Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
White House letter to Barr...
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5986068-WHSC-to-AG-4-19-19.html#document/p1
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1296 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
White House letter to Barr... (Original Post)
handmade34
May 2019
OP
So, it's okay that AG Barr exonerated the pos....when in fact...this report should have just been
asiliveandbreathe
May 2019
#1
Okay, our lawyers needed! I quit reading after the letter stated that a special counsel
Karadeniz
May 2019
#2
asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)1. So, it's okay that AG Barr exonerated the pos....when in fact...this report should have just been
given to Congress....that is the part Flood left out....
Karadeniz
(22,461 posts)2. Okay, our lawyers needed! I quit reading after the letter stated that a special counsel
Is supposed to take a guilty determination to a grand jury for indictment...as if impeachment isn't an option and as if the DoJ doesn't have an opinion that a president shouldn't be indicted. So I'm obviously missing something in the writer's reasoning.
Help, please!!!
handmade34
(22,756 posts)3. legalize meant to confuse
obfuscation and misrepresentation... you're missing something because the author is irrational and unreasonable
czarjak
(11,253 posts)4. Aren't they the first to bitch about getting off on technicalities?