Status
Not open for further replies.
An excellent German youtube channel I'm subscribed to has interviewed Aaron Maté (the guy who made Luke Harding look like what he is) about Russiagate in their "know your stuff" series. Part 1 just published:


I made it to 5 minutes before I realized that this guy is leaving out massive pieces of information, and cherry picking this ******** theory.

God some people will believe anything.
 
Well, he made Ivana sign a gag order - she's not allowed to say anything about their marriage without his prior explicit approval. He's also alleged to have paid off at least 2 porn stars about their relationships. So there evidently can be stuff that he doesn't want in the public domain.

Like he has a limp ****. :rolleyes: OK that was probably too crude. I'm sure he doesn't want either ex or his current wife revealing his lies of grandeur.
 
According to Adam Schiff, Bannon was instructed by the White House not to answer questions about the transition or White House, even after the subpoena was issued

Bannon’s counsel conferred with the White House after the committee issued a subpoena, Schiff said, “and was instructed by the White House to refuse again to answer any questions concerning the time during the transition and his time in the administration.”

“The scope of this assertion of privilege—if that’s what it is—is breathtaking,” Schiff said. “It goes well beyond anything we’ve seen in this investigation … This was effectively a gag order by the White House.”
 
Shouldn't Bannon be punished if he fails to answer questions?

Not necessarily (in the very short term, at least). If there's uncertainty about which group (White House or group issuing the subpoena) has priority, it can be reasonable to get trustworthy clarification first. After clarification, there would not really be any leeway, though, I would think.


That quite sounds like it would reasonably fall under "Obstruction of Justice," though, regardless of whether any crimes had been committed or not.
 
Last edited:
Wow. It used to be that this kind of thing would invoke charges. Bannon and Trump should go to jail for obstruction just for this stunt.

Obstruction of Justice isn't relevant for congressional testimony. They could maybe charge contempt of congress, but that's somewhat less likely than the sun rising in the west tomorrow.
 
This is extremely silly.


The headline was certainly silly. I feel bad for Newsweek. They used to be a more reputable publication.

Considering the number of caveats, conditionals, and disclaimers the actual author of the essay being reported on included, not to mention his own assessment of its likelihood, I'd say that he and it were nowhere nearly as silly.
 
The headline was certainly silly. I feel bad for Newsweek. They used to be a more reputable publication.

Considering the number of caveats, conditionals, and disclaimers the actual author of the essay being reported on included, not to mention his own assessment of its likelihood, I'd say that he and it were nowhere nearly as silly.


Plus Lessig has explained the nature of his essay months ago already, which makes it even more pathetic that the Newsweek clown warms it up again.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom