Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe accused the Trump administration of withholding key evidence in a Tuesday court filing, saying that the government was blocking information in his wrongful dismissal lawsuit.
No, no, no, McCabe. You simply don’t understand.
Any evidence that makes them look bad is covered under “executive privilege” or “the GFY statute.”
Any evidence that makes them look good is immediately released to the media before it’s released to the regulatory agencies that need it.
That’s just the way it is in Trumplandia.
It seems that he will only receive justice–and his pension–after Trump and all the Little Trumps are thrown out of office. Even then, it will be difficult to find justice, as the Little Trumps fill up the seats on every federal court in the land. He may have better luck with the Queen of Hearts.
McCabe is confronting an increasingly common problem in our increasingly unequal society: social distance from power always meant insecurity but the swamp of uncertainty has widened in the past forty years and even reasonably predictable outcomes such as legal disclosure no longer offer firm ground to stand on.
Even if you bow to the emperor, keeping your head on your shoulders remains subject to his whim.
Good for him. I suggest reading Crime in Progress… … The Fusion GPS account of their investigation of Trump. It is astonishing and an easy read
I think there is increasing evidence of links between the repbs and Russia. I wonder about some of those Trump judges
Gee, another “Christmas Surprise”.
Seems as if Mr McCabe may have to get a place in line,waiting for that info.Like a private contractor waiting to be paid by Trump
“in our increasingly unequal society”
TOUCHE !
They will grudging turn over some of the evidence in the future, with the usual excuse of “we forgot.”
McCabe’s team believes the Trump administration selectively released evidence
Perish the thought. Would the “most transparent administration in history” do that?
So if material is withheld on executive privilege or national security or some other bullsh*t grounds, does that mean it has to be construed as favorable to the plaintiff? (Also, I’d think all this stuff would be subject at least to in camera review rather than the court being OK with a simple refusal to produce with no reason given.)
Gee the Trump maladministration, the gift that keeps on lyin’ and crimin’.
Good to hear. Hope the judge compels release of whatever information Mr. McCabe requires.
While I have little sympathy for McCabe, I do support his efforts to put the squeeze on. He should feel free to do some “selective disclosures” himself.
Just think how much info and how many documents have been hidden by this administration, from so many investigative bodies and courts and regarding so many significant decisions and acts.
It’s enough to make you think that perhaps they’ve done a few things wrong and not quite so legal.
True dat. But the Judge in his trial is an Obama appointee.
There is a backstory here, and we just see the tip of the iceberg. How we see or how it is presented to us says more about ourselves and our society, than what the facts of the matter may actuality may be.
McCabe was terminated in a most vindictive manner, he suffered a wrong and should compensated for this accordingly. But he had the opportunity to work in a federal office for the short amount of time he had left to get his pension.
So whether he was denied a pension is a matter of interpretation.
The important thing is, is that he is seeing this thing out, the administration is being held accountable and facts will be disclosed that will not reflect well on the administration.
So that is a good thing and I wish him well.
The case centers on alleged accelerated and illegal dismissal for political purposes.
What employment options he had after dismissal should be irrelevant.
accused the Trump administration of withholding key evidence
Gee, Like we haven’t heard this line before.
this chapter of American needs to be finished and open a new one.
start by painting the election map blue.
That is possibly good fortune for McCabe, and I am happy for that. But in truth, whoever appointed the the Judge should not make a bit of difference, only the law should.
But of course, that is an alien concept to all Trumpistas.