I mean seriously, he’s some schmoe who was in the Trump administration for eight whole months, six years ago. I can totally imagine 90+% of the country doesn’t know the name.
Plus, theoretically, the charges he’s facing have nothing to do with politics, his actions during the Trump administration, nor the whole Stop the Steal fiasco. The charges are simply that he didn’t show up when Congress ordered him to – so even a juror who has opinions about the other matters can (again, theoretically) be neutral about the charges.
Glenn Kirschner in the video posted above said “A problem with our justice system is the least informed people make the best jurors.”
The CNN article says investigators spoke to both a specific Bannon attorney, and a Trump attorney. I am wondering if Trump is paying for Bannon’s legal fees- or outright providing a legal representative for him? Does anyone know for sure?
It would probably be confidential information that no one would disclose. Nonetheless, I doubt Trump would be paying. He doesn’t even pay his own bills.
Boy does that make sense, pretty silly of me to overlook that fact. I am only asking to see if Trump is still covering his own ass like he was doing with Cassidy Hutchinson. He has learned from the formation of the Select Committee that not having someone on the team is a loser. The article says Bannon had three attorneys, I wonder if one is there just to look out for Trump’s interests. This trial is very small potatoes, but Trump has huge liability where Bannon is concerned. Bannon must know where at least some of the bodies are buried.
One of Bannon’s lawyers mentioned above (“What’s the point of going to trial if there are no defenses?”) is none other than David Schoen who you may remember as one of Trump’s lawyers in the second impeachment.
Just to make the record clear, the comment was made in exasperation because the judge ruled, prior to trial, that the defenses Bannon wanted to use were not appropriate.
Basically, Bannon wanted to say that he was relying on a president’s directive not to disclose confidential information, which he believed to supersede the power of congress to subpoena him. The judge said you don’t get to do that.
His other “defenses” similarly grasped at straws.
I totally know who he is.
But if you showed me 6 pictures of 6 white male media talking heads I could not pick him out. Never seen his ugly mug. I read my news, not watch it.
It’s still surely a bizarre thing to say, showing that they seem to have completely lost touch with the purpose and process of the law. If there is no defense, the correct inference is that they should be advising their client to plead guilty. Due process does not imply that the judicial system owes anyone a defense.
It’s possible that they did. It’s his decision to make, and defendants are often misguided about their chances.
Unless you believe you’re above the law. Possible jarring reality ahead.
Maybe he just wants a platform to voice his thoughts.
He’s going down, he knows it, but he plans on testifying so he can speak to a rapt audience (mainly of journalists reporting his every word).
I’m 100% certain they did.
Bannon vowed to go ‘medieval’ and put Nancy Pelosi on the stand. There’s no way he’s was going to plead guilty before the trial started even if his lawyers advised him to.
He’s about to enter ‘find out’ stage of ‘fuck around and find out’.
Sure, but that doesn’t make their outburst to the judge any more coherent. “Our client insists on going to trial, so you have to let us use one of these bogus defenses so that the outcome is not a foregone conclusion. What you’re doing is just unsporting, judge.”
There are two trials going on. Three really if you consider the one in Congress, but that one is not the point of my post.
There is the contempt trial starting on Moday w the judge presiding. And there is the parallel “trial” in the court of right-wing media opinion. Where the goal is for Bannon to demonstrate that the court is “unfair”, where “fair” means Saint Bannon wins, and any other outcome is by definition “unfair”.
The lawyers’ outburst is all about creating a record for the media “trial”, not the real one.
Steve Bannon is a liar. I don’t trust anything he says.
Disqualifies you from the jury? Why? It is a perfectly reasonable conclusion. If you haven’t come to this conclusion yourself, something is wrong with your thinking. THAT would be unreasonable.
If you’d ever seen him, you wouldn’t forget what he looks like. An unshaven stewbum in need of a hair cut, a wardrobe consultant and an exercise program. Now you can pick him out from the rest of the white male media talking heads.
Damn, you just described me.
I better up my game.
Do you look more like you’d use an Ouija board to communicate from the other side than Twitter from this one? Then you might be Steve Bannon.