OFFICIAL: Donald Trump thread.

[Motorcity Cobra]

He's talking about the racist arsonist that set fire to black churches in LA.

Speaking about the arsonist, one 23-year-old resident summed it up by saying, “But what’s the sense in hate?…Forgive what he’s done.” He’s right. More hate isn’t the answer—forgiveness is. As we prepare to go to church this Sunday, let’s remember to lift them up in prayer. 2/2

— Franklin Graham (@Franklin_Graham) April 13, 2019

Did Trump put out a statement on these churches being torched by a white supremacist?

[Motorcity Cobra]

NEW: Judge faults Barr for creating suspicion around disclosure of Mueller report https://t.co/ADz6QXjhde

— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) April 16, 2019

[Motorcity Cobra]

NEW: Judge faults Barr for creating suspicion around disclosure of Mueller report https://t.co/ADz6QXjhde

— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) April 16, 2019

Barr’s Playbook: He Misled Congress When Omitting Parts of Justice Dep’t Memo in 1989

On Friday the thirteenth October 1989, by happenstance the same day as the “Black Friday” market crash, news leaked of a legal memo authored by William Barr. He was then serving as head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). It is highly uncommon for any OLC memo to make headlines. This one did because it was issued in “unusual secrecy” and concluded that the FBI could forcibly abduct people in other countries without the consent of the foreign state. The headline also noted the implication of the legal opinion at that moment in time. It appeared to pave the way for abducting Panama’s leader, Gen. Manuel Noriega.

Members of Congress asked to see the full legal opinion. Barr refused, but said he would provide an account that “summarizes the principal conclusions.” Sound familiar? In March 2019, when Attorney General Barr was handed Robert Mueller’s final report, he wrote that he would “summarize the principal conclusions” of the special counsel’s report for the public.

When Barr withheld the full OLC opinion in 1989 and said to trust his summary of the principal conclusions, Yale law school professor Harold Koh wrote that Barr’s position was “particularly egregious.” Congress also had no appetite for Barr’s stance, and eventually issued a subpoena to successfully wrench the full OLC opinion out of the Department.

What’s different from that struggle and the current struggle over the Mueller report is that we know how the one in 1989 eventually turned out.

When the OLC opinion was finally made public long after Barr left office, it was clear that Barr’s summary had failed to fully disclose the opinion’s principal conclusions. It is better to think of Barr’s summary as a redacted version of the full OLC opinion. That’s because the “summary” took the form of 13 pages of written testimony. The document was replete with quotations from court cases, legal citations, and the language of the OLC opinion itself. Despite its highly detailed analysis, this 13-page version omitted some of the most consequential and incendiary conclusions from the actual opinion. And there was evidently no justifiable reason for having withheld those parts from Congress or the public.

https://www.justsecurity.org/63635/b...-memo-in-1989/

[1bad65]

Climate has always been changing. The oceans have always been rising. Look at history before cars, smog ect. We're still finding cities under water.
Then we have solar flares and pole shifts that affect the climate but yeah man is causing it lol.

When that was pointed out to John Kerry, he abruptly ended the discussion.

That said it all.

That's an irrefutable argument, from my experience and after seeing that.

[1bad65]

Barr’s Playbook: He Misled Congress When Omitting Parts of Justice Dep’t Memo in 1989

Here we go again.


And come Thursday, you're going to once again look like Yosemite Sam after he put the dynamite in his own pants and it blew up.

And if history tells us anything, the process will repeat itself over and again.


That guy is stuck on stupid.

[Left Hook Tua]

Did Trump put out a statement on these churches being torched by a white supremacist?

Does he have to?

[Tomjas]

When that was pointed out to John Kerry, he abruptly ended the discussion.

That said it all.

That's an irrefutable argument, from my experience and after seeing that.

Lol

Look at this!

The opinion of an ignoramus from a backwater in Texas ain’t worth a thing

[denium]

You can't respond, you have nothing to respond with.

[denium]

Lol

Look at this!

The opinion of an ignoramus from a backwater in Texas ain’t worth a thing

Says the fantasist living in Wonglepong.

[Motorcity Cobra]

Trump’s latest on the “pee-tape”: He says “I would be very embarrassed if the tape shows up” and then, in the same breath “there is no tape” and “I wasn’t even in the room during that period of time.” 🤔 pic.twitter.com/1elc3XyYm5

— Andrew Wortman (@AmoneyResists) April 15, 2019