was this same courtesy extended to the clinton white house by starr?
19 Likes
Iâm going to continue to stake out the bold and apparently controversial opinion that I will only decide how outrageous are the redactions after I know what the redactions are. I suspect theyâre probably outrageous, but I donât know yet. Because I donât know what they are. Crazy and in the most literal sense fact-based, I know.
The internet is going to be turned-up-to-11 stupid tomorrow.
9 Likes
âThe talks have aided the presidentâs legal team as it prepares a rebuttal to the report and strategizes for the coming public war over its findingsâ
And why would there need to be a rebuttal? If there is nothing compelling against the Trump team? This smacks of a need to get the story straight before the parents get home. âWhy is there a hole in the roof?â âWe didnât do it! and What hole?â
18 Likes
So, when Lindsey Graham had a Freudian slip immediately after AG Barrâs summary to the effect that the White House was involved in the redactions, he was abso fucking lutely right. And the Media went along with the âwe have not seen itâ bullshit. As usual.
22 Likes
Well, Iâm certainly glad that Jerry Nadler just didnât cut to the chase and subpeona the Longform Mueller Report in the first place. It really would have looked foolish and like he was headrushing into something when we needed to take our time and move at a glacial pace because of ânormsâ and âpracticesâ.
Yes, itâs a good thing.
7 Likes
Irony escapes
3 Likes
Actually yes. But that is the arrogance of the condition.
7 Likes
How does one rebut a total exoneration? It is a puzzlement that is certainly beyond me.
16 Likes
Trying to find the duty to brief the Presidentâs lawyers on otherwise suppressed OSC report on Russian intervention into the election in the description of the AGâs duties.
It must be here somewhere!
11 Likes
Why is there a need for rebuttal from the WH if the Mueller Report totally, totally exonerated Individual1?
Surely an exonerated person would NOT rebut a report or attack the investigators that would prove his innocence, right?
This reminds me of someone not long agoâŚthat was asked repeatedly if he wants an FBI investigation so that he can clear his name in a sexual assault allegationâŚand that someone repeatedly did NOT say yes!
14 Likes
That is PRECISELY what was alleged when Bill Clinton spoke to AG Lynch on that plane for like a minute and Repubs did lose their minds. Absolutely and completely lost it.
19 Likes
Thereâs more . . . Ari Melber just broke a tweet from Nadler saying that the Barr press conference will happen HOURS before congress gets the redacted report. Apparently, Nadler has been informed that his committee wonât get the report until around noon.
15 Likes
the Longform Mueller Report
Of course you really meant to say The Original Longform Mueller ReportâŚ
4 Likes
His mouth says âExoneration!â
But the yellow stain spreading down his pants says âGuilty!â
8 Likes
And yet the MSM will try to find a way to downplay any real criminal/near criminal findings. There wonât be any outrage regardless of the findings. Just a wholotta, whatabouts and whatifs. Iâm expecting little and hoping for just a little more.
3 Likes
I expected nothing else.
And Barr is still there, must be one hell of a redaction.
1 Like
Do you suppose Trumpâs lawyers helped with the redactions?
22 Likes
From âcomplete exonerationâ to this in a matter of days. Too much smoke. Way too much.
8 Likes
So this no surprise to any thinking person.
However, I was surprised today to hear Chuck Rosenberg (my dead-pan favorite on MSNBC) lament that possibly Barr is not the âinstitutionalistâ he thought Barr was, and he would be aggrieved if Barr merely was supporting the President. But then, I was also surprised to see Josh M just find out that Barr advocated for FBI arrests in foreign countries 30 years ago.
4 Likes