- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Clintons Contempt Proceedings Begin Jan. 21
Posted on 1/14/26 at 6:50 pm to KiwiHead
Posted on 1/14/26 at 6:50 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
Are any of them former POTUS? This Epstein stuff is rank stupidity. Thus far the only things to come out is that someone happened to be in a pool with other people in the pool and that Trump had taken some pictures with Epstein and sent some off color letters......oh and Randy Andy of the Mountbatten Windsor clan .....a guy who literally does nothing.
Well and the numerous people interacting with him after he was guilty. Including a Democrat texting him during a hearing for advice.
0
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:19 pm to mwade91383
Either you are Tim Walz Retarded or a fricking idiot. You know exactly what my fricking point is
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:22 pm to VoxDawg
I expect Masshole to be tweetinf all day, making the rounds on the msm and hilding a press conference on the capital stairs
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:49 pm to mwade91383
quote:
Putting aside the fact that Comer has never come up with a plausible legislative purpose that would even justify subpoenaing the Clintons to testify about Bills relationship with Epstein (not that anyone here cares about that, I know)…
So now the purpose of subpoenas is open to interpretation as to whether to appear?
Did they give Navarro or Bannon that courtesy when they jailed them for failing to appear on the 1/6 Reality TV show?
This post was edited on 1/14/26 at 7:50 pm
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:50 pm to VoxDawg
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.
Hey, did you hear that Stranger Things has a super, secret episode 9 that exposes Conformity gate?
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:25 pm to TigerAxeOK
Could have been a phone call
“Please come to our office downtown “
“Please come to our office downtown “
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:29 pm to FLTech
Truly I don’t. Am I giving you too much credit?
If you’re suggesting that those photos mean he didn’t ignore *other* gov subpoenas……oh buddy.
If you’re suggesting that those photos mean he didn’t ignore *other* gov subpoenas……oh buddy.
Posted on 1/15/26 at 8:01 am to VoxDawg
Brian Cates weights in on the matter:
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
If you think Comer won't send a criminal referral the moment the hearing is over next week and neither Bill nor Hill showed up, you don't know a thing about him.
Hell, the current US Attorney is JEANNINE PIRRO.
She does not even have to WAIT for a criminal referral from Comer.
You DO all know that, right?
IT'S CLEARLY ESTABLISHED LAW NOW, thanks to Bannon and Navarro, that defying a Congressional subpoena to appear is a FEDERAL CRIME.
She doesn't NEED a referral from Comer to act on this.
Notice all the freaking dumb social media influencers out there who instantly become experts on ALL THA THINGS are already freaking out that 'Pam Bondi won't do anything!' ?
Listen carefully. I know what I'm talking about. I'm not pretending here to have expertise I do not actually possess to farm outrage clicks and grow my brand and my bank account.
Pay attention:
There is no wiggle room here for the Clintons if they try to go through with defying their subpoenas
None.
At all.
Zero.
Bubkis.
There is no gray area.
This was all exhaustively hashed out THREE YEARS AGO.
How do I know that?
Because I followed both Bannon's and Navarro's attempts to challenge the legitimacy of the J6 Committee subpoenas they got. I read the filings. I followed the rulings.
I was especially impressed by Bannon's legal counsel.
Bannon's lawyers tested EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE AVENUE for arguing that he J6 Committee was ILLEGALLY FORMED [in fact, that was true], and therefore the subpoena he got had no LEGAL FORCE and was unenforceable.
The DC courts heard Bannon's lawyers out and then said IT DIDN'T MATTER and the court wasn't going to rule on whether or not Nancy ILLEGALLY FORMED THE J6 COMMITTEE and violated the House's own rules when she formed it [she did- in about 4 different specific ways]
The Court refused to even look at whether or not Nancy dotted all those i's and crossed the t's in forming the J6 Committee, they said that was IRRELEVANT and they were not going to rule on that.
And because the court did not rule on the legitimacy of the J6 Committee, it ruled that the subpoena was a true legal document and if it was enforceable and defying it and refusing to appear was a crime.
THIS IS THE FEDERAL LAW.
The DC courts said this REPEATEDLY in their rulings.
Irrespective of how the J6 Committee was formed, a subpoena from that committee was a legally enforceable document and therefore both Bannon and Navarro were ordered to appear.
When they continued to defy their subpoenas after the DC federal courts ruled that they must comply or they would be committing a federal crime, the DC US Attorney at that time, a shitheel named MATTHEW GRAVES immediately issued an indictment for the both of them, had them arrested, took them to trial, convicted both of them, and had them sent to prison.
I followed all of THAT also.
Now, HOW MUCH SUCCESS do you see the Clinton's lawyers having as they try to argue that the
1. House Committee that issued that subpoena to Hill and Bill wasn't legally formed?
2. The subpoena has no legal force, and is therefore unenforceable?
3. Defying the subpoena to appear is not a federal crime?
I put the chances of the Clinton's lawyers being able to successfully make this case in federal court with Jeannine Pirro prosecuting the case at about .00034%
These lawyers are boxed in already EVEN BEFORE THEY START TRYING TO ARGUE ABOUT THIS.
Now, here's something else you need to know:
Pam Bondi isn't directly in charge of the charging decisions of the DC US Attorney's office. Jeannine Pirro is making those decisions. She will of course TELL Bondi what she is going to do.
You're about to get a tidal wave of social media influencers who either don't know how anything actually works or are messing with your mind for clicks insisting PAM BONDI WON'T CHARGE IF COMER SENDS A CRIMINAL REFERRAL.
Meanwhile here's me over here telling you how this actually works.
Remember how both Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr were both under constant siege being investigated under claims they 'interfered' with Ol' Bob Mueller's Special Counsel? And then John Durham's Special Counsel?
And they had to continually EXPLAIN that they weren't directly involved in charging decisions at the Special Counsel's Office?
Remember when Mueller and Andrew Weissmann made the absolutely stunning and extraordinary choice to KICK A CHARGING DECISION UP THE CHAIN to Bill Barr and Rod Rosenstein? That truly exotic reading of a federal statute where they wanted to charge a sitting US President with obstruction of justice? BUT THEY DECIDED THEY DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE THAT CHARGING DECISION THEMSELVES, SO THEY KICKED IT UPSTAIRS TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL?
Do you actually remember that any of this happened?
The **ATTORNEY GENERAL** does not make charging decisions on cases for Presidentially appointed US Attorneys. Pam Bondi - no offense here, Pam - in this regard is a glorified office manager at the corporate HQ. Jeannine Pirro is making the charging decisions at the US Attorney's Office in DC.
For Pam Bondi to **get caught** interfering in or dictating or unduly attempting to influence a charging decision at the DC US Attorney's office would create a MASSIVE SCANDAL.
You spent EIGHT YEARS watching Fake News trying to **engineer** these kind of scandals with Sessions and Barr and Rod Rosenstein. When there was NOTHING THERE.
The big scandal right now going on with how the Jack Smith Special Counsel was run, what is it? IT'S THAT THE SMITH SPECIAL COUNSEL WASN'T REALLY INDEPENDENT. Garland and Biden were illegally influencing the investigation. THAT IS A REAL MASSIVE SCANDAL.
Now our own side, who still doesn't pay attention and still doesn't know how any of this actually works, is about to be hit with a tidal wave of mis-and-disinformation about "OMG THAT BITCH PAM BONDI IS GONNA SIT ON A CRIMINAL REFERRAL FOR THE CLINTON'S, ISN'T SHE?!"
I'm over here laughing.
Join me.
Posted on 1/15/26 at 8:01 am to VoxDawg
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Left this out:
It would be a MASSIVE SCANDAL OF SEISMIC PROPORTIONS if Jeannine Pirro followed the law, and charged the Clintons for failure to comply with their legally enforceable subpoenas....
....and Pam Bondi jumped in there and told her NO NO NO YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
Every single social media influencer who's about to clickbait for the next several days that this is EXACTLY WHAT BONDI WILL DO is not your friend.
Bookmark this.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News