Bannon in Contempt

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We have a double standard justice system.

Nah, we don't. These are just your pre-emptive excuses, for when your fantasies collide with reality.

Get the decision that aligns with your childish fetishes? Justice has been done.

Don't get the decision you like, because your silly little fantasies do not align with reality? Must be a big conspiracy of the entire world to make you look stupid!

Rise, repeat. Forever. This is who you are, now. Trump has converted you.

 

[Faun]

Right up until a committee run by a Republican issues them. Let's be clear.

Democrats have done that too...

House panel votes to hold Clinton tech aide Bryan Pagliano in contempt

"Mr. Pagliano is defending a critical principal of individual liberty and the constitutional right of a private citizen to resist partisan political forces masquerading as proper government functions," Pagliano's lawyer writes.

www.politico.com

 

[B. Kidd]

Both democrats and republicans voted to charge Bannnon with cmptempt of congress.

RINO'S aren't Republicans.
Didn't you get the memo?
RINO'S are some confused, wayward, inventions of Dr. Frankensthien!
G. W. being a pronounced experiment for example.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Democrats have done that too...

House panel votes to hold Clinton tech aide Bryan Pagliano in contempt

"Mr. Pagliano is defending a critical principal of individual liberty and the constitutional right of a private citizen to resist partisan political forces masquerading as proper government functions," Pagliano's lawyer writes.

www.politico.com

Yep. But a difference:

From that article:

"An attorney for Pagliano, Mark MacDougall, streesed that his client was ready to appear behind closed doors, but would not be part of a public spectacle."

This is what is being offered to Bannon from the start.

 

[iceberg]

So... you CAN read, right? You CAN rad the thread title... right? You HAVE heard about these events....


...right?

i can, sure. can you? i asked you what his crime was and you chime your usual bullshit in and DO NOT answer the simple question.

just attack. one trick pony.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

i asked you what his crime was

Which was a pretty stupid question, considering you opened a thread with it described right in the title. I don't know what else to tell you.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

From what I'm seeing here, the Trumpsters appear to believe that showing for subpoenas should be optional going forward.

Given that it has been optional going back, why not?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Yeah. If not, they should just get rid of it. It would be a joke at that point.

It's already a fucking joke. It was a joke LONG before Bannon.

 

[Faun]

Yep. But a difference:

From that article:

"An attorney for Pagliano, Mark MacDougall, streesed that his client was ready to appear behind closed doors, but would not be part of a public spectacle."

This is what is being offered to Bannon from the start.

Another difference is that Pagliano had already testified before Congress on the very same matter. But still, Democrats voted against him being held in contempt in a subcommittee vote. Also unlike with Bannon, the full House never voted on the matter.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Given that it has been optional going back, why not?

It was never optional.

 

[whitehall]

Lefties cried for about 50 years over Commies being subpoenaed to appear before HUAC and they blamed it on McCarthy. Here they are again.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Bannon makes all his money off of trump supporters with speaking engagements and talk shows.

There's no way Bannon can continue to earn all that money and turn on trump.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Jeff Sessions had every right to prosecute Pagliano. Subpoenas are not optional. He chose not to do so, as they already had all of that testimony on record and had no real push from Republicans (save for, like, one) to do so, because the purpose of the dog and pony show had already expired when Hilary lost the 2016 election.

 

[JimH52]

The House will get all the documents from the National Archives. And the Dems will remember the refusal of the GOP to respect the letter of the law. Next time they subpoena a Dem, like they did of Hillary and the Benghazi joke, they will thumb their nose at the Repubs. They are kowtowing to the Liar in Chief....trump.

Hillary handed over thousands of pages of documents and spent 11 straight hours testifying to the House. Now trump and his fellow thugs have changed the rules. The Dems will have the same right now to refuse documents and refuse to testify. Just watch when the repubs try to subpoena a Dem...when they hold the majority.....God Forbid.

 

[BlindBoo]

Obozo and his wingman ignored subpoenas. Hillary ignored subpoenas

They didn't ignore them. Holder and Obama fought one. Clinton aids plead the 5th.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

And, now what?

Who is going to carry out his arrest?

No way in hell does this look good for anyone, especially given the nose thumbing done in the Obama administration.

Banana Republic

So Trump Humpers are ok with Trump Humpers breaking the law, as long as, it doesn't result in showing the crooked shit that Lord Trump has done.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Nah, we don't. These are just your pre-emptive excuses, for when your fantasies collide with reality.

Get the decision that aligns with your childish fetishes? Justice has been done.

Don't get the decision you like, because your silly little fantasies do not align with reality? Must be a big conspiracy of the entire world to make you look stupid!

Rise, repeat. Forever. This is who you are, now. Trump has converted you.

Andy McCabe lied to Congress. Anthony Fauci lied to Congress. John Brennan lied to Congress. Why weren't they held to account?

 

[airplanemechanic]

Baloney, she testified to Congress for hours on end and turn over thousands of pages of subpoenaed documents.

Trumpybuddies are afraid to turn over documents and testify for two basic reasons. They're afraid of Trumpybear and they're fright fucked of Trumpyberra.

The bitch destroyed subpoenaed hard drives with a fucking hammer and deleted subpoenaed emails and she walked.

Fuck off.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The bitch destroyed subpoenaed hard drives with a fucking hammer and deleted subpoenaed emails and she walked.

Fuck off.

And it was legal, because of the clumsy subpoena of the republican hacks. Whoops.

Kinda sticks in yer craw, i bet. I can see why.

 

[airplanemechanic]

And it was legal, because of the clumsy subpoena of the republican hacks. Whoops.

Kinda sticks in yer craw, i bet. I can see why.

It's legal to destroy evidence with a hammer and delete emails?

NO, it was not legal. She deleted over 31000 emails "she" deemed personal. That was not her decision. They were under federal subpoena.

Please explain in detail how her destroying evidence is legal.

Or retract your bullshit immediately.