And I told your dumb birther ass I dont just look at thier final poll.Rasmussen polled Trump/Hillary for months as did other polls.While most polls had Hillary ahead in around 90% of thier polls Rasmussen often had Trump ahead.Rasmussen had Trump ahead more than any other poll.
So once again the New York Times pushes a narrative based on anonymous sources. In the recent two years this has blown up in their faces regularly in their anti-Trump narrative. Mueller's office was pretty much leak proof. I don't expect any Mueller investigators are breaking that confidence now knowing that it will probably lead to their own indictments. I expect the claims that the information came from Mueller investigation insiders is a pure fabrication. But of course this does not stop the New York Times from pushing their fictional narrative. If the New York Times expects us to believe this narrative then they better spell out directly which Mueller investigators they got their story from. (Let me help with this the answer is most likely - no one).
Release the Mueller report and prove it's wrong - nobody is going to believe the criminals own narrative that they got cleared.
I will be happy to the see the redacted Mueller report released. It needs to be redacted to provide the committed anonymity to grand jury witnesses and to not include confidential national security information. Barr has committed to provide this in mid-April. The Democrats are currently making noise over nothing by demanding the "full Mueller report" -- these clowns are already getting the full Mueller report. Shortly the Democrats are going to look like idiots again -- and it is entirely on their heads for being complete nitwits.
Hold on a second, the report can get clearance from the courts to be released unredacted. We should all be pushing for that.
So you are pushing for a report to be released including all sorts of confidential national security information? Many of the witnesses who testified in front of the grand jury where promised anonymity in writing. Are you going to release their names so they can promptly sue the government for millions for breaking the agreement? If the government starts revealing the names of witnesses who were promised anonymity in legal proceedings then who in their right mind would ever provide evidence for the government in the criminal matter knowing the government will simply reveal their names so they get wiped out by violent criminal defendants in mob & gang trials. You better think this out better. Releasing an unredacted Mueller report is not the legal standard the U.S. should establish. Any judge who makes that type of decision deserves to have their legal career terminated immediately.
It doesn’t matter what they were promised, they are compelled to be truthful in a grand jury proceeding lest they perjure themselves. Their anonymity can be maintained anyway, witness 1, witness 2 etc.
Well if their anonymity can be maintained via witness 1, witness 2, etc. then the Mueller report needs to be redacted to remove their actual names. It very much matters what the grand jury witnesses were promised. According to an earlier article by the Washington Post (from memory) over 60% of federal criminal trials include witnesses who were promised anonymity. Do you think that any witness would ever step up and provide testimony for a federal case if they knew their real names would be released? They would be insane to do this knowing that criminal gangs would rub them and their families out.
you don't even know what the hell you are talking about. one year you tell picking the winner is your key. the next election you tell us picking the vote regardless of the magnitude of the size of the victory is the way. you are so full of shit you make Trump and the Clintons look like honest abe.
Nope. AG Barr already released his summary. Perhaps, you can wait for the overly redacted Mueller report. Can you tell us another story about how Don jr is fucked and Mueller will indict him?