Lion of the Blogosphere

Bannon subpoenaed to grand jury

Grand jury testimony is secret, so we will not find out what’s said unless there are leaks.

This is good news for Bannon personally. Mueller is not interesting in prosecuting him for anything if he intends to question him in front of a grand jury, because grand jury witnesses get use and derivative use immunity, which isn’t as good as transnational immunity, not by a long shot, but it makes it a lot harder to prosecute the witness.

Grand jury witnesses have no Fifth Amendment right to remain silent because theoretically they cannot be prosecuted for anything they say.

Based on the book Fire and Fury, Bannon hates Kushner and will happily cooperate with Mueller in order to get back at him. Bannon presented himself as being too smart to get anywhere near the Russia thing, so he may not know anything that isn’t already public knowledge. On the other hand, he may have picked up various dirt on Kushner during the course of his association with Trump, which he can squeal in theoretical complete secrecy to the grand jury.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

Posted in Politics

17 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Bannon’s got no credibility. On ResetEra they are saying that Mueller has already flipped Bannon.

    Otis the Sweaty

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

  2. Trump’s approval up to 39.8 on 538. 538 also has GOP generic ballot deficit down to 8.5 (needs to be 7 for GOP to hold the House).

    Not really sure what is causing this upsurge. We’ll have to come back in a few months and see if this is the start of a real recovery or just a statistical artifact. If real, it could be due to booming economy and the consolidation of the party around Trump.

    Otis the Sweaty

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Nate Silver is a complete and utter joke. He has been wrong about everything for the last 18 months. The GOP will easily keep the house and gain in the Senate.

      B.T.D.T.

      January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Nate Silver was the only poll analyst to predict how the 2016 election turned out. The only one. NYTimes and Princeton and HuffPo and many others had Hillary at 98%-99.8% chances to win. But Silver picked out that Trump’s chances were good and even showed us which combinations of states could fall his way.

        Silver is the only proven credible analyst in the industry.

        And his predictions for 2018 are not out yet. Wait for them before you whine about them.

        owentt

        January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

      • what was interesting about Nate in 2016 was that he not only predicted that Trump could win, but predicted that the lack of certainty was because of the limited and poor quality of the available state polls. He was right and right about why he was right.

        Still a douche, though.

        Otis the Sweaty

        January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Nate Silver was the only poll analyst to predict how the 2016 election turned out. The only one.

        That’s such an exaggeration it qualifies as a lie. He said Hillary had a 70% chance of winning and Trump a 30% chance.

        Silver’s genius is making “predictions” that are unfalsifiable; no matter who won 2016, owentt would be saying he predicted how it would turn out. There are cults that envy that level of loyalty.

        The question is how accurately Silver accessed their chances, and looking at the actual margins I don’t see how Clinton was really a 70% favorite. If you restrict the candidates to the states they won by more than 5 points and figure everything else was a toss-up, Trump leads with 204 electoral votes to Clinton’s 201. At 4 points Clinton does pick up Colorado to give her 210 and a small advantage, but at 3 points Trump brings in a couple states to regain the lead at 230 to 210. At 2 points, Trump leads 231 to 218. At 1 point, Trump 260 to 228.

        Those numbers all point to an election that was really more of a 50-50 affair than 70-30, if anything with Trump favored over Clinton by a slight margin. Silver was way off.

        Richard

        January 17, 2018 at EDT am

  3. !

    IHTG

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Oh hell!

      IHTG

      January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

    • IHTG

      January 17, 2018 at EDT am

  4. Hopefully Bannon won’t testify drunk or hungover.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

  5. The only testimony that should be given is what’s beneficial to Trump or doesn’t hurt him in an way. Anything else is treason, regardless of what really happened. It’s war of survival and the rules of war, not courts and constitution apply. Everything is fair to win. Trump is the only game in town. Bannon had better make Trump and all his people look good.

    Yakov

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

  6. Grand jury testimony only carries immunity if it gets granted to the witness by the DoJ. Bannon has no grant of immunity. If he lies, he can be prosecuted for perjury.

    Chris Reynolds (@Crey1959)

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

  7. Semi-OT: I finally got a chance to hear Kris Kobach’s comments about the end of the illegal voting commission. He said it couldn’t move forward in its existing form because of lawsuits failed by various Democrats, including the members of the commission itself. Shockingly, the media’s coverage of the Kobach commission is the complete opposite of its coverage of the Mueller investigation. If Republicans managed to harass Mueller to the point where he decided to give up the investigation, there would be headline after headline about how Trump is destroying democracy. What few headlines there have been about the Kobach commission tell the opposite story: “turns out there was nothing to see here, folks.”

    Not to worry though, Homeland Security is supposed to continue where Kobach left off. I have no idea if there really was very much illegal voting 2016. But that’s the whole point of the investigation, of course: to find out. MSM would rather not know.

    Greg Pandatshang

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Obviously liberals believe there was illegal voting, otherwise they wouldn’t be so worried that the commission would find something.

      That Trump let this be shut down is another example of Trump not being able to follow through with anything.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 16, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Re: nonexistent voter fraud — The manner in which Al Franken won his 2008 Senate race has been memory-holed. Doubly so, as he’s been unpersoned in the Current Year Warlock Hunt (at least temporarily).

      Byron York’s synopsis in the Washington Examiner (2012)
      http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/york-when-1099-felons-vote-in-race-won-by-312-ballots/article/2504163

      “Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes… Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, [a conservative] group identified 1,099 felons — all ineligible to vote — who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race.”

      Felons and ex-felons vote Democratic about 75%-80% of the time.

      Voter fraud is impossible in the U.S. Inconceivable! And if it it were to happen, it couldn’t possibly affect an election’s outcome.

      And it can go unstated that in a double-hypothetical case like Sen. Franken’s, a disparate impact study would prove that anybody raising this issue is a racist.

      amac78

      January 17, 2018 at EDT am

  8. OT:

    Washington Times has an article on arresting the leaders of sanctuary cities.

    map

    January 17, 2018 at EDT am

  9. “Grand jury testimony is secret, so we will not find out what’s said unless there are leaks.”

    Grand jury testimony is indeed secret (unless leaked); however, it is extremely difficult to compel a witness to testify before a grand jury if he or she invokes the constitutional protection against self-incrimination unless transactional immunity is granted. As one expert put it:

    Hubbell and Reiner can be powerful arsenals in the hands of alert defense counsel. No attorney should ever let a client with criminal exposure appear before the grand jury pursuant to a subpoena ad testificandum or a subpoena duces tecum without court-ordered statutory immunity pursuant to §6002-03. These cases provide the authority to support such a strategy.

    ….

    More here, here and here

    Black Death

    January 18, 2018 at EDT am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: