General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumstexasfiddler
(1,990 posts)[link:|
samsingh
(17,599 posts)marble falls
(57,103 posts)brooklynite
(94,596 posts)marble falls
(57,103 posts)... until 45's appeals are done. He's lost all the way up to Federal District court, I believe he's got just one more level and then the SCOTUS gets it.
Can you wait until the legal process is gone through? Or should we just lynch them?
Crunchy Frog
(26,587 posts)I thought it was basically up to Merrick Garland.
marble falls
(57,103 posts)... privilege. 45 claims whatever conversations he had on January 6 or about Jan 6 are covered by executive privilege. Within a month or so, depending on whether the SCOTUS decides to take the case and when it gets put on the calendar he'll have played out his string.
Once it's decided to either not take the case leaving the last court ruling against 45 stand, or they take and rule against 45 - then Bannon's got no cover and if he again refuses, he's actually in locked into Contempt of Congress and Garland will go after him (no doubt in my mind). Right now his claim hinges on 45's claims.
Personally, I can't wait till stinky gets hauled in front of the committee and he has to explain himself.
Beastly Boy
(9,375 posts)It has to go through the federal justice bureaucravy. The House referral was actually forwarded to the DC Attorney General's office, not to Garland. This office is responsible for bringing the charges to a grand jury The grand jury has an option to either indict or not indict. But before the case even gets to the grand jury, there are legal barriers within the DC AG office that may prevent it from referring the case to the grand jury. In either event, Garland has very little say in what will eventually happen.
Here is an article that goes into the whole thing in more detail: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/litman-don-t-be-too-sure-about-the-doj-s-duty-to-indict-bannon/ar-AAPQAeq
Atticus
(15,124 posts)election.
It was not the "norm" and we should not acquiesce in returning to it. A similar referral during the Nixon administration produced an indictment in eight days.
Was the subpoena valid? Yes.
Was the subpoena served on Bannon? Yes.
Has Bannon refused to comply with the subpoena? Yes.
DING, DING, DING! Indictment to issue!
Waiting for a determination of the validity of tfg's childishly silly "executive privilege" claim makes about as much sense as waiting to see if some court somewhere will declare him Grand Poobah For Life.
The midterms are less than a year away so, no, I can't "wait" until these fascist bastards run out the clock under tfg's "system of justice", close down the investigation and tell us "Nothing to see here---move along!"
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(15,624 posts)Apparently there are prior DOJ/OLC legal opinions that may be complicating this process, and the committees subpoena language may have been too vague and broad, and could be interpreted as encompassing a presidents official duties, in addition to personal/political activities.
blogslug
(38,002 posts)I was just about to post that here.
Scrivener7
(50,955 posts)If he were a Democrat, he would have been indicted three weeks ago.
But no.
Gaugamela
(2,496 posts)until they re-install TFG in the White House. Then well start seeing subpoenas enforced.