Steve Bannon Will be Charged with Criminal Contempt Today

  
By:  al Jizzerror  •  2 months ago  •  95 comments


Steve Bannon Will be Charged with Criminal Contempt Today
"We are going to kill it in the crib. Kill the Biden presidency in the crib.”

Sponsored by group SiNNERs and ButtHeads

SiNNERs and ButtHeads


Steve Bannon may be the first individual referred to the Justice Department for refusing to appear after receiving a Congressional subpoena.  I guess he doesn't have the energy to cite the Fifth Amendment.  He would prefer to drink a fifth rather than take the Fifth.

The Committee investigating the causes and occurrences surrounding the January 6th insurrection wants to find out what went on in meetings that Bannon (with Rudi Guiiani and others) participated in at on January 5th and 6th at the Willard Hotel (a few blocks from the White House).  At the same time, Roger Stone was in The Willard Hotel with as many as 50 Oath Keepers.  It appears that the Willard Hotel was ground zero for sedition.

Bannon had actually been in close touch with President Trump for days before January 6th," said Costa on MSNBC. 

"Based on our reporting, he privately told President Trump to have a reckoning on January 6th.Woodward, a former  Washington Post  associate editor, and Costa, a national political reporter, also reported in  Peril  that on December 30, Bannon convinced Trump to return to Washington D.C. on January 6, the day that Biden's 2020 election win was to be certified by Congress.  

"You've got to return to Washington and make a dramatic return today," Bannon said to Trump, according to the book. "You've got to call [Vice President Mike] Pence off the f**king ski slopes and get him back here today. This is a crisis."

"People are going to go, 'What the f**k is going on here?'" Bannon said of the looming election. "We're going to bury Biden on January 6th, f**king bury him."

Bannon served as White House chief strategist and senior counselor to Trump from January 2017 until August 18, 2017, when he was fired by Trump. Bannon allegedly used over $1 million from the Trump campaign for personal benefits and was arrested in August 2020. He pleaded not guilty to the charges.

https://www.newsweek.com/steve-bannon-confirms-his-involvement-january-6-insurrection-war-room-podcast-1631667

The following article articulates the Retrumplican strategy:

In House subpoena fight, Steve Bannon may best Democrats without a winning argument


Even when Trump and his allies have a losing legal argument, their strategy is to win by running out the clock on congressional Democrats.


By Jessica Levinson, MSNBC Opinion Columnist

Now for another episode of the show I like to call “Steve Bannon Vs. the Law.” Like previous episodes, Bannon may have a weak legal argument but still come out triumphant — as in season one, when he was pardoned by then-President Donald Trump, for allegedly defrauding Trump’s own supporters.



______________

Bannon’s decision to defy a valid congressional subpoena is why the Jan. 6 committee will meet on Tuesday, Oct. 19, to vote on referring Bannon for federal criminal contempt charges. After the Select Committee votes, the full House will vote on whether to recommend that the Department of Justice bring criminal contempt of Congress charges against him. Assuming the House votes in favor of the referral, it will be up to the DOJ to determine if it will bring charges.

800

Steve Bannon IS a contemptible criminal!


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
1  author  al Jizzerror    2 months ago

Steve Bannon is a piece of shit.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  al Jizzerror @1    2 months ago

roger stone is making calls to get bannon clipped before he blabs...

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  devangelical @1.1    2 months ago

He looks like a Mafia Don, doesn't he?

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
1.1.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.1.1    2 months ago
He looks like a Mafia Don, doesn't he?

Roger Stone or Steve Bannon?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1.2    2 months ago

Roger Stone. He has that John Gotti look

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
1.1.4  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.1.3    2 months ago
Roger Stone. He has that John Gotti look.

Wait, what?

OIP.XgTqayj8ySOmFoXwlaiVyQHaE_?w=250&h=180&c=7&r=0&o=5&dpr=1.1&pid=1.7

R.05ef0435ca0ef0945cbd8e1d75a787a4?rik=ElevyTf58tPR1g&riu=http%3a%2f%2fmedia.nj.com%2finside-jersey%2fphoto%2freadsdjpg-da13bb0495f2950c.jpg&ehk=nZ9Bs1QxynJYRLAnPA34q9Cz8OIuHXiBS1iTixb%2fdKs%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1.4    2 months ago

Both wear expensive suits. Put a hat on Gotti and he could almost pass for Stone

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2  Tessylo  replied to  al Jizzerror @1    2 months ago

So is everyone associated with that prior criminal enterprise of an 'administration'

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  al Jizzerror @1    2 months ago

What about DOJ precedent?


