Jump to content

[udpate: Whitaker apparently...never asked, but would be told he should recuse if he did???] Whitaker told he does not need to recuse himself from overseeing Mueller investigation

Jason

By Jason
in The Political Re-Education Camp

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Jason changed the title to [udpate: Whitaker apparently...never asked, but would be told he should recuse if he did???] Whitaker told he does not need to recuse himself from overseeing Mueller investigation
Jason

Jason

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Also, that's quite the fucking headline evolution, CNN:

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20181220154604/https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/politics/matthew-whitaker-attorney-general-robert-mueller-investigation/index.html

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20181220214826/https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/politics/matthew-whitaker-attorney-general-robert-mueller-investigation/index.html

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/politics/matthew-whitaker-attorney-general-robert-mueller-investigation/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chairslinger

Chairslinger

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Jwheel86 said:

So I guess Whitaker can expect a subpoena from Mueller regarding obstruction?

 

 

The complaint to Whittaker about the Cohen plea seems like it might fall under the "unprecedented but not illegal" standard of keeping Justice at arms length for a president that Trump has stomped all over quite a few times now.

 

It's kind of a shame it's getting lumped in with the bit about "reigning in" the SDNY. That seems like textbook obstruction.

 

A line has become popular over the past month or two that Trump obstructs out in the open to "confuse" the legal process. And that if he did the same conduct in private there would be no doubt it was obstruction. Well, this is that...in private. This is one of the things Nixon was impeached for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jason

Jason

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 minutes ago, Chairslinger said:

 

 

The complaint to Whittaker about the Cohen plea seems like it might fall under the "unprecedented but not illegal" standard of keeping Justice at arms length for a president that Trump has stomped all over quite a few times now.

 

It's kind of a shame it's getting lumped in with the bit about "reigning in" the SDNY. That seems like textbook obstruction.

 

A line has become popular over the past month or two that Trump obstructs out in the open to "confuse" the legal process. And that if he did the same conduct in private there would be no doubt it was obstruction. Well, this is that...in private. This is one of the things Nixon was impeached for.

 

source.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greatoneshere

Greatoneshere

Posted
Posted

"Incorrectly claimed on his resume".

 

You mean lying? Because lying on your resume is actually illegal if I remember the law correctly because you are falsely representing yourself and your credentials, which employers could theoretically use as a basis to hire you (under false pretenses). 

 

This guy needs to get the :guillotine:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...