I never said that, but I like that you've put words in my mouth. Sweet strategy, let's see if it pays off.For the record, this online message board is equivalent to congress. Come on now.
I never said that, but I like that you've put words in my mouth. Sweet strategy, let's see if it pays off.For the record, this online message board is equivalent to congress. Come on now.
100%
The thing I am as worried about as I was when Barr was confirmed is a detail - Thursday is a strange day to release anything - good or bad.
Thursday release means there's time to create proper news stories about the content and the redactions and figure out meaningful stuff - cross-referenced with known items like "who Person 1 is" and so on.
Friday is a news dump tradition - but Friday NIGHT - so that the story dies on Saturday - and it's a tradition that Wall Street uses because the markets are closed. Friday is a long day for any desired narrative to get out of control - and worse - because it's a political story - both Dems and GOP will have a long time to figure out the Sunday morning plan for Meet the Press etc. And in a way, this creates a kind of Monday drop - because by then the angles will be decided and the information, legal and partisan quotes and tweets and news will become a launchpad. It will BEGIN Monday morning.
So why does that make me as nervous as Barr's original appointment? Because if it were damning to Trump and co, it would be sent to die on Friday night. If it were good news for them, it would be announced first thing monday morning - or maybe in time for the sunday morning shows. So I think there's a more complex plan in place - maybe giving oppoennts enough rope to hang themselves, or rope a dope.
It could also be as simple as "there was no good time" which makes me think the redaction total blackout parodies might actually be real.
He exists in his position to do just that, so pretty high
If he just redacts everything meme-style then everyone will flip their shitThe thing I am as worried about as I was when Barr was confirmed is a detail - Thursday is a strange day to release anything - good or bad.
Thursday release means there's time to create proper news stories about the content and the redactions and figure out meaningful stuff - cross-referenced with known items like "who Person 1 is" and so on.
Friday is a news dump tradition - but Friday NIGHT - so that the story dies on Saturday - and it's a tradition that Wall Street uses because the markets are closed. Friday is a long day for any desired narrative to get out of control - and worse - because it's a political story - both Dems and GOP will have a long time to figure out the Sunday morning plan for Meet the Press etc. And in a way, this creates a kind of Monday drop - because by then the angles will be decided and the information, legal and partisan quotes and tweets and news will become a launchpad. It will BEGIN Monday morning.
So why does that make me as nervous as Barr's original appointment? Because if it were damning to Trump and co, it would be sent to die on Friday night. If it were good news for them, it would be announced first thing monday morning - or maybe in time for the sunday morning shows. So I think there's a more complex plan in place - maybe giving oppoennts enough rope to hang themselves, or rope a dope.
It could also be as simple as "there was no good time" which makes me think the redaction total blackout parodies might actually be real.
First it was 13, then 17, now 18? They keep adding Angry Democrats even after they wrapped it up!"This thing that totally exonnerates me was written by 18 Angry Democrats"
Yeah, since much of the claimed obstruction was done in public, they probably have a ton to go on without knowing specifics of what in the report. They were possibly briefed on what non-public obstruction evidence was in there.Sure, but you're now assuming what it is they're going to say. I'm unsure what you're expecting in this "counter-report".
Add another Angry Democrat to the list!I never said that, but I like that you've put words in my mouth. Sweet strategy, let's see if it pays off.
I mean, obviously not. But if they really are concerned about revealing things like intelligence collection methods, etc. (I know they aren't, but let's just say hypothetically), I could understand only letting a small group from Congress view the unredacted report. I mean, fuck, who has even seen the full report at this point? Is Barr the only one?
Interesting Freudian slip here 😉Weird they need to rebut something that found him totally incident.
Whatever bullshit that Barr is going to pull won't push the needle, just like with his summary.
I never said that, but I like that you've put words in my mouth. Sweet strategy, let's see if it pays off.
Lmfao.The _____________________________ and ___________________. Also ___________________. Therefor _______________________ because __________________________ and ________________. Then ________________ at _____________________.
The president is ______ innocent!
For instance, do you believe anyone in that report should be protected from 'anything that would "unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties." '?
I've stated my points pretty matter of factly. The onus is on you to keep up.you are arguing in bad faith. What do members of this board and what they say have anything to do with congress and their security clearance?
You also didn't directly respond to anything I actually said in that post.
For instance, do you believe anyone in that report should be protected from 'anything that would "unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties." '?
I've stated my points pretty matter of factly. The onus is on you to keep up.
The report is being redacted for investigational reasons primarily. Unless you believe the preservation of our intelligence agencies' methods and their current investigations are wholly irrelevant, that counts for something. As far as "arguing in bad faith", I've done nothing of the sort. We've seen numerous Congresspeople suggest that the report needs to be made public immediately, without redaction. The board is wholly on board with that notion, so it would make nothing but sense, from my perspective, that you and others would be desperate to get it into the hands of what could be described as Congresspeople who may or may not be entirely interested in maintaining the redactions we're discussing private.
Now, I'm sure there's an argument to be made with regards to whether or not specific Congresspeople should be allowed to see the unredacted report, but that's neither here nor there. The argument was that there's a non-zero chance that the unredacted report could be leaked, and I'm saying that it's definitely possible, and something that I'm sure the Justice Department, beyond just Barr, is aware of.
Exactly. I really doubt it's going to be feasible for Barr to hide much of anything here, given the nature of the report.
Releasing it redacted just assures more ongoing drama around the report for another year.
Some redactions are really important. No one should want information about ongoing investigations released.
Yeah Congress has the highest levels of clearance for this stuff. They can and should certainly be able to see the full report. It's their job.To the public, yes. If you want to prevent accusations of a cover up, you'd give Congress the full report. They are the check designed for this very situation.
To the public, yes. If you want to prevent accusations of a cover up, you'd give Congress the full report. They are the check designed for this very situation.
Yeah Congress has the highest levels of clearance for this stuff. They can and should certainly be able to see the full report. It's their job.
I'm sure certain committees will have access to redacted sections, but the question of grand jury information isn't straight forward. There are exceptions for national security but otherwise congress isn't really entitled to see it.
Any attempts at playing games with the redactions though will be pretty clear and won't be subject to these kinds of restrictions if there's no underlying legal basis for them being redacted.
He's already playing games. Zero benefit of the doubt from me.I'm sure certain committees will have access to redacted sections, but the question of grand jury information isn't straight forward. There are exceptions for national security but otherwise congress isn't really entitled to see it.
Any attempts at playing games with the redactions though will be pretty clear and won't be subject to these kinds of restrictions if there's no underlying legal basis for them being redacted.
The question of grand jury information is clear. Barr needs to request the release from a judge, that's it. He confirmed this in the hearing last week. He also confirmed that he has no intention to do so.
He's already playing games. Zero benefit of the doubt from me.
The matter is not at all settled and courts have recently ruled judges don't have broad authority to release grand jury information outside the specific exceptions already laid out. Congress has options (including starting impeachment proceedings) but currently it's not at all clear a judge, even if asked, can release all grand jury related info.
That's not what Barr said last week. He said he could request the release but will not. In fact he basically said If Nadler wants the info to request it himself (which he doesn't have the right to do, as far as I know).
Edit: it's also not the precedent set by both Watergate and the Starr report.
The DC district court just ruled on April 5th that federal courts cannot authorize the disclosure of grand jury information outside the already defined exceptions.
I've stated my points pretty matter of factly. The onus is on you to keep up.
You don't see why someone doesn't leak classified material?Ugggghhh
I don't see why Mueller can't just disobey the administration and leak the whole thing himself. Why play by the rules when those in charge will always twist them to their favor?
The thing I am as worried about as I was when Barr was confirmed is a detail - Thursday is a strange day to release anything - good or bad.
Thursday release means there's time to create proper news stories about the content and the redactions and figure out meaningful stuff - cross-referenced with known items like "who Person 1 is" and so on.
Friday is a news dump tradition - but Friday NIGHT - so that the story dies on Saturday - and it's a tradition that Wall Street uses because the markets are closed. Friday is a long day for any desired narrative to get out of control - and worse - because it's a political story - both Dems and GOP will have a long time to figure out the Sunday morning plan for Meet the Press etc. And in a way, this creates a kind of Monday drop - because by then the angles will be decided and the information, legal and partisan quotes and tweets and news will become a launchpad. It will BEGIN Monday morning.
So why does that make me as nervous as Barr's original appointment? Because if it were damning to Trump and co, it would be sent to die on Friday night. If it were good news for them, it would be announced first thing monday morning - or maybe in time for the sunday morning shows. So I think there's a more complex plan in place - maybe giving oppoennts enough rope to hang themselves, or rope a dope.
It could also be as simple as "there was no good time" which makes me think the redaction total blackout parodies might actually be real.
Ugggghhh
I don't see why Mueller can't just disobey the administration and leak the whole thing himself. Why play by the rules when those in charge will always twist them to their favor?
I don't think it's as complex as you're making it out to be.
The reasoning I think this is coming out Thursday is likely because Congress still won't be in session on Friday and many news outlets won't have their "A-Squad" working either, since this Friday also happens to be Good Friday, and thusly Easter weekend. While not a federal holiday, many outlets and states still view this weekend as an optional holiday that news can likely still be buried thanks to coming out on the last possible day before the "holiday" begins. So in this case at least, Thursday might as well be treated as a Friday for a news dump.
Beware the wrath.
@MicahGrimes Some of dozen-plus White House officials interviewed by Special Counsel Mueller concerned about the president's "wrath" if they are seen as a source of damaging info in Thursday's real of the report, according to multiple witnesses in the investigation.