You know what's weird? Trying to think about who are the people to line up in little pairings of who represents who, actually gave me a weird sense of hope, like it's very early in the whole process compared to looking back on the Nazis, and it's not going anywhere near as well as it did for them in Germany. Putting the two next to each other (Beer Hall Putsch vs January 6th, Goebbels vs Bannon, SA versus Oathkeepers, things like that) makes the MAGA people look pretty wimpy. People looked at the Nazis like a joke early on but they had real combat experience, organization, they got shit done, they weren't afraid to get in the streets by the thousands and fight this actual war that the Right on the internet keeps talking about but seems (a couple outliers aside) to be constantly waiting for someone else to instigate and then win, for them.
Himmler was like this suspectedly wimpy guy, like oh he never saw combat, he only single handedly oversaw the construction of and then commanded a million-strong paramilitary force and then supervised the extermination of six million people. If that's the bar for "we're not sure about this guy," then what the fuck are you going to say in the credit of Steve Bannon or Jared Kushner and their displayed abilities. Nothing, that's what.
On the other hand, the society they're trying to take over is itself a lot more vulnerable and less vigorous and more sitting-on-TikTok based, so maybe it's not any real assurance of safety.
Refusing a subpoena by Congress isn't what Bannon is hoping for. If you believe that Congress is investigating is outside their scope, it's too political to be a lawful investigation, you still have to answer the subpoena and then testify under oath your belief as such. This was something pointed out in Watkins.
So the only way SCOTUS can overturn the conviction is finding some new ability to ignore a subpoena, which I'm not sure how they can justify a new power without it also coming off as SCOTUS removing Congressional power, a clear violation of the separation of power.
You can walk into a hearing and literally sit there and not answer. You can indicate that they're full of themselves. Your 5th Amendment right overrides government oversight in personal matters. They were seeking Bannon's involvement in the Jan. 6 attack, he literally could have gotten up there, gave them the middle finger, indicated his fifth amendment right, and sat there with arms crossed the rest of the time. And he totally could have had SCOTUS get him off scotfree with a Watkins argument, the end.
But if you DO NOT even fucking go, well you've just shot yourself in the foot. Because now, SCOTUS has to invent something to save your dumbass, and reasons to invent a new thing that could potentially backfire are based on how much it's worth it to them to do such.
Literally guy could have done all kinds of things to make this easier for him. Just not showing was quite possibly the dumbest way to do it.
How many of the rest of us get to appeal our four month prison sentences to the Supreme Court of the United States of America with any expectation that they would hear the case?
I was thinking of appealing my parking ticket to the Supreme Court by using the defense that the officer that issued the ticket did it to keep me from voting and … uh … freedom.
lmao. A bunch of states actually have Civil Rights era laws on the books that say law enforcement can't harass you to or from the polls. So if you live in the right state and were cited literally at the polling place, you could probably argue your way out of the ticket.
Yeah, I’d be scared of going to prison if I were him too… That drunken lout is probably going to end up in the infirmary with the DTs by the 4th of July.
Add comment