Nadler could have read the unredacted report and chose not to.

[the other mike]

 

[easyt65]

Nadler's hypocrisy is almost as large as his belt size...

From the Washington Examiner.....

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is the leading Democrat demanding the release of the Mueller Report “in its entirety” without redactions.


His committee is planning to subpoena the Justice Department for the full report.

But back in 1998, as a member of the same committee, he vociferously opposed the release of the full Starr Report, saying that “as a matter of decency and protecting people’s privacy rights, people who may be totally innocent third parties, what must not be released at all.”

a blow job vs Russian's looting the democracy of the country ----

yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

Funny how you always divert back to the same old lie in defense of Slick Willy....

Clinton was Impeached because he intentionally misled / lied under oath during his Sexual Harassment court case resulting in his being held in Contempt of Court by the Judge, stripped of his license to practice law in his home state for his breach of ethics and crime.

Clinton took an oath of office to defend, protect, and uphold the Constitution and every American's Constitutional Rights; however, when the decision came down between saving his own sexually deviant ass or attempt to 'screw' a US citizen out of their right to a fair trial Slick Willy decided to thrown his oath of office and Jones' rights under the proverbial bus.....

...and was busted by the Judge for doing so.

Back then you snowflakes were defending Slick Willy by claiming that 'what a President does in his own free time (sticking cigars up inside Lewinski and getting a BJ from an intern in the Oval Office) was no one's business but his own...and as expected demonstrated that such 'rules' for Democrats do not apply to Conservatives.

Democrats / snowflakes engaged in a disgraceful public witch hunt against Kavanaugh over an accusation they could not substantiate....while doing everything they could to avoid acknowledging Democrat Senators had been engaging in sexual deviant behavior against women for decades, formed a committee to pay for the silence of their victims with tax payer dollars, and then allow them to escape justice / quietly retire at tax payer expense after the story broke.

The American people are not as stupid as Democrats think / not as stupid as Gruber bragged Democrat-supporting snowflakes were / are - all of this did not go un-noticed. Yes, the Democrats, as usual, got away with it all, but their bullshit hypocrisy, justifications, smoke, mirrors, and lies weren't bought for a second...by anyone other than hard-core liberal extremist snowflakes.

 

[jknowgood]

14 of 16 Whitewater partners going to prison, the only two who didn't being Bill and Hill
Webster Hubbell going to prison (for the 2nd time) for claiming to do the work for that which HILLARY billed for (Castle Grande)
The fraudulent work of Hillary, Vince Foster and others regarding Madison S&L

"a blow job" my ass....

tell your ass to step out of the past and focus on todays news ....

then list Trump Cartel members going to prison ...

I say release the entire thing, but also release the reason collusion was referred to. What Obama and all of his associates. You game? The only thing the Muller report has proven. Is how corrupt the Obama administration was.

 

[Slade3200]

Have you looked at his statements about why he hasn’t read it?

Yes. He stated it would not be 'fair' for only him to see it and not everyone....except he knows damn-well that it can NOT be legally released.

He could have read it already to determine if his and his Party's continuous political theater and demand that the US AG break the law, and their continuous attempt to continue the exposed coup was / is worth their effort.

The obvious answer is 'No'. Nadler knows the US AG will never break the law, thus giving him and the treasonous Democrats an opportunity to claim they are hiding something.

Look, I’m not on board with the obstruction fight and would like to see the book closed on this thing. With that said, this breaking the law line is BS. Yes the law restricts Barr from releasing the grand jury testimony, but all he needs is a court order and he would be free to do so. It’s been done in the past. It’s a simple process. You need to ditch that law breaking line. It’s weak and misleading

 

[the other mike]

House minority leader press conference starts @3:45 ;

 

[Slade3200]

As Lindsay Graham stated a couple weeks ago, the Senate Judiciary has the unredacted report. Anyone with clearance, including Chairman Nadler in the House, can go in the classified area and read it. So why hasn't he ?

For the Democrats to continue with this obvious charade they appear to be sabotaging their chances of winning any 2020 elections, especially if they really want to replace Trump in the White House.* His poll numbers are inching up the more it goes on. Americans are quickly waking up to the things going on and as usual, the Democrats probably won't catch on until the next election cycle.

Collins blasts contempt vote as 'desperate' move to discredit Barr.
Ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. Doug Collins hits back at House Democrats' response to the Mueller report and says he does not believe Mueller will testify on the findings.



*

Have you looked at his statements about why he hasn’t read it?

Don't you really mean his lame assed excuse? This has long been black letter law and is nothing new, shitforbrains. They can either serve under the law or they can get the hell out of congress and out of our nation as far as I'm concerned. That asshole should be censured as should many of the half assed excuses for legitimate congressional representatives now serving terms as democratic congressmen.

I trust you were singing he same tune during the endless Benghazi investigations?

 

[the other mike]

I trust you were singing he same tune during the endless Benghazi investigations?

