Steve Bannon Is no Mae West

 

Talk about stating the obvious! Such a title. No one has taken the bait, so this old fool will rush in where wiser individuals know better than to tread. Everyone, I assume, remembers the old Mae West joke, that the trials and travails of Steve Bannon bring to mind:

Mae West was hauled into court on obscenity charges.

Her entourage went to court with her. In the courtroom, her entourage was more or less having a party.

The judge was offended. He repeatedly pounded his gavel, shouting “ORDER IN THE COURT!”

When the noise died down enough for the judge to be heard, he asked Mae West pointedly: “Miss West, are you trying to show contempt for this court?”

Mae West batted her eyelashes and replied sweetly: “Oh, no, your honor. I’m doing my best to conceal it!”

Steve Bannon should wear that contempt conviction proudly. Why appeal?  Does he want to be found not in contempt of Congress? Shameful! It would be worth the jail time and the fine to have that conviction for contempt of Congress for the rest of his life. A red badge of courage, if you will. His bona fides would be bulletproof.  He should ask for a draconian sentence. In prison, he can entertain conservatives of all stripes who come to pay homage to his courage in his conviction (bad pun intended) and the double standard of justice (why is Eric Holder walking around free trying to rig elections and define districts, etc.) that is at play. Activists can demonstrate with signs, FREE THE BANNON!

He almost spoiled that conviction with his mealy-mouthed and variable defenses:  That he wasn’t really trying to avoid the Congressional subpoena; that he just misunderstood the time frame; that he really didn’t intend to show contempt of Congress; that he thought he did actually qualify for executive privilege, though none had been invoked. Etc. etc. How maudlin.

Come on, Steve! Play it straight. Of course, you intended to show contempt of Congress. Bravo!  We would be appalled to find out that you didn’t really mean to show contempt of Congress. There is hardly an institution in our nation that deserves contempt more than Congress. Go join all those January Sixers rotting in DC prison. Show solidarity. Focus the media spotlight on their plight. You began to redeem yourself with your tirade after the conviction. Keep it up. Shout the illegitimacy of the Dreyfus affair, er, I mean, the Jan. 6 committee. Don’t make Mollie Hemingway do all the heavy lifting (although she seems more than able to take down the committee all by herself).

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 60 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    I have nothing but contempt for congress and the presidency as well. The willingness to overlook obvious crimes, like Pelosi’s husband’s insider trading, and Hunter Biden’s unbelievable spree of utilizing his father’s position to finance his and his family’s corruption are just two small examples of the complete degradation of the body. When they attack Republicans with their absurd sense of rectitude it make me want to puke. They are beyond the pale. I have no respect for Bannon and almost none for Trump, but in that swamp of corruption, those two stand out as martyrs and potential saints. I don’t know if this is simply how things have always been, but it sure seems as though things have taken a downward turn of nearly 90º since Obama. They don’t seem to feel the need to pretend. They just blather on hypocritically as though they are the possessors of the Holy Chalice.

    • #31
  2. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    As we learned this week, you can attempt an assassination, and receive a get out of jail free card if your target is a Republican.

    • #32
  3. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):
    Hunter Biden’s unbelievable spree

    I think they really hit a tipping point on the news, yesterday.

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):
    swamp of corruption

    I forget how this came up, but I heard something about Barry Goldwater had a gay staffer in 1964 or something. I started fishing around on the Internet and what mostly came up was how LBJ and Bill Moyers unleashed all kinds of detectives and FBI hunting down gay people that they could leverage the exposure politically somehow. LBJ tapped Goldwater’s phones and Hubert Humphrey’s phones. I mean talk about nauseating.

    Then LBJ had some scandal with a gay staffer and he couldn’t believe it that Barry Goldwater wasn’t going to leverage it against him in the campaign.

    Anybody that thinks we need more government is out of their minds.

    • #33
  4. Mark Alexander Inactive
    Mark Alexander
    @MarkAlexander

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    One of his grounds for appeal is selective prosecution. I’d like to see him push that if only to call more attention to . . . selective prosecution.

    No.

    The House referred the four people who refused to testify to the Justice Department. The Justice Department decided to prosecute two of them, Steve Brannon and Peter Navarro.. Steve Bannon was the first of the two to go to trial. He was convicted.

    I am looking forward to Peter Navarro being prosecuted and hopeful convicted.

    I hope that the Justice Department changes it’s mind and decides to prosecute the other two, Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino.

    I hope that Steve Bannon receives the maximum sentence, and that immediately after he is released, that he be subpoenaed again, and if he doesn’t appear, be found in contempt, and prosecuted again.

    Steve Bannon brought this on himself. He could have done what Mike Flynn did, and take the Fifth Amendment to every posed question.

    So you support show trials. Interesting.

    • #34
  5. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    On what basis is it a crime to decline to show up for a kangaroo court of pure partisan purpose that is set up for the sole purpose of ex post facto fi di g o e person guilty of a manufactured “crime”?

    On the crime of not belonging to the ruling party.

    Same reason some people get hardcore prison sentences for trespassing, while other people burn and loot with complete impunity. Heck, if you have the correct partisan ideology, you can throw a Molotov cocktail into a cop car and the “Department of Justice” will argue for a light sentence on your behalf.

    You misspelled Department of (In)Justice.

    • #35
  6. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    This thing stinks so bad. 

     

     

    • #36
  7. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    One of his grounds for appeal is selective prosecution. I’d like to see him push that if only to call more attention to . . . selective prosecution.

    No.

    The House referred the four people who refused to testify to the Justice Department. The Justice Department decided to prosecute two of them, Steve Brannon and Peter Navarro.. Steve Bannon was the first of the two to go to trial. He was convicted.

    I am looking forward to Peter Navarro being prosecuted and hopeful convicted.

    I hope that the Justice Department changes it’s mind and decides to prosecute the other two, Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino.

    I hope that Steve Bannon receives the maximum sentence, and that immediately after he is released, that he be subpoenaed again, and if he doesn’t appear, be found in contempt, and prosecuted again.

    Steve Bannon brought this on himself. He could have done what Mike Flynn did, and take the Fifth Amendment to every posed question.

    Why are you such a vindictive person? I thought you didn’t like President Trump. Apparently, now you don’t like anyone who worked for him. Am I to suppose you don’t like anyone who liked him, as so many here do? Believe me, the feeling is mutual. And this will be the last time I ever reply to you or read anything you post. This is my best effort at complying with the rules of Ricochet.

    • #37
  8. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    cdor (View Comment):
    And this will be the last time I ever reply to you or read anything you post. This is my best effort at complying with the rules of Ricochet.

    I consider this the wisest course of action since Gary seems to feed off the attention, even when it’s negative. Although I’ve acted the fool on more than one occasion.

    • #38
  9. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    cdor (View Comment):

    Why are you such a vindictive person? I thought you didn’t like President Trump. Apparently, now you don’t like anyone who worked for him. Am I to suppose you don’t like anyone who liked him, as so many here do? Believe me, the feeling is mutual. And this will be the last time I ever reply to you or read anything you post. This is my best effort at complying with the rules of Ricochet.

    I don’t think anyone has addressed the core legal principle behind his assertion that Bannon could plead the 5th.  Bannon is not accused or suspected of any crime for which his testimony is being sought, and, legal pronouncements aside, pleading the 5th implies that what you say might reasonably tend to incriminate you.

    Rather, what Bannon is doing is proactively protecting Trump’s Executive Privilege and deferring to it.  For him to not answer any questions is not in order to not incriminate himself, but to assure that private privileged communication within the Executive Branch remains private.

    But it would take a certain competence to know this, and this requires an expertise that is not within Gary’s métier .

    • #39
  10. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Rather, what Bannon is doing is proactively protecting Trump’s Executive Privilege and deferring to it.  For him to not answer any questions is not in order to not incriminate himself, but to assure that private privileged communication within the Executive Branch remains private.

    Except that Trump told him he didn’t need to worry about that and to go ahead and speak openly.

    • #40
  11. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Rather, what Bannon is doing is proactively protecting Trump’s Executive Privilege and deferring to it. For him to not answer any questions is not in order to not incriminate himself, but to assure that private privileged communication within the Executive Branch remains private.

    Except that Trump told him he didn’t need to worry about that and to go ahead and speak openly.

    I’ve heard that recently.  Just out of curiosity, when and where was this reported?

    • #41
  12. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Flicker (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Rather, what Bannon is doing is proactively protecting Trump’s Executive Privilege and deferring to it. For him to not answer any questions is not in order to not incriminate himself, but to assure that private privileged communication within the Executive Branch remains private.

    Except that Trump told him he didn’t need to worry about that and to go ahead and speak openly.

    I’ve heard that recently. Just out of curiosity, when and where was this reported?

    I dunno . . . saw it at least a week ago while in a zen-like state browsing the web.

    • #42
  13. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Rather, what Bannon is doing is proactively protecting Trump’s Executive Privilege and deferring to it. For him to not answer any questions is not in order to not incriminate himself, but to assure that private privileged communication within the Executive Branch remains private.

    Except that Trump told him he didn’t need to worry about that and to go ahead and speak openly.

    I’ve heard that recently. Just out of curiosity, when and where was this reported?

    I dunno . . . saw it at least a week ago while in a zen-like state browsing the web.

    I saw it too. Trump made public comments that he didn’t like how the executive privilege was harming people’s lives and that he was waiving it for their ability to testify without personal legal concerns. In trying to find it, I found this updated article … https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/11/trump-bannon-executive-privilege/

    It’s the Compost, so take it with a grain of salt. I expect that the Trump and Bannon legal teams are more on the same page than the Compost would like them to be.

    • #43
  14. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Bannon subpoenaed the whole committee and they ignored it. 

    I’ve heard a couple of lawyers say that he has a good chance on appeal. I forget why.

    • #44
  15. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Bannon is on Seb Gorka right now. It will be on Rumble later. 

    • #45
  16. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):
    while in a zen-like state browsing the web.

    Friends don’t let friends browse the web in a zen-like state. 

    • #46
  17. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Bannon is on Seb Gorka right now. It will be on Rumble later.

    It’s on iTunes. I forget exactly how Gorka does this, but he always puts the third hour on iTunes which is a long interview with no calls. 

    I think rumble has his whole show and then clips of guests. The only thing I’m interested in on his show are the guests. 

    • #47
  18. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):
    while in a zen-like state browsing the web.

    Friends don’t let friends browse the web in a zen-like state.

    And here I always thought that the only way one could justifiably browse the web was to be in a certifiably Zen-like state. Kudos, Drew, for doin’ it the right way.

    • #48
  19. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    cdor (View Comment):

    And here I always thought that the only way one could justifiably browse the web was to be in a certifiably Zen-like state. Kudos, Drew, for doin’ it the right way.

    Good way to clear your head when you’re stuck on a project. Sort of “solvitur ambulando” without actually leaving my desk.

    • #49
  20. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    It never should have come to this. 

     

     

     

    • #50
  21. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

    Lord forgive me, I hate these people. “For white Americans.” Says the privileged white American without a freaking clue.

    • #51
  22. Bishop Wash Member
    Bishop Wash
    @BishopWash

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

     

     

    Economic nationalist? WTF?

    • #52
  23. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

     

     

     

    Economic nationalist? WTF?

    Gotta hate these people. Sorry, I know it’s un-Christian. 

    • #53
  24. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

     

     

     

    Economic nationalist? WTF?

     

    Every Western government did every single thing wrong in the face of the wage deflation and job destruction from trade and automation after the Soviet Union fell. Then people whine about Socialism and populism.

    It’s a very complicated situation to manage. 

    • #54
  25. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

     

     

     

    Economic nationalist? WTF?

    Gotta hate these people. Sorry, I know it’s un-Christian.

    I got your point about racialism, before. I’m not sure what you are saying, now.

    • #55
  26. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

     

     

     

    Economic nationalist? WTF?

    Gotta hate these people. Sorry, I know it’s un-Christian.

    I got your point about racialism, before. I’m not sure what you are saying, now.

    Only that she’s labeled “economic nationalism” with the intent of slandering nationalism. Not all nationalism is Nazism. We’ve let the Left corrupt the word as they have so many others. American nationalism isn’t a bad thing and is nothing like the genocidal National Socialism of Hitler’s Germany. That’s my point.

    • #56
  27. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

     

     

     

    Economic nationalist? WTF?

    Gotta hate these people. Sorry, I know it’s un-Christian.

    I got your point about racialism, before. I’m not sure what you are saying, now.

    Only that she’s labeled “economic nationalism” with the intent of slandering nationalism. Not all nationalism is Nazism. We’ve let the Left corrupt the word as they have so many others. American nationalism isn’t a bad thing and is nothing like the genocidal National Socialism of Hitler’s Germany. That’s my point.

    Right. Thank you.

    • #57
  28. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Columbo (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Rather, what Bannon is doing is proactively protecting Trump’s Executive Privilege and deferring to it. For him to not answer any questions is not in order to not incriminate himself, but to assure that private privileged communication within the Executive Branch remains private.

    Except that Trump told him he didn’t need to worry about that and to go ahead and speak openly.

    I’ve heard that recently. Just out of curiosity, when and where was this reported?

    I dunno . . . saw it at least a week ago while in a zen-like state browsing the web.

    I saw it too. Trump made public comments that he didn’t like how the executive privilege was harming people’s lives and that he was waiving it for their ability to testify without personal legal concerns. In trying to find it, I found this updated article … https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/11/trump-bannon-executive-privilege/

    It’s the Compost, so take it with a grain of salt. I expect that the Trump and Bannon legal teams are more on the same page than the Compost would like them to be.

    Superficially, it looks like Trump’s legal team was communicating inspecifically about what Trump has asserted, and Trump’s team is denying or recharacterizing what it previously said.  But, yes, it’s just the Wash Post.

    • #58
  29. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It never should have come to this.

     

     

    Lord forgive me, I hate these people. “For white Americans.” Says the privileged white American without a freaking clue.

    And they call that Firing Line.

    • #59
  30. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I AM ALL IN lol 

     

     

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.