There's a high probability that Garland is impeached and Bannon wins his appeal.
On what grounds do you think Bannon can get his conviction reversed on appeal? I'm betting you were not (and still are not) aware of a single ground that Bannon plans to set forth on appeal when you typed that there is a high probability that "Bannon wins his appeal."
There is almost zero possibility that Bannon gets any kind of reversal on appeal. This was an easy contempt case -- he was duly served a subpoena and publicly defied it. He made whatever factual and legal arguments could excuse that. Then he was convicted by a jury.
What grounds do you believe Bannon will be able to reverse, in whole or in part, his conviction by a jury on contempt counts? You don't have any in mind, do you?
On what grounds do you think Bannon can get his conviction reversed on appeal? I'm betting you were not (and still are not) aware of a single ground that Bannon plans to set forth on appeal when you typed that there is a high probability that "Bannon wins his appeal."
There is almost zero possibility that Bannon gets any kind of reversal on appeal. This was an easy contempt case -- he was duly served a subpoena and publicly defied it. He made whatever factual and legal arguments could excuse that. Then he was convicted by a jury.
What grounds do you believe Bannon will be able to reverse, in whole or in part, his conviction by a jury on contempt counts? You don't have any in mind, do you?
On the grounds of historical precedent. Obama officials ignored congressional subpoenas all the time and never even got fined let alone jail time. Eric Holder was voted to be in contempt of congress by a 255-67 bipartisan vote in 2012 for refusing to testify about his Fast and Furious arms dealing scandal. Obama's DoJ refused to prosecute because he was a Democrat.
I've never heard of the grounds you are referring to. Case law is "historical precedent" but I don't think you are referring to any legal cases that Bannon will cite. I've never heard of the appeal ground of "historical precedent" followed by a description of what happened to someone else in a different context.
Whatever did or did not happen to Eric Holder is not a ground for an appeals court to reverse a jury conviction of criminal contempt. This is the "high probability" of reversal you were referring to? I highly doubt that Bannon's Notice of Appeal will even set forth this "historical precedent" or whatever you are claiming as a ground. I guess we shall see in 30 days when it gets filed.
On the grounds of historical precedent. Obama officials ignored congressional subpoenas all the time and never even got fined let alone jail time. Eric Holder was voted to be in contempt of congress by a 255-67 bipartisan vote in 2012 for refusing to testify about his Fast and Furious arms dealing scandal. Obama's DoJ refused to prosecute because he was a Democrat.
I've never heard of the grounds you are referring to. Case law is "historical precedent" but I don't think you are referring to any legal cases that Bannon will cite. I've never heard of the appeal ground of "historical precedent" followed by a description of what happened to someone else in a different context.
Whatever did or did not happen to Eric Holder is not a ground for an appeals court to reverse a jury conviction of criminal contempt. This is the "high probability" of reversal you were referring to? I highly doubt that Bannon's Notice of Appeal will even set forth this "historical precedent" or whatever you are claiming as a ground. I guess we shall see in 30 days when it gets filed.
His lawyer says the appeal is "bulletproof". I don't know the legalese but it centers around Bannon not being allowed to defend himself.
I do know that the Biden DoJ has demonstrated itself to be wildly partisan and corrupt.
Even fabricating charges to pursue its political agenda.
On what grounds do you think Bannon can get his conviction reversed on appeal? I'm betting you were not (and still are not) aware of a single ground that Bannon plans to set forth on appeal when you typed that there is a high probability that "Bannon wins his appeal."
There is almost zero possibility that Bannon gets any kind of reversal on appeal. This was an easy contempt case -- he was duly served a subpoena and publicly defied it. He made whatever factual and legal arguments could excuse that. Then he was convicted by a jury.
What grounds do you believe Bannon will be able to reverse, in whole or in part, his conviction by a jury on contempt counts? You don't have any in mind, do you?
Simple. On January 3rd, 2023, the January 6th witch trials are a thing of the past. Hard to hold someone in contempt of hearings that are no longer taking place.
No, it would be quite easy to do so. Where did you get this idea? You seem to be saying someone could defy a subpoena and avoid contempt charges by simply running out the clock on the underlying hearing/proceeding. Contempt charges should be dismissed because someone was able to stretch their contempt past the hearing date? WTF? I've never heard of such a goofball theory. No one would ever comply with a subpoena in any context or proceeding if that were the case.
Anyway, this is not a ground for appeal. Bannon raised a lot of wild theories at trial, but never claimed this. He can't appeal on a legal theory that he never raised.
