Jump to content

Steve Bannon Indicted

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 862
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Ted Lange
Ted Lange
elfenix
elfenix
C-Man
C-Man

“Looks like Yoda with AIDS” lol

Posted Images

Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Of course it was.  Happy Veteran's Day Steve!  

Sorry President Trump is gonna have you murdered though, just in case you were thinking of cooperating.  

I think deep down inside, you were a decent guy.  But thoughts and prayers to your family on your upcoming "accident."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89458

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

I don't care who the judge is - I can see Bannon getting mouthy over the weekend and pissing off the judge before he ever steps foot in his courtroom.

Also, Trump didn't have a good track record with his election lawsuits that went up in front of his own appointees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27472

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

I don't care who the judge is - I can see Bannon getting mouthy over the weekend and pissing off the judge before he ever steps foot in his courtroom.

Also, Trump didn't have a good track record with his election lawsuits that went up in front of his own appointees.

 

57 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

District judges just aren't that political.  They get a rare opportunity to handle a political case and occasionally show their ass (Reed O'Connor, Andrew Hanen), but they're not going to stick their necks out on a misdemeanor criminal case.

Bless your hearts

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14264

Posted
Posted
District judges just aren't that political.  They get a rare opportunity to handle a political case and occasionally show their ass (Reed O'Connor, Andrew Hanen), but they're not going to stick their necks out on a misdemeanor criminal case.

I used to believe this.

Now, not so much. (On either side)
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
South Austin

South Austin 52159

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

District judges just aren't that political.  They get a rare opportunity to handle a political case and occasionally show their ass (Reed O'Connor, Andrew Hanen), but they're not going to stick their necks out on a misdemeanor criminal case.

This is pretty true. Look at the Republican-appointed judges who presided over the election cases. Look at the Republican-appointed Lee Yeakel who just struck down Abbott’s Executive Order prohibiting mask mandates.

And as I understand it, this is a contempt proceeding, not a prosecution of a more substantive criminal statute where the scent might be more political. Contempt proceedings for the most part are pretty straightforward. Was there a valid subpoena or court order in place directing the respondent to take action, did the respondent have notice of the subpoena or order, and did the respondent comply with the subpoena and order? There isn’t a whole lot of weighing of the evidence in determining guilt or innocence.

And regardless of political affiliation, federal judges don’t like it when people disrespect process. I’ve seen federal judges come down hard on attorneys and parties for violating subpoenas and court orders regarding discovery.

In one case early in my career Judge Fish in Dallas held a defendant in contempt for violating one of his orders requiring the defendant to appear for a deposition, and after a contempt hearing we ended up deposing the defendant in a federal detention center. That was a lot of fun, but it taught me a lesson very early in my career – Don’t fuck with federal district judges.

Of course, Congressional subpoenas are a different animal, and this whole case has the potential to be a farce, so what do I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28717

Posted
Posted

When Bannon was sucking up to Trump, Trump liked him. When Bannon was upstaging Trump, Trump didn’t like him. Literally everyone else in the White House despised him. He’s such an unlikeable figure, I have a hard time imagining him getting special treatment from the courts, even from a Trump appointee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31305

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, South Austin said:

This is pretty true. Look at the Republican-appointed judges who presided over the election cases. Look at the Republican-appointed Lee Yeakel who just struck down Abbott’s Executive Order prohibiting mask mandates.

And as I understand it, this is a contempt proceeding, not a prosecution of a more substantive criminal statute where the scent might be more political. Contempt proceedings for the most part are pretty straightforward. Was there a valid subpoena or court order in place directing the respondent to take action, did the respondent have notice of the subpoena or order, and did the respondent comply with the subpoena and order? There isn’t a whole lot of weighing of the evidence in determining guilt or innocence.

And regardless of political affiliation, federal judges don’t like it when people disrespect process. I’ve seen federal judges come down hard on attorneys and parties for violating subpoenas and court orders regarding discovery.

In one case early in my career Judge Fish in Dallas held a defendant in contempt for violating one of his orders requiring the defendant to appear for a deposition, and after a contempt hearing we ended up deposing the defendant in a federal detention center. That was a lot of fun, but it taught me a lesson very early in my career – Don’t fuck with federal district judges.

Of course, Congressional subpoenas are a different animal, and this whole case has the potential to be a farce, so what do I know.

Just to be clear, it is a criminal offense that will be tried like any other, with the "gravamen" being contempt of congress.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/192

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Under a Bad Sign

Horn Under a Bad Sign 20345

Posted
Posted

Stephen K. Bannon, the former Trump White House adviser who was indicted last week for defying a congressional subpoena, surrendered to federal authorities Monday morning and made his first court appearance later in the afternoon.

Bannon, 67, walked through a group of photographers outside the FBI field office in downtown Washington. He told the news media, “I don’t want anybody to take their eye off the ball for what we do every day … We’re taking down the Biden regime.”

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChuckNorrisActionJeans

ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2659

Posted
Posted

Regime, indeed. He and the other Trump goons are all in on helping Brazil kill what democracy they have left. Replicating the shit they're still trying to pull here. He should hang if there's any justice left

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/11/world/americas/bolsonaro-trump-brazil-election.html

Steve Bannon, Mr. Trump’s former chief strategist, has said President Bolsonaro will only lose if “the machines” steal the election. Representative Mark Green, a Tennessee Republican who has pushed laws combating voter fraud, met with lawmakers in Brazil to discuss “voting integrity policies.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted

Two of Bannon’s accomplices have pleaded guilty for financial crimes they committed with him and for which he was pardoned. How do you wall builders feel about this?

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/21/politics/kolfage-badolato-guilty-plea-border-wall-bannon/index.html
Brian Kolfage and Andrew Badolato each pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Kolfage also pleaded guilty to two counts of filing a false tax return and one count of wire fraud in connection with filing a false tax return. 

"I knew what I was doing was wrong and a crime," Kolfage told the judge. Both men will be sentenced on September 6.
The men are accused by federal prosecutors of using hundreds of thousands of dollars donated to an online crowdfunding campaign called We Build the Wall for personal expenses, among other things.
 
 
Bannon, who pleaded not guilty and denied any wrongdoing, was pardoned by then-President Trump in his final days in office. The Manhattan district attorney's office is investigating Bannon for the same conduct and whether it violated state law. The pardon only covered federal crimes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29803

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Satchel said:

Two of Bannon’s accomplices have pleaded guilty for financial crimes they committed with him and for which he was pardoned. How do you wall builders feel about this?

I'll tell you exactly how they feel. 

The CR is full of ideologues who have been libs all their lives and can't get past their hysteria and need for outrage. Lib tiktok (the official spokesoutlet for Lib Snowflake Central) has this video of a so-called "trans" piece of shit teacher saying he/she (choose only one, you dangerous sickos) wants to show gay porn to babies who just happen to be in the car when a mother (a mother!!!!) is dropping off her unsuspectng 6-year-old at kindergarten. I don't see you complaining about that, so you obviously support pedophilia.

You hate Steve Bannon (oh yea, I hate him and Trump really, really bad. I hate both parties because they're the same.®) because he hates people who rape babies or look at pictures of people raping babies. If Beloved Kyle machine gunned a bunch of baby rapists, you'd say it was against the law.

Look what you're doing to our country!! 

I'll now either flee or stonewall, you snowflake betas!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2959

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Not pardoning anyone remotely known to the president would be a nice restriction.

 

In all fairness, the president barely knew Bannon.  I think he may have gotten coffee for the president a few times, but he didn't really know him.

  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29803

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Tom said:

 

In all fairness, the president barely knew Bannon.  I think he may have gotten coffee for the president a few times, but he didn't really know him.

And the Donald fired him like a dog because he wasn't even good at delivering coffee. DIET COKE, YOU FUCKING LOSER. NOW GET OUT!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
TexasEd

TexasEd 8064

Posted
Posted

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/03/politics/steve-bannon-new-york-grand-jury-build-the-wall/index.html

 

Quote

Several close allies of Steve Bannon have been subpoenaed to testify before a New York state grand jury investigating his fundraising for a private border wall effort, people familiar with the investigation tell CNN.

The subpoenas were sent to several witnesses in recent weeks, requiring them to appear and provide testimony for the Manhattan district attorney's probe, the people said. Among those who received subpoenas are people in Bannon's "immediate circle," according to one of the sources familiar with the matter.

Quote

The district attorney's office launched the criminal investigation into Bannon's "We Build the Wall" crowd-fundraising activities early last year after Trump pardoned Bannon on federal fraud charges relating to the same alleged scheme. Presidential pardons do not apply to state investigations.

Since Bannon was charged but the federal case was never brought to a conclusion, lawyers familiar with the issue say, he would not have double-jeopardy grounds to challenge any possible state charges.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76422

Posted
Posted
Quote

The jury of 12 and two alternates, the majority of whom are nonwhite, were seated from a pool of 22 jurors who were qualified. The jury selection process ran long on Monday, as many potential jurors voiced their dislike of Bannon and his work in the Trump White House. Those who did so were eliminated and were not on the final panel.


this will be easy to appeal, not enough whites on the jury 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31305

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Horn Dog said:

Is he wearing postman pants?

Actually, I think they may be zip-offs.  What a toad.  A male ditch pig.

Also, 2000 wants its shoes back (and they were horribad then, too).

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13416

Posted
Posted (edited)

Shouldn't this be a relatively easy & quick decision for a jury?

1. Did Congress issue a subpoena for Bannon.

2. Did Bannon defy the subpoena?

Could they have knocked out this trial in 15 minutes?

EDIT: I assume that Bannon may have come to the conclusion that he will be found guilty and look to appeal, hoping for a friendly WH in early 2025 before the appeal is heard. Could he extend an appeal that long?

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31305

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, The Ace of Aces said:

FWIW this is very common. The burden is all on the prosecution so nothing they do really makes any difference. 

Well, it's common when the prosecution has a skimpy case and the defense can easily argue that it didn't meet its burden.

In this one, I think the jury and judge will be underwhelmed.

I don't think the DC Circuit will be any help for Bannon at all.  It will be telling if the Supreme Court grants cert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76422

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, it's common when the prosecution has a skimpy case and the defense can easily argue that it didn't meet its burden.

In this one, I think the jury and judge will be underwhelmed.

I don't think the DC Circuit will be any help for Bannon at all.  It will be telling if the Supreme Court jenny thomas grants cert.

fixed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kyrie Eleison

Kyrie Eleison 9312

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, it's common when the prosecution has a skimpy case and the defense can easily argue that it didn't meet its burden.

In this one, I think the jury and judge will be underwhelmed.

I don't think the DC Circuit will be any help for Bannon at all.  It will be telling if the Supreme Court grants cert.

that's a civil litigator reading/interpretation if there ever was one, my man...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...