Reply to Bannon indicted

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Bannon indicted"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Guilty on both count![/quote]

Of course! That's what happens when you aren't allowed to mount a defense. SC should overturn it as there's precedence from way back during Nixon's presidency.

I don't like Bannon but I don't like kangaroo courts more. We have to be VERY careful or it will come back to bite us as a party. This makes me very nervous. Bannon is not easily intimidated.

For those speaking about Hillary, she walked into a much friendlier situation.[/quote]

Was Bannon somehow blocked from a defense?  My understanding is that he just chose not to put on a defense (which is his right).

Let’s review.  He was subpoenaed by Congress to testify. He refused. He was hauled to court because he refused.  The prosecution explained why he needed to appear in front of Congress.  His defense had nothing to say. He lost.  [/quote]

There was no point. The judge at first disallowed the letter from Trump, then realized he was up the creek without a paddle due to precedence. So he kinda sorta allowed it. Bannon was denied every request he had. So why try to mount a defense. They will appeal, the appeal will be turned down (Obama judge) and then we'll see if the SC takes the case. Max sentence is 2 years, min 2 months. My guess is between now and October they will think long and hard about the consequences of playing hardball. Election year and all.[/quote]

The SC justices are republican in that they are pro life.  But they are very definitely not pro fascism.[/quote]

They are there to determine legality, not to be weaponized.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics