With all of the clear lying going on right now - one set of people come out a meeting with a shared understanding and, within a few hours or days, another set of people directly the refute the facts as laid out - every single hearing should be done in public from now on.
I’m sick of the free pass the enablers are getting right now. No more he said/he said/she said/she said.
I would love to hear Nunes’s questioning of Bannon as I suppose Bannon may know quite a bit regarding Nunes’s skullduggery on WH grounds that fateful night. Perhaps he’ll need to recuse” himself again?
On the one hand Bannon, like Trump, is a serial liar. On the other it will be interesting to see how much he is willing to expose of the old organization he was a part of.
Bannons dilemma,
Lie under oath and look to save trump so he might get a job back.
Pardon on the perjury charge.
Make a deal with Mueller and bury trump and family for being thrown out of the family mob organization and spend the rest of his short life running from the russian mob while under protective custody.
Wonder what he is going to do, or what did he do today.
Next book
Fired & Furious & Murdered
O snap!
I was being thoughtful lol
The “Murdered” part got me. hahahahahaha
We were watching a show about MI6 the other night and they reenacted the ricin umbrella incident. It’s just fresh on my mind. The actual umbrella that delivered the ricin was built in Bulgaria.
No wonder Putin is always sliming himself all over the Balkans.
Sometimes I wonder why AP articles, with their sanitized versions of the news, are ever included on TPM. Here’s an account of what actually happened, with the House panel issuing a subpoena to Bannon on the spot when he tried to invoke “executive privilege” about campaign issues. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-16/house-panel-subpoenas-bannon-amid-fight-over-executive-privilege
Yes, the AP is but a shadow of its former self, and it’s pretty damn sad.
He refused to answer any questions and was issued a subpoena on the spot… Mueller must really have him in the crosshairs
OTOH, no one will find out what he says in front of the grand jury. The House committee can’t be trusted.
ding ding ding! You win the prize.
That is exactly true.
Just saw this at Bloomberg.
Sanders Says Trump Isn’t Racist, Citing ‘The Apprentice’
Now would be a good time to release those tapes.
Yeah, I saw that too… Chad Pergram (Fox News Congressional correspondent) tweeted out substantially the same thing… That Bannon was served with a subpoena mid testimony when he tried to assert that weird executive privacy privilege that the trump-bots keep pulling out of thin air. But, neither Bloomberg nor Pergram actually say if the subpoena bore fruit and persuaded Bannon to be more talkative.
This could turn out to be a big part of the story.
My theory is that Trump has tied his aids’ hands by having them sign some stealth NDAs (probably predating their time on the government payroll). This could have the affect of leaving the signor exposed to some severe financial penalties if they disclose anything trump related to anybody… even a congressional questioner in a setting where their testimony is ‘voluntary’. So, the aids have settled on creating this fictional privilege that they cite whenever they would otherwise be forced to say something that would not please Trump. They know that they have a choice between personal financial ruin or trying to bluff congress into allowing this non-answer.
So… by serving Bannon with this subpoena they effectively called his bluff and compelled his testimony and at the same time provided Bannon a shield to hide behind that will allow him to talk more freely and protect him from a litigious Trump.
Given the current relationship between Trump and Bannon it would not surprise me if Bannon had asked them to issue the subpoena.
Not if it isn’t enforceable and I don’t think NDAs are enforceable against government employees so I don’t care if a supposed NDA was signed before someone was on the government payroll. Once they are on it, WE own that information.
Furthermore, you cannot bind someone with an NDA against giving testimony about a crime. An NDA is a contract. You cannot contract legally about criminal matters.
Actually it more than likely means Bannon is not the target of the investigation according to the NYT:
The subpoena is a sign that Mr. Bannon is not personally the focus of
the investigation. Justice Department rules allow prosecutors to
subpoena the targets of investigations only in rare circumstances.
I didn’t think Bannon was a target. I don’t think he got up in this Russian shit - he was on the edges just by being present during the transition.
I think the main players always have been all the Trumps, plus Manafort, Gates, yadda yadda yadda.
So who is Big Boy Bannon more afraid of: Trump, his base, Mueller, or the Russians? The Mercer money is not his anymore, the dream of re-making America in his own image doesn’t have a platform, so where does he go from here? Can he disrupt anything anymore?
I get all that but my point is that it is the ‘voluntary’ nature of testimony that creates the ambiguity. I understand that a NDA is not enforceable if the testimony is compelled by court order or subpoena. But, having a conversation that is not compelled even if it is under oath does not void the NDA… it just means that you have to be real careful how you answer. So, you answer in a way that keeps you out of trouble with the NDA and still allows you to ‘tell the truth’. My theory is that this may be what is motivating them to bluff and create this fictional privilege. However, once the subpoena is part of the equation the voluntary nature of the the conversation is out the window. With the subpoena the NDA is officially pierced and the conversation can proceed as if the NDA never existed. The witness can proceed safe in the knowledge that s/he can freely talk about anything they know without worrying about the NDA.