- 00:07:11 Retweeted @davepell 00:06:05 Please remember that Trump fired Sessions and hired Barr specifically, and solely, because he was angry that Sessions wasn’t obstructing.
- 00:14:26 I wonder if it will be possible to find a link to the report on Twitter once it is posted. I’m worried it will be difficult to find.
- 03:17:10 Retweeted @CarolLeonnig 00:48:49 BREAKING — Get ready to see a LOT of Mueller report. We’re told it will be lightly redacted, revealing a “granular” look at possible obstruction of justice evidence debated in probe of @realDonaldTrump
https://t.co/Y7dUZwmdS4 - 03:43:32 Oops https://t.co/h3RSitoOtB
- 05:09:48 Retweeted @jaredbkeller 2019-04-17 23:59:30 [INT. A diner in Iowa]ME: How is your last name pronounced?
PETE BUTTIGIEG: It’s ‘Boot-EDGE-EDGE,’ not ‘Booty-JUDGE’
ME: Huh, right. I guess I’ll …
(•_•)
( •_•)>вЊђв– -в–
(вЊђв– _в– )
… booty-JUDGE of that!
PETE BUTTIGIEG:
ME:
PETE BUTTIGIEG:
ME: I’m president now
- 05:18:11 Retweeted @PreetBharara 2019-04-17 22:18:26 I’m preparing my own counter report. It will be comprised of many sections, each less than 280 characters.
- 13:03:02 Just to get this on the record, here are the Mueller report predictions I made on the Curmudgeon’s Corner Slack yesterday… (1/5)
- 13:03:03 I’m going to go with about 30% redacted, most of that color coded as “related to continuing investigations”. The stuff that is not redacted will be embarrassing details, but about general events we already knew about. (2/5) in reply to abulsme
- 13:03:03 No brand new big bombshells. Everything will still be consistent with the “useful idiots” theory of what happened on the collusion side. (3/5) in reply to abulsme
- 13:03:04 On the obstruction side we’ll see a run down of the kinds of things we already know about, and folks who always thought it was obstruction will still think so, but it won’t convince anybody who wasn’t already there. (4/5) in reply to abulsme
- 13:03:04 Alternately it will be really fun if we get hard evidence that Trump and family really were innocent, and this whole thing was the Russians framing Trump to encourage divisions in American society. Which is plausible. (Although still falls into the “useful idiot” zone.) (5/5) in reply to abulsme
- 13:14:24 Retweeted @mattsgorman 01:31:58 Breaking: The Mueller Report CD-ROM will also contain 12 free hours of America Online
- 13:27:09 I got up before 6 am for this stupid thing. Barr better be on time and not do one of these things where he keeps people waiting. :-/
- 14:14:05 So, interesting news conference. But mostly ignorable. We’ll see what we see later today. Most interesting thing to me was that Barr is going to give a less redacted copy to congressional leaders… but still without the 6e info, which he doesn’t want to file a court motion about.
- 15:07:07 Time to start reading I guess… https://t.co/mOHqiFc3zg
- 15:32:20 Started reading, but now have to get my son to school and then go to work. Reduced to listening to other people reading and talking about it on my headphones while I do other things…
- 16:34:03 Retweeted @ChrisWarcraft 16:26:46 So basically the redacted report is “Trump was too dumb to commit these crimes properly but REALLY wanted to commit crimes which by the way is still an impeachable offense” and they’re trying to spin that as a win?
- 16:39:30 Retweeted @jbview 16:21:46 The Watergate-era Congress considered that kind of lies to the public to be part of of a legitimate impeachment. https://t.co/RdKvJYpmIw
- 16:44:09 Retweeted @OfficialJonZal 16:31:29 Because nothing says “TOTALLY EXONERATED!” quite like slumping back in your chair and announcing “Oh my God. … I’m fucked.” https://t.co/LZlWUn9QH4 in reply to OfficialJonZal
- 16:51:39 Retweeted @BenjySarlin 16:29:46 There’s an alchemy going on by which bombshell Russia stories in the news get derided as fake news when they come out and then old news when they’re confirmed by a massive federal investigation
- 16:52:04 Retweeted @BradMossEsq 15:49:47 .@DonaldJTrumpJr was spared a conspiracy charge because Mueller decided he was too stupid to know what he was doing was potentially illegal. https://t.co/qLA45D9aZj
- 16:54:56 6% is a lot less than the 30% I expected. But I seem to have been right that most of the redactions are related to ongoing investigations. Which is interesting on its own. https://t.co/9eU0uyaRcq
- 16:57:19 By the way, we aren’t recording the Curmudgeon’s Corner podcast until TOMMORROW night, so we’ll be able to respond to more fully digested responses to this report, rather than instant reactions as people are skimming and speed reading.
- 17:48:46 Retweeted @ElieNYC 17:10:34 Jesus Christ. Only 10 pages into the obstruction section, but the contrast b/w it and the Russia section is striking.
Russia Section: It all looks bad but criminal conspiracy is hard to prove.
Obstruction section: This is easy to prove for anybody with the authority to do so. - 18:13:06 We win! https://t.co/EVQPsQuog0
- 19:31:03 Retweeted @maxbergmann 18:35:00 The press need to stop saying there was no “evidence of collusion.” That’s Barr’s spin. The report is FULL of evidence of collusion. Mueller just said it didn’t legally amount to a criminal conspiracy.
- 19:53:44 Retweeted @jonfavs 19:50:54 This is unbelievably disappointing. Even if you don’t ultimately pursue impeachment proceedings, why on Earth would you say this today?Part of the American people making a judgment in 2020 requires a full account of the President’s criminality and abuse of power. https://t.co/DB634jA2Fq
- 21:10:22 Thread. https://t.co/eOByfbFm3K
- 21:18:56 Retweeted @RadioFreeTom 21:09:22 I have been on the road all day, and I am just now reading up on today’s events, and I’ll just say:Every Trump shill who demanded an apology from the Trump-Russia folks owes the Trump-Russia folks a big goddamn apology.
There was no crime. Fine. The rest of it is disgusting.
- 22:14:56 Retweeted @normative 22:04:14 So, the full report reinforces my reaction to Barr’s summary: An inquiry focused on whether there was an “agreement”—a legal prerequisite for a conspiracy charge—definitionally omits the kind of public quid pro quo we all witnessed playing out.
- 22:16:30 Retweeted @joshtpm 16:42:43 Seems worth noting. Red underline is part Barr quoted, blue underline the part he omitted. https://t.co/5UOC22ZsZk
- 22:52:55 Retweeted @neal_katyal 21:27:49 This is a striking footnote. It’s raising seriously the possibility of criminal liability when Trump leaves office. Amazing. https://t.co/zSuMf1tL0f
- 22:57:02 I agreed with this a year ago. I don’t any more. Even if it is doomed to fail, even if it is doomed politically, there is a moral imperative to push as hard as possible here to try to bring accountability. If the Senate tanks it, that is on them, so be it. Make them defend him. https://t.co/gzWUOKJ09M
- 23:16:37 Nice! -> You can now download the source code for all Infocom text adventure classics | Ars Technica https://t.co/IoFUMpo1QH
- 23:20:34 Retweeted @DaveMc99TA 23:02:36 So aggravating. Basically D leadership has endorsed the idea that the President didn’t do anything wrong and the voters don’t need to understand what he did so now any future President can do the same thing. https://t.co/CpqH8jQxUi
- 23:24:11 Thread https://t.co/Bq6RhW0D0u
- 23:26:06 Another thread. https://t.co/JEiMrILD2F
- 23:50:16 Retweeted @samstein 14:17:59 The basic rationalization Barr gives for why Trump didn’t legally obstruct justice is that he was emotionally upset about being accused of potential crimes and bad media coverage and acted out. That’s the actual argument the Attorney General of the United States made.
- 23:59:00 @lrozen I read maybe 20 pages before I had to go to work this morning. Heading home shortly. Intend to ignore other things I should do in order to read most of the night. But I am a news junky. Very few people will do this. Hell, I may not actually end up finishing. But I will try. in reply to lrozen
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.