Wow thanks for bringing that up.

 

[Dick Foster]

Nadler's hypocrisy is almost as large as his belt size...

From the Washington Examiner.....

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is the leading Democrat demanding the release of the Mueller Report “in its entirety” without redactions.


His committee is planning to subpoena the Justice Department for the full report.

But back in 1998, as a member of the same committee, he vociferously opposed the release of the full Starr Report, saying that “as a matter of decency and protecting people’s privacy rights, people who may be totally innocent third parties, what must not be released at all.”

a blow job vs Russian's looting the democracy of the country ----

yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

Funny how you always divert back to the same old lie in defense of Slick Willy....

Clinton was Impeached because he intentionally misled / lied under oath during his Sexual Harassment court case resulting in his being held in Contempt of Court by the Judge, stripped of his license to practice law in his home state for his breach of ethics and crime.

Clinton took an oath of office to defend, protect, and uphold the Constitution and every American's Constitutional Rights; however, when the decision came down between saving his own sexually deviant ass or attempt to 'screw' a US citizen out of their right to a fair trial Slick Willy decided to thrown his oath of office and Jones' rights under the proverbial bus.....

...and was busted by the Judge for doing so.

Back then you snowflakes were defending Slick Willy by claiming that 'what a President does in his own free time (sticking cigars up inside Lewinski and getting a BJ from an intern in the Oval Office) was no one's business but his own...and as expected demonstrated that such 'rules' for Democrats do not apply to Conservatives.

Democrats / snowflakes engaged in a disgraceful public witch hunt against Kavanaugh over an accusation they could not substantiate....while doing everything they could to avoid acknowledging Democrat Senators had been engaging in sexual deviant behavior against women for decades, formed a committee to pay for the silence of their victims with tax payer dollars, and then allow them to escape justice / quietly retire at tax payer expense after the story broke.

The American people are not as stupid as Democrats think / not as stupid as Gruber bragged Democrat-supporting snowflakes were / are - all of this did not go un-noticed. Yes, the Democrats, as usual, got away with it all, but their bullshit hypocrisy, justifications, smoke, mirrors, and lies weren't bought for a second...by anyone other than hard-core liberal extremist snowflakes.

As if I ever got beyond the fact that the asshole was a coward and a draft dodger.

 

[Slade3200]

I trust you were singing he same tune during the endless Benghazi investigations?

Wow thanks for bringing that up.

I’m not interested in your YouTube videos. Please just make your point and we can discuss

 

[Dick Foster]

Have you looked at his statements about why he hasn’t read it?

Yes. He stated it would not be 'fair' for only him to see it and not everyone....except he knows damn-well that it can NOT be legally released.

He could have read it already to determine if his and his Party's continuous political theater and demand that the US AG break the law, and their continuous attempt to continue the exposed coup was / is worth their effort.

The obvious answer is 'No'. Nadler knows the US AG will never break the law, thus giving him and the treasonous Democrats an opportunity to claim they are hiding something.

Look, I’m not on board with the obstruction fight and would like to see the book closed on this thing. With that said, this breaking the law line is BS. Yes the law restricts Barr from releasing the grand jury testimony, but all he needs is a court order and he would be free to do so. It’s been done in the past. It’s a simple process. You need to ditch that law breaking line. It’s weak and misleading

Dumbass, no court would ever issue what would clearly be an illegal order. It would be AGAINST the law and they would be subject to immediate disbarment and hauled off of the bench. I wish you people would get a friggin clue.

 

[the other mike]

I’m not interested in your YouTube videos. Please just make your point and we can discuss

Democrats when they hear the truth...

 

[easyt65]

With that said, this breaking the law line is BS.

Negative.

1. Grand Jury Information can NOT be legally released.

2. Comey's own team helped / participated in the redaction of the report.
-- If you are going to accuse Barr of engaging in a cover-up by redacting information then you are simultaneously accusing Mueller's own team of engaging in that same cover-up.

3. READ THE LAW. Congress wrote it. If they wanted to they could have already changed the law, making it legal for the US AG to release the entire report. Instead, they have neither made any attempt to read the less redacted version nor made any effort to change their law to allow it to be released.

It's all political theater.

 

[Slade3200]

Have you looked at his statements about why he hasn’t read it?

Yes. He stated it would not be 'fair' for only him to see it and not everyone....except he knows damn-well that it can NOT be legally released.

He could have read it already to determine if his and his Party's continuous political theater and demand that the US AG break the law, and their continuous attempt to continue the exposed coup was / is worth their effort.

The obvious answer is 'No'. Nadler knows the US AG will never break the law, thus giving him and the treasonous Democrats an opportunity to claim they are hiding something.

