- Jan 15, 2018 at 1:18 am #3512480
So…there is no honor among thieves, it’s said. Now that Bannon has been exiled from the Trump circle, I wonder if he might not be ready to talk honestly–assuming there’s anything to tell, and assuming that he’s capable of that. He said in Fire and Fury that “this whole Russian investigation is going to come down to money laundering”. Bannon has a history of going after his enemies pretty hard. I wonder if he has any reason to stay loyal to the Trump crowd now (or just the opposite), especially under threat of perjury.
Pure speculation.Jan 15, 2018 at 3:30 pm #3512526
Looks like Bannon has overstepped. His patron, the Mercers, have withdrawn their financial support. Fired him from Breitbart,
I don’t think he will be a factor anymore, although he may continue to speak up occasionally with sensational statements the media likes.Jan 15, 2018 at 5:21 pm #3512550
Well yeah, but Bannon wanted to be a kingmaker and a force. I wonder if his resentment over this turn of events might make him willing to bring down Trump as a way of staying influential–and getting revenge? Again, presuming he actually knows anything that could do this.Jan 16, 2018 at 1:31 am #3512682
Wonder if he’ll wear clean shirts?Jan 16, 2018 at 4:26 am #3512700
“Wonder if he’ll wear clean shirts?”
some commentator said that he looks like a disheveled drunk.
the thing is, it’s the House committee. Run by Republicans. That hasn’t exactly gone out of its way to actually, you know, investigate.Jan 16, 2018 at 2:43 pm #3512728
I think they’re partisan to Trump, may investigate Bannon
Except “investigate” is a political term, try to find some mud that sticks on the wallJan 16, 2018 at 5:48 pm #3512759
And now Bannon’s been subpoenaed by Mueller: from today’s NYTimes:
“The move marked the first time Mr. Mueller is known to have used a grand jury subpoena to seek information from a member of Mr. Trump’s inner circle. The special counsel’s office has used subpoenas before to seek information on Mr. Trump’s associates and their possible ties to Russia or other foreign governments.”
You have to answer all questions in a Grand Jury interview and everything is recorded for the record. there’s some speculation that this is just an opening move by Mueller to get Bannon to appear in a regular meeting with lawyers understanding that the Grand Jury is out there, but that sounds a bit far fetched.
Ze plot thickens…Jan 16, 2018 at 7:52 pm #3512773
Todd StoughBPL Member
All of this wasted money. All for nothing. If Trump is a bad president then don’t re-elect him. His term is going to be up before anything can be done about it. If he is a good president that people want to elect, what is the problem?Jan 16, 2018 at 8:34 pm #3512780
Well, there’s the small matter of breaking the law. This is a legal inquiry. You don’t get to break the law if you’re the president. And then also, it’s established that Russia interfered in our election. Is it a waste of money to look into that?Jan 16, 2018 at 10:18 pm #3512797
The question is, did the Trump people agree to drop the Russia sanctions in return for the Russians hacking the DNC and releasing before the election, and pushing fake stories about Hillary.
There’s a lot of evidence supporting this, like Donald Jr. email that promised dirt on Hillary from Russian government, Jr. said “love it”, Jr., Mannafort, and Kushner then went to meeting to discuss it. And the Trump campaign had removed from the Republican platform the Ukraine sanctions. Flynn admitted to a deal where as soon as Trump would get into office, they’d remove the sanctions and then Flynn had a deal lined up where he’d make a bunch of money personally. etc.
May be illegal, maybe not.
Also, a lot of Trump’s business deals. After his third bankruptcy, regular banks wouldn’t loan him money so it appears he got financing from Russian and Italian crime groups. Trump is an idiot for running for president just to boost his ego because there is now more spotlight on this apparently illegal activity.
Also Kushner. Kushner’s family made some real estate deals with heavy leverage that now require financing or at risk of going bankrupt. They got caught selling U.S. Visas in return for investments, using the influence of Jared on the Trump administration. Also questions about using money from Russian crime people.
With Trump as president, he can just fire someone trying to investigate. This all is one level worse corruption than what we’ve had previously so worth investigating. We don’t want the U.S. turning into an autocracy.Jan 16, 2018 at 11:21 pm #3512811
“We don’t want the U.S. turning into an autocracy.”
That’s why I objected to Gerald Ford as president.
..you see, this is funny, you see, because ‘auto-cracy’ and ford….
Jan 17, 2018 at 1:05 am #3512834
- This reply was modified 10 months, 3 weeks ago by jeffrey armbruster.
Nick GatelBPL Member
@ngatelLocale: Southern California
We don’t want the U.S. turning into an autocracy.
It already is. It’s called the beltway or the swamp. Congressmen and Senators who have made their office lifetime careers. Time to exercise the second half of Article V of our constitution and take back control of our government.Jan 17, 2018 at 4:07 am #3512860
Dodge the issue JeffreyJan 17, 2018 at 4:14 am #3512862
The White House has exerted ‘executive privilege” over Bannon’s testimony to the House. In short, Trump is claiming that he can compel Bannon to remain silent over any of the questions that the House might have for him in regards to their investigation.
Which means: the White House now thinks that they have the right to kill any testimony that they wish. To which the House responded by issuing a subpoena to Bannon which will compel him to testify. Both parties did this–r’s and d’s.
Nick, Trump’s actions are what (would be) autocracy looks like.
Ken, I’m not dodging, I’m performing a chevr Ole.Jan 17, 2018 at 4:56 am #3512870
W I S N E R !BPL Member
Jesus Chrysler, you guys are something.Jan 17, 2018 at 5:15 am #3512872
“The White House has exerted ‘executive privilege” over Bannon’s testimony to the House.”
