Kushner? Barely knows him.
“Sources say Bannon told by WH not to answer questions before House Intel Cmte about the White House and the transition. Did not assert executive privilege. Committee subpoenas him during the meeting to comply while in the hearing.”
I mean, isn’t this obstruction (bolded part)?
It’s been nothing but interference and obstruction since “Day One” anyway.
BFD. I take all the House and Senate hearings exactly 0.00% seriously. They’re all totally corrupt whitewash exercises anyway. Mueller’s investigation is the only one that matters.
I read Mueller’s interest in Bannon as a move toward an obstruction case. He wasn’t there when the most crucial decisions were made, but in a way that few others can, he can be a window into Trump’s mind, and some of Bannon’s quoted comments have been pretty candid and unfiltered. Why wouldn’t Mueller be interested in Bannon’s cooperation, especially when he knows that his relationship with Trump is at an all-time low.
How can the White House tell Bannon what not to testify on? He doesn’t work for them. They aren’t asserting executive privilege. Doesn’t matter, the grand jury will have its asshole reamer all gassed up and ready to go for him.
I think they use abrasive sand.
And there go the chances for peace in the Middle East.
For what it’s worth, the reporting this morning is that Mueller will get to hear everything Bannon knows, which is more important that these nonsensical Congressional hearings.
This seems very important.
Hundreds of sketchy payments from the Russian government to Americans around the election. The payments set off alarms even at the time. Our old friend Kislyak happens to feature prominently. Again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No doubt. Like, about the 800th very important item of this thread.
If it were me, I wouldn’t get my hopes up too high, considering that the majority of that article - the part you didn’t quote - is about a pattern of these suspicious payments over the past 10 years or so. But whatever floats your boat, I guess.
I didn’t quote any of the article. But whatever floats your boat, I guess.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Semantics.
“Fake words”?
For fans of the Special Counsel: http://www.northernsun.com/It's-Mueller-Time-TShirt-(8579).html
Honesty.
So, by “the majority of that article - the part you didn’t quote”, you meant the entire article? You’re not real good at this semantics thing.
Damn, now they’ve agreed to an interview rather than a grand jury appearance. Guess they can put the reaming machine away for a while.
No, I meant “the majority of that article - the part [FYL] didn’t quote”. You’re not real at this understanding thing.
And he didn’t quote a single word of it. You’re a fucking moron.