Steve Bannon

[SuzieC]

Putz is a flight risk. Can he be held in the slammer pending sentencing?

[Kendra]

Bannon and lawyer speaking now. I didn't realize one of his attorneys was one of tfg's attorneys in one of the impeachment trials.

[Kendra]

Bannon and lawyer speaking now. I didn't realize one of his attorneys was one of tfg's attorneys in one of the impeachment trials.

Edit: Forget the exact words, but Bannon called out the J6 Committee members for being gutless and not coming and testifying. I do believe I saw in the crowd that nice older gentleman with the Santa beard holding up a sign like he's always done for Manafort, Flynn, etc.

[MN-Skeptic]

[pipistrelle]

“Bulletproof appeal.”

[raison de arizona]

The folks I follow on Twitter say that Bannon is certain to appeal this.

I heard an interview of his lawyer earlier this week, who said they had already been working on the appeal.

[bob]

The folks I follow on Twitter say that Bannon is certain to appeal this.

There's no reason for him not to. Especially if it continues the grift.


* * *

Putz is a flight risk. Can he be held in the slammer pending sentencing?

Possible but not probable. The first step would be for the prosecutor to request that bail be revoked, and I doubt that request will be made.

* * *

This was my area of practice, so I can speak with some confidence: Most issues on appeal give deference to the trial court's decision. It's not enough to make a good argument that the court messed up. You must show that the court abused its discretion.

"Most" is doing too much work here: The resident criminal appeals specialist will inevitably say: (1) the court's instructions are the most fertile grounds for an appeal; and (2) "abuse of discretion" often isn't the standard of review used for those kinds of claims.

Having said that, a winning appellate issue isn't (yet) jumping out at me.

[raison de arizona]

Wait, what? Who is the gutless one who wouldn't testify? Bannon seems to have lost track of what his trial was about, flip that and reverse it, bub.


Was listening to FoxNews, the first guy said that it was "very unusual" to deny executive privilege but the next guy that was on had his facts straight.

[Maybenaut]

The folks I follow on Twitter say that Bannon is certain to appeal this.

There's no reason for him not to. Especially if it continues the grift.


* * *

Putz is a flight risk. Can he be held in the slammer pending sentencing?

Possible but not probable. The first step would be for the prosecutor to request that bail be revoked, and I doubt that request will be made.

* * *

This was my area of practice, so I can speak with some confidence: Most issues on appeal give deference to the trial court's decision. It's not enough to make a good argument that the court messed up. You must show that the court abused its discretion.

"Most" is doing too much work here: The resident criminal appeals specialist will inevitably say: (1) the court's instructions are the most fertile grounds for an appeal; and (2) "abuse of discretion" often isn't the standard of review used for those kinds of claims.

Having said that, a winning appellate issue isn't (yet) jumping out at me.

In my practice as an appellate defense attorney, among the first things I look at are (a) what were the jury instructions and how do they compare to standard pattern instructions, and (b) did the defense counsel object. If the defense doesn’t object, the issue is usually waived (but not always - waiver is complicated and nuanced). If the defense did object, and the instruction required certain things of the jury that deprived my guy a fair trial (instructing that they couldn’t consider certain defenses or evidence, for example), then the question is whether the instructional error is of constitutional dimension or not. Instructional errors depriving a defendant of a defense usually are of constitutional dimension; run-of-the-mill evidentiary errors usually are not (though there are always exceptions). The difference in the type of error governs the level of scrutiny on appeal, as well as who has the burden. With an error of constitutional dimension, the burden is on the government to prove that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. With non-constitutional errors, the burden is on the appellant to prove that the error prejudiced a substantial right, which is much more difficult to prove.

Instructional errors are among the most fruitful.

I doubt, though, that any of these issues will save the day for Bannon.

[MN-Skeptic]

I doubt, though, that any of these issues will save the day for Bannon.

I hope you’re right and we get another Smack Down Friday.

[raison de arizona]

Bwawawa Bannon the gutless wonder, testify or STFU. Everybody can see yer skeered.

