Yes. Most of that hearing was focused on the Vol II obstruction, and specifically about obstruction during the WH period. Dean was essentially a stand-in for McGahn. It was a well executed hearing by the Dems and I quite enjoyed it. It didn’t get the coverage it deserved, but that’s also a strategic decision by Pelosi not to put the “I” word in front of it. If we ever do get to the “I” word, I would bring both Joyce Vance and Barbara McQuade back again to essentially repeat for a larger audience what they said in this hearing.
10 Likes
That’s why they make chocolate and vanilla! 
3 Likes
Thankfully the Republican congress critters were quick to point out that John Dean did have a way forward to survive and make a living after Watergate. Given the propensity of conservative Republicans to act in the most viperous ways possible, Mr McGahn needs to know that.
Hopefully he got the message and had a come to Jesus moment, as sometimes said.
Hmmm …
2 Likes
You’re right. He shouldn’t.
1 Like
Or a smaller cell
1 Like
I can’t tell if that’s the hum of agreement or disagreement. Maybe it’s the guttural sound of disapproval for an overly broad generalization?
1 Like
Oh, just the trivial observation that perhaps not all “instinctual followers” are Republicans.
2 Likes
As of 4 days ago, tRump has told almost 11,000 lies/misleading claims while in office. If anyone thinks he’d tell the truth under oath, they would be sadly mistaken. He cannot tell the truth, it’s not in his DNA.
3 Likes
Hard to make this coherent but i’ll try:
“Because he wanted to make himself look like a good lawyer"
He committed perjury cause it would make him look like a good lawyer? Desparate nonsense.
"he believed it because I would constantly tell anyone who would listen, including you, including the media that Robert Mueller was conflicted, Robert Mueller had a total conflict of interest,”
He committed perjury because he actually believed what I said about Mueller being conflicted? And jumped to the conclusion that meant he should fire Mueller?
Interpretation 1: I went on and on about Mueller being conflicted but did not expect anyone to take it seriously? Again, nonsense. I will wager Andrew McCabe’s pension that people take Trump’s rants seriously.
Interpretation 2: Trump doesn’t give direct orders, he rants about who is doing him wrong and expects others to understand that means to take action. The way mob bosses talk. McGahn got that.
8 Likes
That’s the opposite of a reason to not interview him.
3 Likes
“…reminding him, and making him even angrier that he cannot see his penis under his enormous gut.”
To be fair to Caesar, he was at least educated, could read and write, actually served in the military, made good on actual infrastructure plans, practiced clemency (offer not valid for Cilician pirates or Vercengetorix), passed effective and beneficial legislation, provided for his veterans, and was widely popular with most Romans (besides Pompey, Brutus and a handful of stab-happy senators). 
10 Likes
Impossible to disagree with, but outside the point I’m poorly making.
1 Like
“And what does McGahn say to that ?”
I hope he says it in public and under oath if he ever responds to his subpoena.
2 Likes
Question for our resident lawyers:
The admin has forbidden McGahn from answering a subpoena to testify before Congress. If I understand it correctly, they haven’t claimed executive privilege, yet, but probably will once it gets in front of a judge. By accusing McGahn of committing perjury, has Trump undermined his eventual claim of privilege? Does this accusation strengthen Congress’s hand?
10 Likes
I think he did tell the truth when he said he would take dirt on a political opponent from a foreign government again. I think that’s one of the very few things he’s said while in office that is true. His problem now is that his lies are spread so wide among so many people that his entourage is straining to keep all of them straight, and to collectively stay on script. The veil of deceit is getting awfully thin, though. His DNA was not built for the real world.
12 Likes
My specialty!
(Sorry.)
1 Like
I think this Presidential order really calls for the Department of Justice to prosecute Don McGahn. I fully support a prosecution for perjury and other crimes.
Democrats should be supporting and backing up President Trump on criminal matters such as this. Otherwise, they run the the risk of looking like curmudgeons.
4 Likes
He could be the John Dean of 2060.
1 Like