In 2015, former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner was also referred by the House to the Justice Department for prosecution—but the Obama administration declined.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3    2 months ago

Bannon wanted to overthrow the United States government. He belongs in prison. 

What the hell is wrong with "conservatives" today ? 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.1    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.2    2 months ago

It doesnt matter whether it could have happened or not. The then president of the United States wanted it to happen and is currently working to make it easier to do next time. 

These traitors have to be rooted out. 

As for Tig, I'm sure he can speak for himself. If he takes all this lightly then he has problems too. But I doubt you are accurately representing him. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.2    2 months ago

You see, John just told you how it is - it's always different when it's a Trump official. For proof John is offering Bannon's rhetoric.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    2 months ago

John Eastman personally presented Trump with a plan to steal the election. This was done in the oval office. Trump approved of the plan. We know this is so because Trump later told Mike Pence to listen to Eastman. 

We also know that in his speech to his rally on the morning of Jan 6 Trump once again praised Eastman and suggested that Pence follow what Eastman suggested. This was hours before Pence was to preside over the electoral vote counting procedure. 

This fucking guy is busted. 

The refusal of "the right" to accept this truth is seriously damaging this country.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.6  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.3    2 months ago
But I doubt you are accurately representing him. 

Short memory? Let me see if I can help...........

"There is no way Trump would be sworn in for a second term.   The absolute worst-case situation would be a constitutional crisis which would have been resolved by the SCotUS who would absolutely NOT rule in Trump's favor since he was dead wrong (lying) and the facts of the case prove it."

[ deleted ]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.6    2 months ago

I have nothing to do with Tig underplaying the seriousness of this situation.  You will have to talk to him about it. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.7    2 months ago

I don't think Jim is portraying TiG's thoughts accurately

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.10  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.9    2 months ago

He didn't portray. He used TiG's exact words.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.11  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.10    2 months ago

Then show us the link where TiG said it or I'm deleting this entire thread

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.12  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.9    2 months ago

Those are TiG's thoughts. Did ya miss the link?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.13  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.11    2 months ago

It's right above your {deleted} note in my post................JFC

You deleted the last part of my post with the link as you neglected to click the link.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.14  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.12    2 months ago

Yes, I missed the link. Thank you for pointing it out.

Now let's stop discussing TiG. He's not the subject of this seed. Anymore comments concerning him will be deleted

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.15  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.14    2 months ago

Sorry but  I could not let JR's comment go unchallenged. I'll stop.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.16  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.15    2 months ago
Sorry but  I could not let JR's comment go unchallenged. I'll stop.

Jim, it is not a good practice to quote someone else from a different article in a different context and apply it to the current context.

My comment was in response to the article:   "How close were we to an actual stolen election — stolen by Trump?"

I answered the title question with my comment @5 which you quoted:

TiG@5 ☞ There is no way Trump would be sworn in for a second term.   The absolute worst-case situation would be a constitutional crisis which would have been resolved by the SCotUS who would absolutely NOT rule in Trump's favor since he was dead wrong (lying) and the facts of the case prove it.

That response expresses my position that the worst Trump could have done is trigger a constitutional crisis and that there is no way on the planet he would have succeeded in being sworn in for a second term.

Your comment is gone, but I do not see how you quoting me applies to this comment from JR:

JR @1.3.1 Bannon wanted to overthrow the United States government. He belongs in prison. 

My comment does not even mention Bannon or his intentions.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.17  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.16    2 months ago

Sorry TiG but when JR says Bannon wanted to overthrow the Government, the key word was want. I just pointed out that "want in one hand and shit in the other" came into play........through your very well put example and post. Just quoting clear thoughts from another member.

And I really don't care about form and quoting. People use relevant quotes from all SORTS of sources  here at NT and I thought yours was one quite relevant of those to squelch some noise.

Sorry I chose you........................

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.18  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.5    2 months ago
We know this is so because Trump later told Mike Pence to listen to Eastman. 

Ah-hah!


We also know that in his speech to his rally on the morning of Jan 6 Trump once again praised Eastman and suggested that Pence follow what Eastman suggested. This was hours before Pence was to preside over the electoral vote counting procedure. 

Then why did Trump tell the crowd to go in peace?


This fucking guy is busted. 

Is that why they need every document in the Trump White House?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.19  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.17    2 months ago

I still do not see how my quote supports your point in any way.   The fact that Bannon had little chance of overturning the election does not mean he did not have the intent ('want') of changing the results of the election.

Now, on the other hand, if JR was arguing that Bannon might have succeeded in overturning the election (rather than making a statement on his intent and actions) then I could see how my quote would apply.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.20  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.19    2 months ago

JR is using it to tie the "overthrow the government" narrative he's been pushing since Jan 7. Wanting something and being able to do it are two different things. But he will parrot it till the cows come home and it's old and sickening as hell but he continues to push it. I used your example to show, as I think you did, that that happening was at best a misconceived pipe dream and he needs to let go.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.21  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.20    2 months ago

Give it up, Jim. TiG is now here explaining his own words and you trying to tell TiG what he meant in the context of what John wrote [deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.22  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.20    2 months ago

I am hardly the only one in America who thinks Trump tried to overthrow his own government. Try using google or bing on the topic. 

The idea that unless something succeeds it didnt happen is absurd. 

Hitler wanted to overthrow the regional government in Bavaria in 1923. His coup attempt barely got off the ground and didnt come close to succeeding. He was still thrown in prison for it. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.23  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.22    2 months ago
"The idea that unless something succeeds it didnt happen is absurd."

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

Plus it's not an opinion.  It's the truth.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.24  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.22    2 months ago
I am hardly the only one in America who thinks Trump tried to overthrow his own government. Try using google or bing on the topic. 

All people, like yourself more than likely, that are and/or were never Trumpers to begin with. I know that opinion is out there and sure as hell don't need Google to tell me that FFS.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.25  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.21    2 months ago

jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.26  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.25    2 months ago

He thought I was going to give myself a ticket....

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.27  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.20    2 months ago
Wanting something and being able to do it are two different things.

And JR knows that:

JR @1.3.22 ☞ The idea that unless something succeeds it didnt happen is absurd. 

I used your example to show, as I think you did, that that happening was at best a misconceived pipe dream and he needs to let go.

The fact that Trump (/ Bannon) were not going to prevail is irrelevant.    Attempted murder, for example, is not dismissed simply because the would-be murderer had little chance of success.   You are posing a strange argument.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
1.3.28  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.27    2 months ago

Still gotta prove they planned it and had others well on board and organized than hoping for it by your very "attempted murder" analogy. Good day all of you.

IMPASSE

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.29  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.3.28    2 months ago
Still gotta prove they planned it and had others well on board and organized than hoping for it by your very "attempted murder" analogy. Good day all of you.

There is no IMPASSE anymore and you just illustrated why.   IMPASSE cannot be used to stifle a rebuttal.

Of course the allegations need to be determined with a judicial process.   Who is arguing otherwise??

The point, seems to me, is that an attempted crime is not dismissed simply because the likelihood of success is low.   You understand that, right?  

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
1.3.30  evilgenius  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.27    2 months ago

Yes a local guy was just charged with attempted bank robbery (among many other charges) after pointed a hand gun at a drive through teller. I'm pretty sure his lawyer won't get him off using this, "but he never had a chance to succeed..." defense. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.31  Trout Giggles  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.29    2 months ago
Of course the allegations need to be determined with a judicial process. 

Isn't that what the Select Committee is doing?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.32  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @1.3.30    2 months ago

Yeah, I remember a long time ago a former friend of mine was in an argument with her brother in law.  He threw a beer bottle at her.  She ducked and it missed.  I told her she should press charges.  She said - it didn't hit me.  Doesn't matter.  He made the attempt.  Just because he didn't succeed doesn't mean he couldn't be charged and arrested.  

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
1.3.33  author  al Jizzerror  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.22    2 months ago
The idea that unless something succeeds it didnt happen is absurd.

