Activity Log in Register

He was asked under oath if he knew who had leaked to the WSJ.

iairishcheeks 30798 posts Original UHND Member

Posted 1:08 pm on Feb 14, 2020

0

And he claimed to have no idea. That's a "material" false statement, no?

Replies 27

He was asked under oath if he knew who had leaked to the WSJ. iairishcheeks 1:08pm · 2/14/20
- It apparently wasn’t to the career prosecutors who examined it. Frank L 1:13pm · 2/14/20
  - Or to a Grand Jury it appears.NT conorlarkin 6:06am · 2/15/20
  - Prosecution is a political process.NT iairishcheeks 2:04pm · 2/14/20
    - It can but shouldn’t be. I know both the USA and former USA in this district pretty well. Both R’s. Frank L 2:12pm · 2/14/20
      - Yet the facts remain.NT iairishcheeks 2:18pm · 2/14/20
        
        In certain cases. All the more reason to remain vigilant against it, especially with a prez who Frank L 2:35pm · 2/14/20
  - Come on man. You have to admit that this is fucked up. TampaIrish 1:16pm · 2/14/20
    - Stone has been convicted on 7 counts of both perjury Frank L 1:31pm · 2/14/20
      - And you see nothing one sided about any of this shit? TampaIrish 1:33pm · 2/14/20
        
        I said I don’t know the reasoning behind McCabe. Frank L 1:37pm · 2/14/20
- He meant "material to conor"NT NedoftheHill 1:11pm · 2/14/20
  - Ohh, my bad.NT iairishcheeks 2:08pm · 2/14/20
- He then allowed agents to run around looking for the source of the leak for weeks Cole 1:10pm · 2/14/20

View Full Conversation