The rule of American Law has been restored: Former Donald Trump's Adviser Steve Bannon indicted and arrested with two counts of contempt of Congress
Monday, November 15, 2021
Attorney General Merrick Garland (left) and former Donald Trump's Adviser Steve Bannon.
VietPress USA (Nov. 15, 2021): Accordig to CNN, "The House January 6 investigation hoped to send a fear-inducing message deep into Donald Trump's inner circle by opening the way to the prosecution of Steve Bannon.
But the risks of that strategy became clear on Monday as the ex-President's political arsonist turned himself in to the FBI after a grand jury had indicted him for contempt of Congress last week. Ever the outsider wrecking ball, Bannon set the example for turning efforts to hold Trump acolytes accountable into fuel for more extremism.
The former Wall Street banker turned firebrand populist podcaster relished his moment in the spotlight, embracing victimhood in the name of Trumpism just like political dirty tricks master and Trump fan Roger Stone.
He vowed to topple the Biden "regime" and to make the charges against him a "misdemeanor from Hell" for the President, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Attorney General Merrick Garland, who signed off on his prosecution".
Read this report from NBC News at the following link:
VietPress
USA News
www.vietpressusa.us
o00o
Trump adviser Steve Bannon's indictment and arrest are a win for the rule of law
Future legal wrangling aside, it’s worth pausing to consider what just happened.
By Laurence H. Tribe, professor of constitutional law at Harvard, Stuart M. Gerson, former assistant attorney general and Dennis Aftergut, former federal prosecutor
Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon surrendered to federal authorities on Monday, and was later released on his own recognizance after surrendering his passport. Bannon has been charged with two counts of contempt of Congress thanks to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s commitment to restoring the rule of law. By demonstrating that severe sanctions follow the flouting of subpoenas, whether from Congress or the courts, the Justice Department has sent a clear message to other witnesses that Bannon’s path of defiance can result in very real consequences — including possibly jail.
Before the indictment was announced on Friday, former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows proved why such consequences are necessary. Meadows was AWOL for his subpoenaed appearance before the House Select Committee, set for Monday. In light of the Bannon indictment, the committee should give Meadows a few days to rethink his options.
Meadows very well might do what former Trump acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey B. Clark did on Nov. 5: Show up but refuse to answer any substantive questions on grounds of executive privilege. While that might pay lip service to the power of legal compulsion, both Clark and Bannon’s executive privilege claim is a weak one. The resolution of that questionable defense may come from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which is considering Trump’s own privilege claim. The court will hear that case on Nov. 30 after Friday’s order to expedite the briefing.
Should the D.C. Circuit Court affirm the ruling against former President Donald Trump, and the Supreme Court leave that ruling in place or affirm it, Congress has an additional option. It could consider civil contempt for those like Clark who show up but use privilege as a pretext to stay silent. That would require the House to sue recalcitrant witnesses to obtain a court order compelling an answer to questions. Under such an order, witnesses may be held in custody until they relent and do as they should. As the legal saying goes, the witness “holds the key to the prison door.”
But legal wrangling aside, it’s worth pausing today to consider what just happened. The three branches of our constitutional government are working in tandem, exactly as the Constitution intended. Congress investigated the unprecedented Jan. 6 insurrection and subpoenaed those with knowledge about its planning. The current president declined to assert executive privilege. The District Court, in a closely related matter, rejected the former president’s claims that his administration’s documents should be shielded. That is what our system of separation of powers demands.
====
Hạnh Dương
www.Vietpressusa.us
Related Post:
BREAKING NEWS,
Front Page