Anyone else drink Bleach. My good friend Fredrick Douglas wouldn't. Gary and his moron in the room friend will. Goes down good after all the orange Kool aid
Anyone else drink Bleach. My good friend Fredrick Douglas wouldn't. Gary and his moron in the room friend will. Goes down good after all the orange Kool aid
^^ This is what happens when your world view is formed by playing the telephone game with morons.
USA currently has one of the lower inflation rates among rich nations.
we are at 8.2%, europe is at 9.9%
Good on Biden.
US also has one of the lowest unemployment rates among rich nations.
we are at 3.5%, Europe is at 6.6%.
Good on Biden.
And of course our deficit is falling fast and our currency is very strong.
Good on Republicans for allowing fracking in red states all these years so we don't have spiking energy costs, which is the ONLY reason our inflation rate is lower than (some, not all) European countries right now, despite making ALL the same fiscal/monetary mistakes.
Biden has added $4 trillion to the 10-year deficit according to the CBO. Not counting another $1 trillion he's trying to add for student transfer.
I've never heard of the grounds you are referring to. Case law is "historical precedent" but I don't think you are referring to any legal cases that Bannon will cite. I've never heard of the appeal ground of "historical precedent" followed by a description of what happened to someone else in a different context.
Whatever did or did not happen to Eric Holder is not a ground for an appeals court to reverse a jury conviction of criminal contempt. This is the "high probability" of reversal you were referring to? I highly doubt that Bannon's Notice of Appeal will even set forth this "historical precedent" or whatever you are claiming as a ground. I guess we shall see in 30 days when it gets filed.
His lawyer says the appeal is "bulletproof". I don't know the legalese but it centers around Bannon not being allowed to defend himself.
You should know better than to rely on a lawyer's positive characterizations of their client's chances.
What you are describing sounds like Bannon will argue on appeal that he was precluded from entering certain evidence or raising certain arguments. Most criminal appeals, if not all of them, raise that. Very few are successful. Is this what you were referring to when you said Bannon had a "high probability" that he will win his appeal?
I do know that the Biden DoJ has demonstrated itself to be wildly partisan and corrupt. Even fabricating charges to pursue its political agenda.
Bannon argued at trial that his prosecution was partisan. He was convicted anyway. There are no grounds for appeal there.
Even fabricating charges to pursue its political agenda.
I'm not aware of Bannon ever claiming fabrication of anything in his trial. In fact, he admitted being duly served with the subpoena and there is no dispute as to what the subpoenas state. He admitted -- in fact, publicly broadcasted -- that he was not going to comply with them. There is nothing that even could be fabricated here, assuming the DOJ wanted to take such a massive, public risk. Bannon will not be claiming fabrication of any kind on appeal.
His lawyer says the appeal is "bulletproof". I don't know the legalese but it centers around Bannon not being allowed to defend himself.
You should know better than to rely on a lawyer's positive characterizations of their client's chances.
What you are describing sounds like Bannon will argue on appeal that he was precluded from entering certain evidence or raising certain arguments. Most criminal appeals, if not all of them, raise that. Very few are successful. Is this what you were referring to when you said Bannon had a "high probability" that he will win his appeal?
I do know that the Biden DoJ has demonstrated itself to be wildly partisan and corrupt. Even fabricating charges to pursue its political agenda.
Bannon argued at trial that his prosecution was partisan. He was convicted anyway. There are no grounds for appeal there.
Even fabricating charges to pursue its political agenda.
I'm not aware of Bannon ever claiming fabrication of anything in his trial. In fact, he admitted being duly served with the subpoena and there is no dispute as to what the subpoenas state. He admitted -- in fact, publicly broadcasted -- that he was not going to comply with them. There is nothing that even could be fabricated here, assuming the DOJ wanted to take such a massive, public risk. Bannon will not be claiming fabrication of any kind on appeal.
I was referring to the DoJ fabricating charges in other cases as evidence of its political bias.
The DC area votes like 95% Democrat. If I was the lawyer I would ask for a change of venue. You can't get an honest jury full of Democrats. Democrats are incapable of removing their emotions from anything.
Thanks for the working link, but it still won't let me use the interactive lookup to see who is who. And if the offending comments are innocuous things like "we should do a recount in Arizona," that is no different from incessand Democrat complaints about voter suppression, Russian hacking, doubts cast on electronic voting machines, calls for recount in Minnesota in 2016, etc etc etc. That's just part of democracy.
you are being naive and willfully ignorant. A main tenet of the Republican Party is that the 2020 election was stolen. There is no such equivalent believe in the Democratic Party.
Except for the 2016 election, 2004 election and 2000 election.