ADVERTISEMENT

Not a good look for Bannon and Team Trump

Medic007

MegaPoke is insane
Sep 25, 2006
33,224
52,099
113
This is the kind of crap that made people doubt the integrity of Obama administration officials like Lois Lerner, Eric Holder, and Susan Rice. It's also a big part of why Hillary lost. This is not sending a strong message of "THERE WAS NO RUSSIAN COLLUSION."

Bannon took the time to talk to some book author. It's time to answer questions in front of Congress.

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/17/politics/steve-bannon-white-house-limit-testimony/index.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: AC_Exotic
I don't think you can believe a word bannon says...he's already admitted he made a mistake. He crawfished way to early. He was after bucks for his book and had just enough credibility then to make people look. Now, he's just another joke.
 
I don't think you can believe a word bannon says...he's already admitted he made a mistake. He crawfished way to early. He was after bucks for his book and had just enough credibility then to make people look. Now, he's just another joke.
Then let him talk. Lying to Congress has consequences. The apparent shielding effort by the White House smells really bad. Really, really bad.
 
Is this really about the big picture and long-term game? If Trump gives away executive privilege, can he take it back? And then, if he does, will some then say not waiving executive privilege is a sign of guilt? Double edged sword.

Some believe Mueller has no collusion and the goal now is to trip Trump up on conflicting statements and try to get him on perjury or obstruction of justice.

Back in the day I use to work in public accounting, then worked on the internal audit staff of a Fortune 500 company. We were good auditors in the sense we were not trying to issue "gotcha stickers" or parking tickets, we wanted to be business partners and improve controls and the business, we always had professional skepticism and we did discover some embezzlement, etc...part of that is because we were trusted business partners, not auditors that bayoneted the wounded after the war was fought over stupid stuff.

Few years later I am a Division Controller and I am audited by internal audit, I was very helpful. The audit department had a new leader and a new attitude, they just wanted to write parking tickets and basically alienate people. We had the trust of people when we were in audit and people would reveal stuff to us, even after I was out of audit. Well, the next time I was audited, I did not bend over backwards. I answered every question but did not say anything past what was asked, only provided the bare minimum of what was requested. I took the attitude of ok parking ticket auditor, come in here and tell me something about my entity I do not know, going to have to earn it. I was ethical, I assisted the SEC in cleaning up this company later in my career, I prevented big problems (accelerating earnings, etc..), the traffic ticket issues did not impact the financials or business ethics. I turned stuff in to the CFO all the time.

I wish the environment in Washington was "fair", but if I was the President and thought I had hostile auditors coming in and I knew my house was in order (no one knows what might be going on outside), I provide the bare minimum, tell me what I do not know, earn it. Hostile auditors will take a parking ticket and turn it in to a major audit comment that requires a congressional hearing. When I was in audit parking ticket issues was a discussion, a verbal conversation and that was it, and we would document it. But it did not go to the CEO, CFO, and regional controller in the final audit report, that was reserved for true control weaknesses and deficiencies.

This President is being attacked more viciously then any modern US President, suspicion and hatred of him does not mean he has a higher standard then previous Presidents to self incriminate and give enemies an opportunity to use parking tickets to bring him down.

If he has done wrong, then I hope he is charged, but he is innocent until proven guilty and should be afforded every legal protection provided under the law.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rdcldad
trump had no way of instituting weaponized government departmental agencies while running for office.

trump had no way of diverting democratic party finances to his campaig while running for office.

trump had no way of coopting bernie sanders delegates to derail his nomination.

these instances are not conspiracy theory
they are real subversions on democracy

yet not the story

or the scandal
 
  • Like
Reactions: NZ Poke
I don't see what's wrong with this. Just because he agreed to an interview in regards to Russian collusion during the campaign, does not give the Mueller and his department carte blanche to ask any question about any dealing Bannon may or may not have ever had. It was clearly reported that the White House only blocked communications regarding post-election activities. So unless you believe they colluded with the Russians to win the election AFTER Trump had won the election, I'm not sure I understand the issue here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HanAholeSolo2.0
The Obama cronies claimed "nothing to see here" while invoking their 5th Amendment rights, executive privilege, and refusal to recall. We all probably rightly assumed some level of guilt because why else would they do that?

Now Bannon and Team Trump appear to be doing the exact same thing. I'm going to rightly assume some level of guilt in light of "THERE WAS NO COLLUSION." I doubt I'm the only Trump voter who feels the same way. Trump is doing plenty of good things, but Obama/Clinton 2.0 is not something I voted for.
 
I don't see what's wrong with this. Just because he agreed to an interview in regards to Russian collusion during the campaign, does not give the Mueller and his department carte blanche to ask any question about any dealing Bannon may or may not have ever had. It was clearly reported that the White House only blocked communications regarding post-election activities. So unless you believe they colluded with the Russians to win the election AFTER Trump had won the election, I'm not sure I understand the issue here.

Special privilege can be invoked under Congressional testimony (assuming he even had that privilege in the first place, quite debatable) but not for Mueller. And the congressional committee was very frustrated with his stonewalling, to the extent of considering contempt if he doesn’t start talking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT