143
Fuck you, you traitorous piece of shit. It should be 40 fucking years not 4 months. Enjoy your time and the loss of your voting privileges.
delay, appeal, delay, appeal, delay, appeal....every time with the motherfuckers.
Must be nice to have money.
I wish to be able to see one of those "faces of meth" progressions of Peter Navarro realizing more and more that he's really going to jail for a while and it's not something he can bully his way out of
The only thing that's inaccurate about that sign is that the big lie is still hurting democracy.
It needs a little asterisk next to "almost"
He knows if he reports he will be out in less time than the appeals process, he just doesn't want ANY time.
If the Supreme Court won't enforce the law, sooner or later folks are going to start doing it themselves.
Those assholes when given the chance actively rewrite law to support their fee fees while bitching about "activist" judges.
Getting real sick of this aspect of the us criminal system.
Yeah, same. Special treatment for the elite, when they should be held to the very highest of standards.
Can I just ask the Supreme Court stuff? I don’t understand how people can just appeal to the Supreme Court after having been convicted by other courts. Why is this allowed?
If you're a godamned fascist piece of shit...then you can call the shithead hotline. Clarence Thomas will personally answer the phone.
4 months at Club Fed is too much if you're the Peter Navarro.
I recall seeing at least one interview with this guy, he was all self righteous like his shit didn't stink, big pompous ass. Wasn't this the dude who Kushner found by looking at books on Amazon? Cause that's how all the best advisors are found.
Get fucked and eat shit, Peter
No, and thanks for asking.
The question is - why isn't tiny d in the exact same boat? I want this dirtbag to serve his time, but tiny d should be facing the same predicament.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former Trump adviser Peter Navarro is asking the Supreme Court to let him avoid reporting to a federal prison next week to begin serving a four-month sentence for his contempt of Congress conviction.
Navarro’s attorneys argued that pausing a lower court’s ruling rejecting his bid to stay free is warranted when the person making the request is not a flight risk and is raising substantial legal questions, not simply seeking to delay.
“Navarro is indisputably neither a flight risk nor a danger to public safety should he be release pending appeal,” the attorneys said.
Navarro has been arguing that the decision by US District Judge Amit P. Mehta to not let him raise an executive privilege defense at trial was wrong and that the possibility the appeals court might reverse that decision should keep him out of prison as the court weighs his case.
Bannon also was sentenced to four months for failing to comply with a congressional subpoena in the investigation, but the presiding judge allowed the Trump ally to stay out of prison while his conviction goes through the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
Navarro was sentenced earlier this year to four months in prison after being convicted in September of two contempt of Congress counts for not complying with a subpoena from the House select committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.
The original article contains 412 words, the summary contains 226 words. Saved 45%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
143 points (97.4% liked)
politics
18069 readers
3972 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS