you present a leftist opinion rag as proof? may as well have gone to huffpo
2 Likes
That was not proof. I passed the first link in the subject as background. (And indicated as such) If you want more information look further.
I am a few years removed from my original sources on the topic but I found them believable.
As far as the Devils’s Triangle lie, I experienced it directly.
Everything does not need to be a partisan conflict. The man lied in his testimonies.
Let me broaden the selection:
https://www.google.com/search?q=kavenaugh+lied+to+congress&source
Justice is blind. Some don’t make decision based on who the protagonist is, but rather on the justice of their cause in the particular case.
What was Kavanaugh’s proven-false alleged lie?
Bannon is quite entitled to refuse to give any info to the kangaroos. He can argue that he believes they have no right to the information they seek, and can demand that they first prove in court that they do.
1 Like
I think legislative subpoenas are weak. He does need to contest it though. My understanding is that he ignored it rather than make any argument whatsoever.
But now he has his chance to make his argument to a court.
The argument is whether a former president can claim executive privilege. A less partisan AG would have litigated this issue before running after indictments.
I am in some agreement, but I think the indictment is the vehicle to litigation.
Recently it seems the courts have decided to slow walk litigation and let the clock run out on the issue. I think the indictment is designed to fast track the process.
I don’t see them extending executive privilege to former executives, but we are on our way to conclusive rulings.
Despite the politics that are happening in conjunction (always there) I do think congress has a compelling case to look at all things Jan 6 related.
It’s a sad era. So corrupt. I’m really sad about the left’s love of govt abuse of citizens.
2 Likes
Meh, he got a pardon in his other case, so as far as government abuse he’s kinda sitting even right now.
nothing but opinion, including yours. you have no idea what kav knew or didn’t know in hs
1 Like
Opinion is all we have in this forum. In mine it looks like he downplayed the sexual nature of his youthful yearbook comments by making up alternative meanings after the fact. “Boofing” is farting? Nah.
The other testimony issues where he downplayed involvement in unpopular events have a paper trail if you care to look. The stolen Dem documents issue seems well supported.
Is was where I grew up. I had never heard as a sexual term before. Just like the “OK” sign has different meaning in different places apparently. People seem to believe their experiences growing up are the same for everyone.
1 Like
Is there and documented use of it as a farting euphemism in the 80’s? The sexual meaning is documented.
Also, what in the world did he mean writing this note to a buddy in the yearbook.
[redacted] Fan Club; Judge — Have You Boofed Yet?;
Farting seems the unlikely meaning to him at the time. Context appears sexual to me.
This is a trivial matter and does not make him guilty, but to me it looks like he was less than truthful in his testimony which was my original reason to bring it up. Lying to congress to avoid gotcha moments is a perpetually tolerated activity.
Just telling you that is what I meant where and when I grew up. I can’t say what he meant.
1 Like
Welp, Trump himself has been doing it for years. His hangers on are learning from him, that you can make very good money from the base by selling swag, fooling them, and keeping them riled up.
don’t know anything about any stolen documents. i do know if he was even tangentially involved in “unpopular events” leftist idiots would be claiming he had a central role. again, that one is a matter of opinion. just the same as rw idiots would do the same in the inverse. i don’t blame you, i’d likely do the same… ya gotta go with the ammo you got
Glenn Greenwald has noted that there are several court rulings from the McCarthy era that severely restrict Congressional subpoenas. The Bannon indictment is ridiculous since the subpoenas are of dubious legality to begin with, and he has every right to challenge them in court.
Bolded: how bout taking a look?
I’m not dying on this hill. You are right about opinions and partisanship. And this case is about the same as the other fella’s mentioned in this thread.
The point is not that Kavenaugh is some craven liar. The point is that getting cute with the truth is par for the course in congressional testimony.
There isn’t a partisan side with some monopoly on it or some honor streak that keeps them from doing it.
And Congress has little power to punish it.
Bannon will skate. Same as these other cases. But they might snag some documents from him.
i still want to know where the congress gets the authority to compel private citizens they have no oversight authority over to appear anywhere. we oversee them, not they us.
1 Like
I don’t like the power myself. And it looks like
It has been steadily weakening as the years roll by.
Not sure it will ever gets to full zero though. Probably just enough to make it inconvenient to fight them on it.