As I understand it, actually, they didn’t. Instead, they “suggested that some of the answers could potentially infringe upon executive privilege.” [Politico]
“…compel Bannon to remain silent over any of the questions that the House might have for him in regards to their investigation.”
Also not true. From what I read, he answered questions for about an hour and a half. It’s when the questioning turned to the presidential transition, and his time in the White House, that he began refusing to answer, as I understand it.Jan 17, 2018 at 5:26 am #3512874
“It’s when the questioning turned to the presidential transition, and his time in the White House, that he began refusing to answer, as I understand it.”
well, yes. The relevant time period. As for “some of the answers infringing on executive privilege”…that’s another way of saying that the President has a right to block testimony relevant to the investigation.
But agreed, I may have this wrong. Or this could all be opening gambits and kabuki.Jan 17, 2018 at 5:53 am #3512876
“that’s another way of saying that the President has a right to block testimony relevant to the investigation.”
That will be for the courts to decide. Though the court ruled against Nixon, in U.S. v Nixon the court noted “the valid need for protection of communications between high Government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties” and that “[h]uman experience teaches that those who expect public dissemination of their remarks may well temper candor with a concern for appearances and for their own interests to the detriment of the decisionmaking process.”
Of course, that was a case between the judiciary and the executive, as far as I can tell, there hasn’t been a Supreme Court case relating to executive privilege between the executive and the legislative.
Interestingly, to me anyway, the next president to assert executive privilege and lose in court was Clinton.Jan 17, 2018 at 5:58 am #3512877
It’s my understanding that Bannon will have to answer all questions under oath and for the record before the Grand Jury. No executive privilege. And the House seems to think that subpoenaing him will likewise force him to answer questions.
by refusing to answer, is Bannon signaling that he has info that implicates others? Kabuki.Jan 17, 2018 at 6:10 am #3512880
“It’s my understanding that Bannon will have to answer all questions under oath and for the record before the Grand Jury. No executive privilege.”
Again, that might be for a court to decide. Sidney Blumenthal invoked executive privilege before a federal grand jury during the Lewinsky affair.
“by refusing to answer, is Bannon signaling that he has info that implicates others?”
Not necessarily. According to Robert S. Litt, former general counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the Obama administration”
“[T]he privilege belongs to the President, and inferior officers should not take it upon themselves to disclose such communications without express permission from the White House. Certainly that is how these issues were handled in the Obama Administration: when Congress asked an agency for information about presidential communications, as it often did, the agency consulted with the White House to see if there were objections to responding.” [Wikipedia]Jan 17, 2018 at 4:07 pm #3512895
so he’ll talk about before the election? That has some useful information
not during transition and when in Whitehouse? whatever… the courts will decide, there is a lot of other information from other people
it’s funny how some of them say they won’t talk about stuff because they may claim executive privilege in the future. I don’t see the distinction from just claiming executive privilege, again, whatever…
since Bannon is being subpoenaed by the grand jury, that normally means Bannon is not at risk, just a witness, that’s useful information
reading the tea leaves is difficult. Especially because the media exaggerates to get more eyeballs to make more money on ads.
Ford – autocracy – I just got it, I’m kind of slow – ha, ha, ha,…Jan 17, 2018 at 4:19 pm #3512897
No, we do not have an autocracy
The courts have repeatedly made decisions against Trump
The media has a lot of reports very critical of Trump. Flake was just talking about how it’s wrong for Trump to call any story he doesn’t like “fake news”. And to cite fake news he likes as real.
Congress passed a law requiring Trump to implement Russia sanctions, even though Trump didn’t want to. He reluctantly signed it. Who knows if there would have been enough votes to over-ride a veto. Of course Trump has delayed executing that law. Has he done it yet? I don’t think so. At least he hasn’t removed any.
So no, we do not have an autocracy – all the branches of government are not under control of the leader, like in Russia. Trump is envious.
Whether there should be Russia sanctions is another question. I could argue that we should at least work to remove them as soon as possible. But for Trump to do it unilaterally would appear to be quid pro quo.Jan 18, 2018 at 2:36 am #3513010
A commentator on MSNBC, “R. Meadow”, suggests that there’s a game afoot between testimony delivered to the House panel on the one hand and the same thing delivered to Mueller. Testimony delivered to the House will find its way to the White House. Testimony delivered to Mueller won’t. And so, when Bannon refused to testify to the House, Republicans were quick to issue a subpoena that would supposedly force him to do so. All other actors in the Trump family and administration who’ve refused to testify to the House–that is, all other actors–have not been subpoenaed, and went on their merry way. Not Bannon.
If Bannon wants his testimony to do the most damage–he’ll deliver it to Mueller. And the White House won’t know anything about it.
And now the Mueller subpoena to Bannon has been lifted and the parties will meet in a private setting.
signed, Geoff (the G is for “gossip”).Jan 18, 2018 at 3:43 am #3513019
Bannon will now answer FBI questions at the FBI office, the grand jury subpoena got Bannon to agree to this
Bannon will be accompanied by his lawyer
Bannon’s lawyer is also the lawyer of several white house officials
Maybe Bannon’s lawyer will let other people know what Bannon said?
That is weird how all the Republican congressmen treat Bannon so much differently than other Trump people. Bannon has been thrown under the bus after his critical comments in that book, must have something to do with that…Jan 18, 2018 at 3:58 am #3513021
“Bannon’s lawyer is also the lawyer of several white house officials
Maybe Bannon’s lawyer will let other people know what Bannon said?”
True. Weird. Is it legal to divulge what one of your clients has testified..to another client, or interested parties?
In this gosh darn topsy turvy world of ours, does that matter anymore?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.