Look, I’m not on board with the obstruction fight and would like to see the book closed on this thing. With that said, this breaking the law line is BS. Yes the law restricts Barr from releasing the grand jury testimony, but all he needs is a court order and he would be free to do so. It’s been done in the past. It’s a simple process. You need to ditch that law breaking line. It’s weak and misleading

Dumbass, no court would ever issue what would clearly be an illegal order. It would be AGAINST the law and they would be subject to immediate disbarment and hauled off of the bench. I wish you people would get a friggin clue.

It’s funny to hear you call me a dumbass and then proceed to make a dumbass statement. Next time do a little more homework than simply listen to right wing propaganda
———

Under U.S. law, grand jury testimony generally must be kept secret. But if a grand jury matter involves "grave hostile acts of a foreign power" or other intelligence information, the information can be shared with appropriate government officials. The law also lets a judge release grand jury information when strong public interest is at stake.

A 1974 court decision involving Republican President Richard Nixon gives Democrats strong ammunition to argue that they are entitled to any grand jury information redacted by Barr. Leon Jaworski, a special prosecutor during the Watergate scandal, produced a report that relied on evidence from grand jury proceedings.

H.R. Haldeman, who had served Nixon as White House chief of staff, sought to block that information from Congress, citing the same grand jury secrecy provision mentioned by Barr. The dispute ended up before a panel of federal appeals court judges in Washington, which ruled 5-1 against Haldeman. The court said Congress clearly needed the material to conduct an effective impeachment investigation, and noted that the Democratic-led House Judiciary committee had taken "elaborate precautions to insure against unnecessary and inappropriate disclosure of these materials." The committee approved articles of impeachment against Nixon as Congress began the process of trying to remove him from office. Nixon resigned before the full House could vote on impeachment.

 

[Slade3200]

I’m not interested in your YouTube videos. Please just make your point and we can discuss

Democrats when they hear the truth...
View attachment 260079

Didn’t Fox have to apologize for Hannitys pushing of that fake story after Seth’s family asked him to cut it out?! Holy shit and you call that truth?! Wow

 

[Slade3200]

With that said, this breaking the law line is BS.

Negative.

1. Grand Jury Information can NOT be legally released.

2. Comey's own team helped / participated in the redaction of the report.
-- If you are going to accuse Barr of engaging in a cover-up by redacting information then you are simultaneously accusing Mueller's own team of engaging in that same cover-up.

3. READ THE LAW. Congress wrote it. If they wanted to they could have already changed the law, making it legal for the US AG to release the entire report. Instead, they have neither made any attempt to read the less redacted version nor made any effort to change their law to allow it to be released.

It's all political theater.

1 no it isn’t there is legal precedent, look at my above post.

2 I never accused Barr of a cover up

3 aren’t you tired of parroting talking points?

 

[the other mike]

Didn’t Fox have to apologize for Hannitys pushing of that fake story after Seth’s family asked him to cut it out?! Holy shit and you call that truth?! Wow

That's a cover-up. Their family settled for an undisclosed amount ( my guess upward of $20 million )
That's enough to turn people when their only option is to be ruined
by individuals who 'don't take no for an answer', we'll just say.

 

[toobfreak]

View attachment 260074

More like:

 

[Camp]

With that said, this breaking the law line is BS.

Negative.

1. Grand Jury Information can NOT be legally released.

Wrong, and a lie. Prosecutors regularly have Grand Jury information released by simply requesting the presiding judge approve of the release. If Barr made the request and the judge denied the request Barr might have an excuse, but Barr refuses to make the request.

 

[easyt65]

1. Under U.S. law, grand jury testimony generally must be kept secret. But if a grand jury matter involves "grave hostile acts of a foreign power" or other intelligence information, the information can be shared with appropriate government officials.

2. The law also lets a judge release grand jury information when strong public interest is at stake.

1. Overwhelming evidence - to include the Mueller report - has proven that no such grave hostile act by a foreign power involving the President of the United States EVER occurred. By your own statement you admit there is no justification for releasing the Grand jury information. In fact your statement supports the continuing fact that to release that information would be a crime.

No evidence of criminal collusion warranting an investigation.
No evidence of criminal collusion warranting the appointment of a Spcl Counsel.
No evidence of Trump / Trump Team collusion.
No indictment of Trump / Trump Team members for collusion.
No conviction of Trump / Trump Team members for collusion.
No finding of Obstruction.
No indictment for obstruction.
No conviction for Obstruction.
Overwhelming evidence the investigation was a failed coup attempt perpetrated by the Obama administration, begun criminally intentionally.

2. There is no 'strong public interest' in continuing this exposed coup. There is only biased treasonous Democrat interest in continuing this attempt to oust / undermine the elected President of the United States.

 

[easyt65]

Wrong, and a lie.

Back it up. Links, documents, and even the law itself have been repeatedly posted collaborating the fact that Grand jury information, as in this case, can not be released. Your 'uh-uh' changes nothing.

Have you told Mueller and his team that you believe they are part of the cover-up conspiracy since it was MUELLER'S TEAM who helped redact the report?