Also in the link, but a “good source” that she describes in a bit more detail in the replies (also in the link).
AP:
I can’t find a time stamp on this article.
Mueller Report Live Updates: Summary Expected on Capitol Hill Within an Hour
More eyes = more leak sources.
From CNNas of 2:17 CDT
Is “refusing to see it” NOT a valid characterization of “ruling out ANYTHING that is not a full public release” (presumably one that has not been vetted for intel that needs to be redacted to protect human assets from exposure/retaliatory action by Putin’s lads)?
I wouldn’t be terribly surprised to learn that the America-hating fuckstick was threatening to publish (tweet) the identities of the aforementioned human assets if the report is made available to the public, even WITH such redactions.
Nadler just tweeted that a “very brief” memo has been provided to him and will release shortly.
And apparently followed by:
No idea what that means. I’m suspecting they mean that it’s up to Congress, but they did find something.
Well.
I’m hanging up my spurs as a prognosticator. Sounds like a full “exoneration” to me.
Pelosi is not an idiot, and not a traitor (unlike the president). There’s something in between “bullet point summary” and “completely un-redacted and exposing national security secrets”, and I’m willing to assume that that’s what she means.
Wait a second. I’m on your side. I hate Trump and everything he has ever done and stands for. Just trying to understand how their can’t be any more indictments. He’s fucking guilty!
Sure he is. But unfortunately, the DOJ does not agree.
Was the source I was replying to a bad one? Because according to that article she was refusing any classified briefing and would only settle for a full public release. I think refusing to see it sums it up pretty good. As of right now she is refusing to see an unclassified version. The only way she can form an opinion as to whether it should be classified or not is to actually see it while it is classified.
I just saw the news.
I’m surprised on the Obstruction of Justice front. Not super surprised - I’m pretty sure that Trump never successfully did anything to obstruct the investigation other than firing Comey, but there seemed to be some good reason to believe that he ordered more obstructive acts and was only saved by his people refusing to do it.
Granted, they might have lied to Mueller about that. If so, then it’s really just Comey and the one TV interview that followed right after. They must have decided that it wasn’t enough to win a case - particularly not an impeachment trial. And, ultimately, obstruction was always going to be more of a “follow-on” crime. Prosecuting it by itself isn’t worth doing.
I believe that the key aspects of the letter are, as I do far more strongly predict, the clear statements that other crimes have been handed out and that Barr is going to have do use a lot of black ink where those are discussed in the report. I guess, depending on how much the content of those disgusts Barr, whole sections will be blacked out or just small, key sections. If it’s a big black blob, then we won’t know if it’s related to Trump, Manafort, Broidy, Barrack, or whoever else. If Barr decides that Trump needs to be run through the muck a bit, then he might leave the section headings open and some of the introduction, that introduces Trump as one of the participants. Though, I suspect that that won’t happen, just based on it going against policy to reveal until the indictment is brought.
Unfortunately, the case is going to be harder to keep watch on, now, because the House Democrats are going to be going forward with their investigations, hogging the news. I think I’ll be able to continue following up on Butina, and maybe some stuff coming out of the SDNY, but I think there are some other things still run out of DC that might be bigger than the SDNY stuff.
For all practical purposes, thump is in the clear and fully exonerated. I’m going to go throw up now.
Did you read the article? She is demanding a full unredacted public release of the report and all source documents. I guess The Hill could be misquoting her. She is a politician after all and she may be not telling the whole truth. If you take her at her word she wants the full report released and is refusing a classified briefing. Maybe she will change her mind but that’s what she is saying now.
Apparently the special counsel with his 19 lawyers and 40 FBI agents, after nearly two years of investigation involving the issuing of 2800 subpoenas, executing almost 500 search warrants, interviewing over 500 people, asking for extra information from 13 different governments and pulling hundreds of phone records and other documents requiring court orders, could not find any evidence of collusion or obstruction - not just by Trump, but anyone in his orbit, or any other American citizen for that matter.
But the internet sleuths, armed with angry blog reports and lubricated by the tears of Rachel Maddow are certain that’s wrong. Of course.
So was there a time, perhaps in the past, when this person had any journalistic credibility?