The Jan. 6 Investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Update on the Steve Bannon congressional subpoena.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/18/poli...ee-releases-bannon-contempt-report/index.html

From the article.

"Any individual who is found liable for contempt of Congress is then guilty of a crime that may result in a fine and between one and 12 months imprisonment. But this process is rarely invoked and rarely leads to jail time."

The hilited is the most annoying aspect of this whole process to me. Pursue them to the fullest extent of the law as far as I am concerned.
 
kevbo said:
Update on the Steve Bannon congressional subpoena.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/18/poli...ee-releases-bannon-contempt-report/index.html

From the article.

"Any individual who is found liable for contempt of Congress is then guilty of a crime that may result in a fine and between one and 12 months imprisonment. But this process is rarely invoked and rarely leads to jail time."

The hilited is the most annoying aspect of this whole process to me. Pursue them to the fullest extent of the law as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...

Why? what is Congress possibly going to do differently based on the testimony?
 
kevbo said:
Sigh... It's not about the testimony, but about the failure to comply with a subpoena to appear and/or present documents.

But you knew that. As the song says, bob, bob, bobin' along.
Click to expand...

But why would you want to force someone to comply with a subpoena if it isn't about the testimony?
 
BobTheCoward said:
But why would you want to force someone to comply with a subpoena if it isn't about the testimony?
Click to expand...
It is about the testimony.

The committee wants it so they can develop a complete picture regarding what happened during the January 6 terrorist activity. That involves getting testimony, documents, etc.. If one of the involved individuals (such as Bannon) is refusing to comply, then he is obstructing the activities of the committee, and his obstruction should be punished.
 
Segnosaur said:
It is about the testimony.

The committee wants it so they can develop a complete picture regarding what happened during the January 6 terrorist activity. That involves getting testimony, documents, etc.. If one of the involved individuals (such as Bannon) is refusing to comply, then he is obstructing the activities of the committee, and his obstruction should be punished.
Click to expand...


....but Kevbo said it wasnt about the testimony.
wait, why should that be punished?
 
kevbo said:
Update on the Steve Bannon congressional subpoena.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/18/poli...ee-releases-bannon-contempt-report/index.html

From the article.

"Any individual who is found liable for contempt of Congress is then guilty of a crime that may result in a fine and between one and 12 months imprisonment. But this process is rarely invoked and rarely leads to jail time."

The hilited is the most annoying aspect of this whole process to me. Pursue them to the fullest extent of the law as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...


And it should be that if you comply with the subpoena, you can avoid jail time If you refuse, you get the jail time, and then when you get out, you still have to comply with the subpoena and if you don't, its back to jail you go, and you keep going to jail until you comply.
 
It's about comparing evidence and testimony. It's also about giving witnesses the chance to put the blame where they think it belongs.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
It's about comparing evidence and testimony. It's also about giving witnesses the chance to put the blame where they think it belongs.
Click to expand...

Maybe it is my general disgust for legislators that I'm not going to support throwing people in jail, but why is everyone cool with them trying to jail somebody for an investigation that isn't even a criminal investigation?

How does this advance the job of legislating?
 
BobTheCoward said:
Maybe it is my general disgust for legislators that I'm not going to support throwing people in jail, but why is everyone cool with them trying to jail somebody for an investigation that isn't even a criminal investigation?

How does this advance the job of legislating?
Click to expand...

It's not a criminal investigation.
It's about fact-finding.

If people who are required to testify refuse, the threat of prosecution might make them reconsider.
But the safe bet is that they fear incriminating themselves, thus leading to future criminal investigations.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
It's not a criminal investigation.
It's about fact-finding.

If people who are required to testify refuse, the threat of prosecution might make them reconsider.
But the safe bet is that they fear incriminating themselves, thus leading to future criminal investigations.
Click to expand...

Fact finding is an incredibly bad and cruel reason to jail someone.It is an act of violence against someone not committing a harmful act.
 
Segnosaur said:
And to no one's surprise:

From: Politico
Donald Trump is suing the Jan. 6 select committee and the National Archives to block the release of his White House’s records...The thrust of Trump's claim is twofold, arguing first that the Jan. 6 committee's request for documents is so broad as to be unconstitutional. Secondly, the suit asserts that the committee lacks a legitimate "legislative purpose" for pursuing the documents.

An obvious delaying tactic. Hopefully it gets taken care of by the courts fairly quickly. (The big risk of course is that if it gets to the supreme court, they may delay ruling on it for months.)
Click to expand...

I've never seen an innocent man try so hard to keep his records from being seen. :rolleyes:
 
kevbo said:
Update on the Steve Bannon congressional subpoena.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/18/poli...ee-releases-bannon-contempt-report/index.html

From the article.

"Any individual who is found liable for contempt of Congress is then guilty of a crime that may result in a fine and between one and 12 months imprisonment. But this process is rarely invoked and rarely leads to jail time."

The hilited is the most annoying aspect of this whole process to me. Pursue them to the fullest extent of the law as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...

I agree. This reminds me of parents who are always threatening their misbehaving kids with punishment and never following through and then wonder why the kids just ignore them.
 
kevbo said:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/18/poli...ee-releases-bannon-contempt-report/index.html



From the article.



"Any individual who is found liable for contempt of Congress is then guilty of a crime that may result in a fine and between one and 12 months imprisonment. But this process is rarely invoked and rarely leads to jail time."



The hilited is the most annoying aspect of this whole process to me. Pursue them to the fullest extent of the law as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...
Yes it might be annoying. And i agree... People who are uncooperative should be charged.

But i do wonder about the context. How often are congressional subpoenas actually ignored? How often is it a case where the congressional committee is controlled by the party that is not in control of the white house/department of justice? How often are subpoenas issued to secondary figures who have little to add (vs. Primary figures like Bannon.)

The Trump administration regularly ignored congressional subpoenas, but since the DoJ was under the control of either Fred Flinstone or a racist kebler elf most of the time, its not like they would have had a cooperative DoJ to prosecute. Hopefully Garland will be more willing to enforce the law this time around.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
 
BobTheCoward said:
Maybe it is my general disgust for legislators that I'm not going to support throwing people in jail, but why is everyone cool with them trying to jail somebody for an investigation that isn't even a criminal investigation?
How does this advance the job of legislating?
Click to expand...

They can make criminal referrals, and will based on the evidence that comes to light. There's no reason to think that the committee is just there for looks. It can also have all sorts of impacts on legislation in the future. I think it's obviously over the past 4 years that congressional committees need to add some teeth to their ability to investigate. That should\could\would lead to more legislation. Whether you agree or not.

That being said, this move by the committee is pretty smart. Once the committee approves criminal contempt for Bannon, it goes to the full house to vote. Once again, getting Republicans on the record as opposing investigations into what happened on Jan 6th. Any time you can get them on record making stupid decisions it'll be good for the Dems.
 
plague311 said:
They can make criminal referrals, and will based on the evidence that comes to light. There's no reason to think that the committee is just there for looks. It can also have all sorts of impacts on legislation in the future. I think it's obviously over the past 4 years that congressional committees need to add some teeth to their ability to investigate. That should\could\would lead to more legislation. Whether you agree or not.

That being said, this move by the committee is pretty smart. Once the committee approves criminal contempt for Bannon, it goes to the full house to vote. Once again, getting Republicans on the record as opposing investigations into what happened on Jan 6th. Any time you can get them on record making stupid decisions it'll be good for the Dems.
Click to expand...

The idea that you can use government violence against an individual for the objective of possibly improving legislation is frightening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom