can bannon get a fair trial?

They simply don't want to deal with reality. Instead of booze, drugs, or some other addiction to try to escape from reality, they listen and believe every word from people like Hannity, Tucker, Laura, etc. But then again, they are part of a cult.

 

That does not apply here with Bannon and most cases such as traffic tickets if you decide to plead not guilty. Although I have argued that it is unjust in our Criminal Justice System, it usually involves persons who have money and those who do not when charged with very serious felonies, such as felony murder, habitual robbery, etc. I made this argument in another thread and will not repeat my points here. I am also of the belief that it is not as systemic as your op-ed pointed out, especially when it comes to trial courts, rules of evidence, etc. Certain social issues and the appellate system or the Supreme Court decisions may show "unjust" but that is a double edge sword argument.

That being said, when it comes to Steve Bannon and his team, he has been given every opportunity, his rights intact, and is now "having his day in court." Under federal rules of evidence and procedure, he cannot and will not make this court into a circus. He, or his lawyers, can directly cross-examine the prosecution witnesses and/or present evidence of his reasonable doubt, such as his "negotiations" with the committee. Bannon can even choose to testify on his behalf in the trial, or he can remain silent per the 5th Amendment. But none of that proves or shows how unjust this trial is. Never has nor never will.

 

I very much appreciate the quality of your argumentation but I'm afraid it's flying too high above their heads. It's a bit like feeding pigs with caviar.

 

The Legislative Branch is not doing that whatsoever. You have no understanding what the powers of the three branches of government. Congress has the authority to investigate through its oversight. Oversight is not a criminal investigation. It can refer charges of criminality to the DOJ, but it is not actually looking into criminality. The January 6th committee is no different than the select committee on Benghazi or the Select committee of Unamerican Activities back in the 1980s through 70s, and various other standing or special committees. This is an implied power of Congress through the necessary and proper clause, among other things. There have been two significant Supreme Court Cases, Watkins v United States, and Eastland v United States.

What happened is that through the oversight and the subpoena, Bannon refused. As such, the choice is either to refer the matter to the DOJ or not. This is established rules of order and conduct with the House of Representatives and/or the Senate and has been since the 1950s. If passed, the referral goes to the DOJ. Then the DOJ decides whether or not to seat a grand jury. In this case, it did, the Grand Jury took in all the testimony and evidence, and indicted Steve Bannon. Once indicted, it is then referred, specifically in this case, to the DC District Court. And from there, the rest is history.

A referral is not a criminal investigation. Criminal investigations can happen with the FBI or other Law Enforcement Agencies, the DOJ specifically, the Grand Jury, or a combination thereof.

You guys have no idea what you are talking about and have no knowledge of the law or how things work. Quite frankly, you never will.

 

Ok, fair enough. I'll give you that if you give me that it's just as obvious that Joe is the "big guy" that profited off his son's association with foreign business partners.