could satisfy the law merely by testifying for a session in which they say nothing other than, "Congressman, I would like to invoke my Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination." If that's too much for them, then they ARE in contempt of Congress, which would absolutely be within its legal rights, to have them thrown in jail until they were ready to comply.

 

A court, usually, when the legislative branch and the executive branch can't work things out. The difficulty usually arises because congress naturally takes a very liberal and expandeed view on what legislative purposes are like anything it wants to do. The courts have backed up subpoenas as a way for congress to get important and relevant information it needs for specific legislation that it is actively considering.

 

You are correct that congress can investigate anything it wants to, but that is not the issue. The issue is the issuance of subpoenas, and the courts have ruled that congress can issue enforceable subpoenas only if they are for critical information needed for an active on-going law making activity.