151

Steve Bannon’s achievement:

 

 

Absolutely-that was their big breakthrough in 2016-in the 1990s the GOP guys all bitched about the Clintons together while the rest of the country wondered what was wrong with them. But in 2016 they are able to transfer Clinton Derangement Syndrome to the Left

 

Who is Richard Burr, Really? Why the public can’t trust his voice in the Russia probe

 

 

 

 

How not to think–and what the Mueller Report won’t tell us–about Trump’s efforts to obstruct the investigation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/sam_vinograd/status/1110253684196368384

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/1110298207081373697

 

 

Reference book: How to date like a man

 

Bingo:

“Look, it may well be the case — and we’re guessing because we haven’t seen the report, that the special counsel has concluded there’s insufficient evidence to charge the President or members of his campaign with conspiring with the Russians,” said Rep. David Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. “And at the same time, there is evidence that, in fact, conspiracy or collusion occurred at some level.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/GovHowardDean/status/1110124785089040385

 

Democrats have said their demands for transparency are no different than Republicans’ successful effort to obtain thousands of investigative documents — including internal emails and private text messages — related to the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email use.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/24/mueller-report-congress-impeachment-1233879

 

 

 

Question begging analysis by Lawfare

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-bill-barrs-letter

The conclusion on the Russian conspiracy prong stands for one proposition unambiguously: The special counsel’s office did not believe that it could reasonably prove in court that any Trump campaign member or affiliate committed a crime in assisting the Russian government with its efforts. That’s a significant thing

It’s actually not as Goodman argues

 

 

Wittes:

But Barr’s summary would also be broadly consistent with many other possible reports. It would be consistent with, for example, a report that finds lots of “evidence of collusion” that for one reason or another falls short of criminal conduct. It would be consistent with a report that describes conduct that falls short of the criminal standard by the barest of technicalities

That’s why it’s so premature to declare ‘vindication for the President’

. It would be consistent with a report that finds that individuals associated with the president’s campaign were aware of the Russian efforts to interfere in the election, welcomed such assistance, and did not in any way warn the American public about it—but who did not take the requisite step of entering into any criminal agreement to assist the effort either. It would also be consistent with a report that suggested that Trump’s principal engagement with the Russians was not over hacked emails at all, but instead about the tower he was negotiating to build in Moscow even as the campaign was going on.

Our point here is not that that report suggests any of these things or that if one squints at Barr’s summary long enough, it is actually bad for the president. It isn’t.”

Huh? if the report-assuming we ever see it-“describes conduct that falls short of the criminal standard by the barest of technicalities”

how is this ‘great news for the President?’ It’d be pretty terrible news and you’d hardly need to squint which may explain why they won’t release the report.

 

 

 

 

License

October 28, 2016: a Day That Will Live in Infamy Copyright © by . All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book