|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Senior Member
Originally Posted by Firefly
He actually sounded intelligent and rational in the 60 min interview a saw awhile ago. That actually is the only direct communication I’ve seen of him. He, up until now, has been more talked about than talkative.
The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.
It's that simple.
Site Sponsor
I'm pretty sure Bannon was the cause of near collapse of Trump's cabinet. The team itself had likely had enough of him and after some key cabinet changes, Bannon was voted off the island.
I like Bannon, he did do a good 60 Minutes interview, but he is likely a bit to intense for Trump's kids and a few key Staffers.
I would agree, he needs to dial it back a bit and have a table spoon of STFU.
A lot has been accomplished since Bannon left, so just how needed was he ?
Last edited by Averageman; 01-03-18 at 19:39.
Senior Member
Sloppy Steve has been subpoenaed
Site Sponsor
Well that likely means he will either plead the fifth, or one of the little Trumper's is going under the bus.
Here's to hoping he has the common sense to STFU and give them nothing.
Senior Member
If he talks I can assure you it's not due to him not having common sense. It's because he has an agenda.
Whiskey
May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one
Senior Member
Bannon only cares about Bannon. You can’t plead the fifth unless if the question would incriminate someone else and not yourself (from what I can tell, not a lawyer) so he could potentially find himself in a pickle if he withholds information when questioned.
Senior Member
No need to plead the fifth. Just do like everyone else when being questioned and either "I do not recall", or "I do not know".
Whiskey
May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one
Senior Member
I’m curious as I am ignorant as to how these things work (as I said, not a lawyer), if you are being questioned and respond like that but they have proof that you had knowledge of the situation can they use that to hang you out to dry?
Senior Member
Given how much federal prosecutors love charging people with making false statements to the FBI, whether intentional or not, this is a good strategy.
Show up with your lawyer. Tell the the FBI you cannot recall or do not know to every question they have aside from your name. The less shit you have to remember the better, and if you cannot remember anything specific and tell them as much they can go pound sand. At least where lying to the FBI charges are concerned.
Not that the FBI would ever need to interview me for any purpose, I would probably utilize the “I don’t recall” strategy as well. If for no other reason than limiting my exposure to potential legal liability.
Senior Member
Sure, just not on the lying to a federal agent charges. If you don’t make a specific claim, that is demonstrably false they have nothing to charge you with. If you claim you cannot remember, or do not know that effectively enters into the record as a non statement where facts are concerned.
If all the parties involved here were smart, the “I don’t recall” strategy would probably effectively stonewall Mueller. For example if that idiot Flynn were better at tradecraft he’d have done like Oliver North. Sure the FBI might have found something, but you’d make them dig like hell for it. Why serve up a charge of lying for them on a silver platter? If he’d have done that there evidently would have been no other charges at all.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks