…To get an idea of the legal defense that both Peter Navarro and Stephen Bannon will likely mount in their criminal contempt cases, look at pages 11-17 of the civil lawsuit filed last December by General Michael Flynn. 

That lawsuit was tossed by the court in Florida on procedural grounds, but the basic case it presented was sound.  

it’s pretty much established fact that Nancy Pelosi did not form the J6 Committee according to the House’s own stated rules or legislation.

flynn v committee.pdf

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aFFwGSaW6VkdR1v9FYoXUVocgGWwzTfk/view

Page 28 of the lawsuit is where Flynn and his legal team begin laying out their argument as to why any subpoenas issued by the J6 Committee have no legal force:

The resolution for the creation of the committee clearly says it’s to have 13 members.  Pelosi appointed only 9.  

And she rejected ALL of Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s picks for the panel.  She picked Cheney and Kinzinger.

None of the subpoenas issued by this illegally formed committee have any real legal force.

None of these basic FACTS are in dispute.  House Resolution 3233 says what it clearly says, as does House Resolution 503.  

The rules and legislation passed by the House clearly say what they say.  

And it’s beyond dispute that Pelosi did not follow the rules or the legislation when she arbitrarily formed the J6 Committee and rejected all of McCarthy’s GOP members for the panel, an unprecedented move she freely admitted was historical in it’s breathtaking illegality.  [See point 34 on page 14].

Thus, both Navarro and Bannon have a legitimate case that the subpoenas they are defying have no legal force.

Flynn tried to get to a civil trial and prove this; the civil court tossed the case on procedural grounds so the issue was never resolved. 

That’s not what’s going to happen in the Navarro and the Bannon cases.  

The DOJ indicted them. They have both pled not guilty and both are going to trial.  They are going to be arguing the uncontested facts in the courtroom.

Watch: even the DOJ prosecutors are going to have to stipulate the facts of the formation of the committee. 

They’re not going to introduce a fake version of how the committee was formed. 

This was all covered extensively by the media at the time.

(Reason) YouTube Deleted a January 6th Committee Video for Spreading Election Misinformation

“We enforce our policies equally for everyone,” said a YouTube spokesperson.

We live in a clown world.šŸ¤”

reason.com/2022/06/17/youtube-january-6-committee-hearing-trump/

HILARIOUS!

YouTube Deleted a January 6th Committee Video for Spreading Election Misinformation

YouTube removed a video uploaded by the January 6 Committee that showed footage of former President Trump contesting the results of the 2020 election.