Barr doesn't agree with IG report - who didn't see that coming?
(no message)
Replies to: Barr doesn't agree with IG report - who didn't see that coming?
Rather expected given the IG process of allowing targets to rebuttal and negotiate, but.....
I am willing to accept the IG findings as I am willing to accept the Durham findings.
If the two conflict with each other, I will believe the party with subpoena power and the power to convict which is Durham.
The IG report is small in scope compared to the Durham investigation, and it is fundamentally different in it’s approach. But Horowitz’s report is only the appetizer, and GOP and Dems will have to wait longer for the real meat.
Barr, Trump personal attorney and Russian hack.
(no message)
I assume you respect the NYTimes? If so, why would they print this without evidence?
Did it ever occur to you that Barr may have good reasons to question the IG's purported finding of no political bias?
No, with Barr that wouldn’t occur to a reasonable person.
Even before Durham he had a fixed view on what happened. He’s a hack and a disgrace.
I’ll take the independent guy.
When is the MCCabe indictment by the way?
I said McCabe will be indicted and I continue to stand by that statement. Silver bracelets for him.
Meanwhile, you said "Orange Jr." would be indicted before December 25, 2018. Putting the date aside, do you still stand by that statement?
Okay Seth, you are a credible source.
(no message)
Do you stand by your statement that Orange Jr. will be indicted?
(no message)
Not under Barr.
(no message)
Why didn't Mueller indict him?
(no message)
And how would I know that? Unlike the Durham lawyers, no one has leaked such info.
(no message)
Imagine, a Trump hire backs another Trump hire. Who didn't see that coming?
(no message)
(no message)
Would you consider Barr to be Trump’s wingman? Where did I hear an AG say that before? Refresh my
memory.
He is and so was the other clown. They have zero credibility.
(no message)
Absolutely and that’s why elections have consequences. The Dems don’t think they can beat Trump
So they want to impeach him which will only assure his re-election. How stupid can that party be?
No one has accused them of being a bag of brains. Why we have this bozo.
Both Barry and Orange had the prerogative to appoint political hacks.
Just don’t claim they have credibility as idjits like Cole claim.
(no message)
Do Schiff and/or Nadler have any credibility?
(no message)
Do Jordan and Nunes? Please.
(no message)
Re: Do Jordan and Nunes? Please.
This is new: Inpeachment report shows multiple phone calls between @DevinNunes and Rudy’s now indicted former partner Lev Parnas pic.twitter.com/9Cc0gQfhkj
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) December 3, 2019
Link: https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1201947160348123136
Yes, and yes. Now you. Do Nadler and Schiff?
(no message)
Yes and yes for impeachment at least. See how this works.
Barr though isn’t supposed to be a partisan politician as AG. See if you can wrap your pea sized brain around that concept.
So Schiff has credibility? Wow, Frank. You might be the only "Republican" to say that.
Even Romney wouldn't go there.
On impeachment, yes. They will present a credible case to the Senate.
(no message)
And yet, Schiff has been shown to be a liar on the Russia collusion allegations.
He has never offered the evidence he claimed existed. A page from Harry Reid's book.