[northland10]

Peter Navarro, if he’s watching, will note that his trial in November is in same courthouse. Also in front of a DC jury

I was discussing this (and the potential sentence) with a colleague earlier today and he wondered how much this might look bad for Navarro. I told him it is not quite the same. I'm not sure Navarro can even make it to trial without getting locked up (contempt, violation of release, etc.).

Instructional errors are among the most fruitful.

I doubt, though, that any of these issues will save the day for Bannon.

Thank you for your insight and please keep it up.

Off Topic

And thank Stormy for all the Tweets.

[Gregg]

“I only have one disappointment,” he said. “And that is the gutless members of that show trial committee, the J6 committee, didn’t have the guts to come here and testify.”

Says a guy just convicted of not having the guts to come down here and testify.

Lack da bum up.

[sad-cafe]

I hope he does keep doing his podcast

asshole doesn't have the brains to shut the f up

he will FAAFO how much trouble his mouth costs

[Kendra]

Bannon enters his safe space

[Volkonski]

[Gregg]

After having gotten on his knees and begging for a conviction, he is now offering up his eternal soul to get an upward departure on his sentencing report.

[New Turtle]

When is he gonna get medieval on the court, during sentencing or appeal?

[neonzx]

I've surfed a bit in this thread... are there any reasonable expectation of the sentence that will handed down? Weeks? Days? Slap-on-wrist probation w/ random drug/alcohol screens?

[AndyinPA]

I've surfed a bit in this thread... are there any reasonable expectation of the sentence that will handed down? Weeks? Days? Slap-on-wrist probation w/ random drug/alcohol screens?

I'm not positive of this, but I think one year maximum, one month probable on each count. I don't think I've heard what's likely.

[noblepa]

Bannon, thankfully, has a much more…robust… opinion of himself than most of the rest of the world. He thinks he’s famous or at least infamous but yeah, no. He thinks people think about him a LOT more than they actually do.

I, for one, almost NEVER think of him, except when I read about him here.

And, when I do think of him, it is along the lines of "my god, what a sleazeball!"

[noblepa]

The folks I follow on Twitter say that Bannon is certain to appeal this.

There's no reason for him not to. Especially if it continues the grift.


* * *

Putz is a flight risk. Can he be held in the slammer pending sentencing?

Possible but not probable. The first step would be for the prosecutor to request that bail be revoked, and I doubt that request will be made.

* * *

This was my area of practice, so I can speak with some confidence: Most issues on appeal give deference to the trial court's decision. It's not enough to make a good argument that the court messed up. You must show that the court abused its discretion.

"Most" is doing too much work here: The resident criminal appeals specialist will inevitably say: (1) the court's instructions are the most fertile grounds for an appeal; and (2) "abuse of discretion" often isn't the standard of review used for those kinds of claims.

Having said that, a winning appellate issue isn't (yet) jumping out at me.

Can they dangle the prospect of a lighter sentence if he relents and agrees to testify before the committee, in effect purging himself of the contempt?

[raison de arizona]

I've surfed a bit in this thread... are there any reasonable expectation of the sentence that will handed down? Weeks? Days? Slap-on-wrist probation w/ random drug/alcohol screens?

I'm not positive of this, but I think one year maximum, one month probable on each count. I don't think I've heard what's likely.

The talking heads I’ve listened to say 30 days on each count, to be served concurrently, is the most likely sentence. For whatever that’s worth.

[AndyinPA]

I've surfed a bit in this thread... are there any reasonable expectation of the sentence that will handed down? Weeks? Days? Slap-on-wrist probation w/ random drug/alcohol screens?

I'm not positive of this, but I think one year maximum, one month probable on each count. I don't think I've heard what's likely.

The talking heads I’ve listened to say 30 days on each count, to be served concurrently, is the most likely sentence. For whatever that’s worth.

Lock him up!

[Gregg]

There is a 30 mandatory sentence, so he needs to pack a toothbrush.

I can't keep track, was he pardoned for a previous felony and if yes, does that count against him in his sentencing report?