If two or more people agree to commit a crime and change their minds later (or if they simply fail to commit the crime for any reason), they are still guilty of criminal conspiracy.

Conspiracy

An agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act, along with an intent to achieve the agreement's goal.  Most U.S. jurisdictions also require an overt act toward furthering the agreement.  An overt act is a statutory requirement, not a constitutional one. See Whitfield v. United States , 453 U.S. 209 (2005). The illegal act is the conspiracy's "target offense.

"https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/conspiracy

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.34  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.9    2 months ago

Of course he isn't.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.3.36  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.5    2 months ago

The Eastman plan was not illegal. It was stupid and had no chance of success,  but the whole point of it was to follow the law. 

The idea that it’s A basis for charging anyone with a criminal attempt to overthrow the government is laughable. 

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
1.3.37  author  al Jizzerror  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.36    2 months ago
The Eastman plan was not illegal.

The Eastman plan was based on bullshit and it violated the Constitution.  Fortunately, Pence realized this and he refused to violate the Constitution.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.38  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.36    2 months ago

247233791_10158536977112135_3847504813111606649_n.png?_nc_cat=102&_nc_rgb565=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=EBeRcx4Dm7oAX-qG_pD&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=23aab34f6327f4d9272f2500d2e0a6a9&oe=617576D7

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.3.39  Sean Treacy  replied to  al Jizzerror @1.3.37    2 months ago

It's not a crime to advocate for actions that are found to be unconstitutional. 

You realize Barack Obama isn't in jail for his unconstitutional actions, right? 

Again, it was a plan to change the election result  by following  election law. Last time I looked, following the law isn't overthrowing the government or a putsch. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3.40  devangelical  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.38    2 months ago

I hope her efforts are motivated by trying to salvage the family name before daddy croaks.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.3.41  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.38    2 months ago

Why would post that in response to what I wrote? Do you imagine it's relevant to my post?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.42  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.39    2 months ago
Again, it was a plan to change the election result  by following  election law. Last time I looked, following the law isn't overthrowing the government or a putsch. 

The Eastman plan was for Pence to declare that the election was in dispute in 7 states, and thus the electoral votes for those states would not be counted. 

That was a lie, none of those 7 states were in legal dispute. 

It is amazing how blithely Trumpsters want to discount the evidence of his traitorous actions. 

Maybe this country deserves to go down the drain if this is the best we can do to protect our democracy. 

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
1.3.43  author  al Jizzerror  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.42    2 months ago

Exactly right.

From the Eastman memo:

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL

January 6 scenario

7 states have transmitted dual slates of electors to the President of the Senate.

1. VP Pence, presiding over the joint session (or Senate Pro Tempore Grassley, if Pence recuses himself), begins to open and count the ballots, starting with Alabama (without conceding that the procedure, specified by the Electoral Count Act, of going through the States alphabetically is required).

2. When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.

3. At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States.

No states transmitted dual slates of electors.  Eastman's premise is bullshit.  Each state presented one slate of electors.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.3.44  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.42    2 months ago
n plan was for Pence to declare that the election was in dispute in 7 states, and thus the electoral votes for those states would not be counted. 

Yes, John. That's why Eastman's  argument had no chance of succeeding.  Even if Pence had declared followed Eastman's strategy, the issue would have been resolved legally to trump's detriment. 

The idea that's its the same Hitler's beer hall putsch is insane. Eastman wanted to have Trump installed through the legal process, Hitler tried to seize Germany by force. I have no idea how you can conflate the two actions. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.45  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.44    2 months ago
Eastman wanted to have Trump installed through the legal process,

There is no installing through a "legal process" that includes saying that 7 states were in dispute when there results had been certified by the states. NO ONE filed alternate sets of electors in those states because there werent any. 

Keep downplaying this - whatever shred of credibility you have left will float away. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.3.46  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.45    2 months ago
a "legal process" that includes saying that 7 states were in dispute when there results had been certified by the states. N

What do you imagine was happening on January 6th? You had Congress and the VP performing their duties. If a dispute had arisen, it would have been settled under the laws and Constitution.   Pence spared us the process by ignoring Eastman's memo, but even if he had followed it, the contest would have been settled legally.  The dispute would have been settled under the Constitution and US law, not with  the barrel of a gun. 

O ONE filed alternate sets of electors in those states because there werent any.

Who is disputing that? 

Keep downplaying this 

You are comparing a misguided and obviously doomed attempt to  change the election results through the legal process with a military putsch.  Get a grip before you lose your last shred of credibility. 

There's a reason Eastman isn't charged with any crimes. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.47  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.46    2 months ago

You want to whitewash Trump's role in and responsibility for trying to steal the election and overthrow the incoming government. 

Its that simple.  Talking about this is not the law and that is not the law..... who gives a fuck? We all know what he did and you keep defending it.  Utterly inexplicable. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.48  Trout Giggles  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.21    2 months ago

I call BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.3.49  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.47    2 months ago

Talking about this is not the law and that is not the law..... who gives a fuck

Yeah, who cares what the law is when you accuse someone of breaking it.  Stalin couldn't have said it better himself.

We all know what he did and you keep defending it.  Utterly inexplicable. 

What's inexplicable is you confuse pointing out reality with "defending Trump"

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.50  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.49    2 months ago

Everyone here knows what you do, there is no secret about it.

I dont care if Trump broke "the law".  He wanted to be kept in office by whatever means possible, as long as it worked. Broke the law, didnt break the law makes no difference whatsoever to him. 

We need for conservatives, Republicans and Trumpsters to DENOUNCE him, once and for all , and for ever. And say he is "dead " to them. 

Can you do that ?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
Masters Participates
1.3.51  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.49    one month ago

‘keep defending it.  Utterly inexplicable. ‘

“What's inexplicable is you confuse pointing out reality with "defending Trump". “

Do you, or do you not, look for every Gosh Damn reason, irregardless of how technically impure and obscure, Small or Tom petty, cause never ever do I c u acknowledge Trump did SOMETHING, fckn ANYTHING WRONG, and I’ll agree , you’re pathetic incessant Defense, is inexplicable, so I’m going go eat a popsicle, to warm my heart, asz you pull my finger and I rip another a part I was in the Play that has disgraced US ALL, cause if you wish to use sum of my  words Quoted and wrongly depicted, have at it, cause I’m unemployed when it comes to playin with words, cause working with words To me, sounds absurd ....  but maybe you hadn’t herd. Mentality should not be deferred , but probably a lot deterred, cause like French $hit, De Turd does not flush whence emitted from rosey cheeks, irregardless from who’s Tulips these words squeak from, steal away, cause my Tungsten is a Timeless Watch, continuously lickin and tickin like a timed bomb waiting for the proper chronological alarm  set off X, cause I n joy screwing    Nails too the coffin I’ll cream ate in, but only, because on occasion , i Ken 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  JohnRussell    2 months ago

What took so long? 

Bannon is the next right wing martyr. Move over Ashley Babbitt. 

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
2.1  evilgenius  replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 months ago
What took so long? 

The committee had to meet and vote.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 months ago
What took so long?

American government has never been known to act quickly.

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
3  Veronica    2 months ago

Hobo Santa behind bars would be nice to see.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Veronica @3    2 months ago

Maybe they'll finally get him a shave and a shower

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
3.1.1  Veronica  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1    2 months ago

He looks so scummy.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
3.1.2  author  al Jizzerror  replied to  Veronica @3.1.1    2 months ago

512

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
3.1.3  Veronica  replied to  al Jizzerror @3.1.2    2 months ago

Oh, you dirty boy, you.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
3.1.4  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Veronica @3.1.1    2 months ago
He looks so scummy.

And noooooobody needs a scratch and sniff in order to sample what is wafting off of him in just about every photo out there.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Veronica @3.1.1    2 months ago

He's a walking talking pile of garbage

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  al Jizzerror @3.1.2    2 months ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
3.1.7  Veronica  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @3.1.4    2 months ago

That is something I would never scratch.

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
3.1.8  Veronica  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.5    2 months ago

Yep...and you are being kind.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
3.2  evilgenius  replied to  Veronica @3    2 months ago
Hobo Santa behind bars would be nice to see.

The DoJ will need to review the committee charges and decide if they want to pursue a criminal court case. Hobo Santa will then be able to do everything anyone else can to delay and tie up litigation for as long as possible. 

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
3.2.1  Veronica  replied to  evilgenius @3.2    2 months ago

One can hope.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.2.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  evilgenius @3.2    2 months ago

If Merrick and the DOJ decide not to indict, may God have mercy on their souls.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Veronica @3    2 months ago

He will become other inmate's ho ho ho.

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
3.3.1  Veronica  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.3    2 months ago

I actually had that thought when I posted Hbo Santa behind bars.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.3.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Veronica @3.3.1    2 months ago

GMTA.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
4  Greg Jones    2 months ago
From the article: "Even when Trump and his allies have a losing legal argument, their strategy is to win by running out the clock on congressional Democrats."
That's the plan
 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @4    2 months ago
That's the plan

When honesty is not an option , you do whatever you can. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
4.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
4.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Greg Jones @4    2 months ago
From the article: "Even when Trump and his allies have a losing legal argument, their strategy is to win by running out the clock on congressional Democrats."
That's the plan

Why is bowing to, and outwardly idolizing, men of such low character ok with you?  Do you honestly think that serving men like Donald Trump and Steve Bannon will somehow give you power over others, or provide you with vast riches and other-worldly wealth?  Not only do you put on a pedestal those who enrich themselves by cheating others, but you brag about it like it's an honor that they allow you to serve them.  Perhaps if you had more respect for yourself, you could be free from the metaphoric chains that keep you in servitude to men like Donald Trump and his dishonest and otherwise like-minded friends.

Here is where I usually put a mildly comical, yet ball-slapping translation, but I don't think that's necessary today.

 

     

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4.2    2 months ago
Here is where I usually put a mildly comical, yet ball-slapping translation, but I don't think that's necessary today.  

Yeah...after that bitch slap I think that would be overkill

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
4.2.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.1    2 months ago
Yeah...after that bitch slap I think that would be overkill

Sometimes I just can't help over-presenting an argument.  I decided to cut this one short.  jrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
Masters Participates
4.2.3  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4.2.2    2 months ago

U sound like Lorrraina Bobbitt there, but I once overstated an argument as well, but wound up in Camden NJ, as that would be , one state over 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
5  Ender    2 months ago

Couldn't happen to a bigger slob...

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
6  Hallux    2 months ago

Do inmates get 2 shirts? Could be a bargaining point.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
7  author  al Jizzerror    2 months ago

I'm surprised that the Trumpanzees haven't commented here to show their support for Bannon.

512

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
7.1  Veronica  replied to  al Jizzerror @7    2 months ago

I think vic is trying to figure out why his Biden Hate Fest seed is all fucked up.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
7.1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Veronica @7.1    2 months ago

Because he can't find his ass with 2 hands.

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
7.1.2  Veronica  replied to  Trout Giggles @7.1.1    2 months ago

122602531-rear-back-behind-view-of-attractive-stunning-sportive-perfect-muscular-fit-thin-shape-form-line-wavy.jpg

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
7.1.3  author  al Jizzerror  replied to  Veronica @7.1.2    2 months ago

jrSmiley_28_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Veronica
Senior Guide
7.1.4  Veronica  replied to  al Jizzerror @7.1.3    2 months ago

Thank you.  Her hands found her ass...

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
8  author  al Jizzerror    2 months ago

UPDATE:  

Jan. 6 committee advances report to hold Steve Bannon in

criminal contempt

By Melissa Macaya

Updated 11:42 PM ET, Tue October 19, 2021

What you need to know

  • The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot formally approved holding Trump ally Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress after he defied a subpoena to appear before the panel.
  • The committee unanimously passed a criminal contempt report that outlined efforts to get Bannon to comply with its subpoena and his failure to do so.
  • The House will vote on the report Thursday, and following passage in the chamber, it would then get referred to the Justice Department which will decide whether to pursue charges.
 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
8.1  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  al Jizzerror @8    2 months ago

Am I the only one who doesn't see a pardon in his future?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @8.1    2 months ago

Unless trmp gets re-elected....

You can slap me later

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

JohnRussell
devangelical
Sparty On
Thomas
Tacos!


29 visitors