swordfish

ANNND - Here is MAD's response: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/13/pete-buttigieg-had-to-google-alfred-e-neuman-after/ Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg was mocked by Mad magazine over the weekend after he admitted he “had to Google” President Trump’s new nickname for him. During an interview with Politico on Friday, Mr. Trump compared the South Bend mayor to Alfred E. Neuman, the freckled, red-haired fictitious mascot who has graced the pages of Mad magazine for decades. “Alfred E. Neuman cannot become president of the United States,” the president said. Asked what he thought of the new nickname, Mr. Buttigieg took a shot at Mr. Trump’s age while admitting he “had to Google” the reference. “I’ll be honest. I had to Google that,” the 37-year-old mayor told Politico. “I guess it’s just a generational thing. I didn’t get the reference. It’s kind of funny, I guess. But he’s also the president of the United States and I’m surprised he’s not spending more time trying to salvage this China deal.” Mad magazine, which has pilloried Mr. Trump many times in the past, set its sights on Mr. Buttigieg this time, asking on Twitter, “Who’s Pete Buttigieg? Must be a generational thing.” “MAD Magazine is for all generations!” another tweet read. 196 people are talking about this

Great questions Coach. SF is generally supportive of the idea of allowing teachers being armed obviously with many rules in place to (hopefully) avoid pitfalls.

Saw Alex on CBS Sunday Morning this week. Looks pretty good. Admitted it wasn't his hair though....

SF's post in memes on April 15. Found it very funny when the Mayor said he had to google it. "It's a generational thing"......

What new legislation would you propose? These kids broke numerous laws just obtaining and possessing the guns, let alone taking them into a gun-free zone and then committed murder. Anything legislative must be aimed at addressing mental issues.

OIC - So it's religion's fault? Or should we just not talk about it......Really not seeing how that meme was germane.....

"Pimp" comes to mind......"That shirt is so Pimp" - "That car is pimping" - I remember explaining the original meaning of that word as the whore's boss to my daughters.....They thought it applied to the wild dressing styles of the 70's/80's.....

Well then why post a meme like that on a serious topic? Deflection? https://nypost.com/2019/05/10/colorado-school-shooting-suspects-reportedly-took-guns-from-parents-cabinet/ What new gun law could have prevented these kids from getting those guns? They broke into a supposedly secure gun safe, stole the guns, torched a vehicle and (obviously - thankfully) didn't know how to use the guns effectively. They broke the law. Simple. Whose fault do you think this is?

Gonzo - There is meme thread. But I'll bite, so you think banning guns is the answer?

Woop - There it is!! http://www.fox5dc.com/news/joe-biden-backs-health-care-for-illegal-immigrants-says-we-have-an-obligation-to-provide-it?fbclid=IwAR2BF2zVJa_bn_rCfL7cwFshlKm5MfwWhIoA9F47PeO321RTfqvdH4PoIos Leading 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden said this week that the U.S. must provide health care to everyone in the country, “regardless of whether they are documented or undocumented.”

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/10/25/biden-stumbles-over-education-question/ Another Biden classic....... Paraphrasing...... Reporter: Why are schools in Iowa better than DC? Biden: Black people....... Read it - I'm not going to offend anyone by posting the story.....Little bit gun shy....

SF feels that in any shooting (mass or not) situation, the blame should be placed squarely on the shooter and that shooter should not be glorified in any way - no matter who. Somebody pulled a trigger - they are the problem, not the gun, not the teacher, not the bully - the shooter. Secondary is how the weapon was obtained, and if there was criminality involved - punishment should follow accordingly. IMHO - anyone who pulls the trigger is to blame, and it is my opinion there are likely mental issues as well. Personally I don't want to hear anything about a shooter - only the heroes that stopped the carnage, or killed the shooter, and the stories of the wounded. Up until this shooting, in the past, the storylines surrounding the shootings have leaned towards the shooter's backgrounds, shooter's personal beliefs and political views being reasons and excuses for them pulling the trigger while overtly ignoring any mental issues. In the latest shooting in Colorado, this story is appearing to place the blame on the school itself and the culture. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/09/us/colorado-shooting-stem-school-concerned-parent-invs/index.html Since I have ran into some flak for posting a story - I will trust everybody to read the entire story themselves with out my highlighting and have a conversation about it.

Just another point in my "degradation of society" rant I had a few years ago that I was informed how wrong I was for suggesting it. (Again - IMHO)

Thanks W. It just seems like political theater to me that Nadler's committee would find Barr in contempt over this versus him not coming to a hearing they called the day after he was in the Senate. There was a fuller copy of the report (including the classified sections, but not the Grand Jury sections) made available to the Senate Judiciary Committee that only 2 Senators took the time to look at it. https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/442329-do-democrats-really-want-to-see-the-unredacted-special-counsel-report Despite their demands that Attorney General William Barr release the full unredacted report by special counsel Robert Mueller, Democrats have shown little actual interest in viewing it themselves. In a solid gesture of transparency, Barr allowed a dozen members of Congress, six Democrats and six Republicans, to access the report with most of the redactions removed. While grand jury material had to be redacted to comply with federal requirements, this version of the report does include classified information, materials related to ongoing investigations, and information that could damage reputations of individuals not charged with crimes. But prior to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with Barr last week, only two lawmakers had taken advantage of the opportunity, and both were Republicans. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham and Representative Doug Collins, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, reviewed the unredacted information, and both said the new details did not change their assessment of the report in any way.Moreover, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler were also granted access to the document. Despite being some of the most vocal critics of the way Barr handled the release of the report, none of them bothered to review the information that they claim is so critical. Not even the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein, deigned to read the less redacted version of the report prior to the attorney general testifying in front of her own panel. Since the Democrats are so determined for the public to have access to the unredacted report, along with all the underlying evidence no less, their unanimous refusal to inspect the redacted information themselves raises some serious questions about their true motives in making such a fuss about the release of the full report. The Democrats had evidently “boycotted en masse” the opportunity to review the unredacted report because they wanted Barr to also remove legally required redactions of grand jury material and grant access to a broader array of lawmakers. The theory that makes the most sense to me is their fear that Barr's warning of investigating the investigators has them attempting to make anything Barr finds questionable. Even Mr. Nadler argued against what he is asking for now back in 1998. https://www.westernjournal.com/flashback-nadler-argued-releasing-independent-counsel-report-clinton/ In a 1998 interview on PBS’ Charlie Rose show, Nadler, then a member of the Judiciary Committee, cited rule 6(e) as a reason much of the Starr report could not be released publicly. “It’s grand jury material,” he said. “It represents statements, which may or may not be true by various witnesses, salacious material, all kinds of material that it would be unfair to release.”

Ohhh SNAP!!

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46988/pete-over-nbc-reporter-labels-buttigieg-kind-emily-zanotti?fbclid=IwAR1umEwi7ojaBZlgL2s8VPziOpjZgwHketE6vVWcPsWk9c8cgF_kfr88j5M The mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and first openly gay contender for a presidential nomination, enjoyed an extended honeymoon period with the press, landing on the cover of TIME and featuring in high-profile fashion magazines, but in recent days, Buttigieg's star power seems to have waned, and even mainstream media commentators have been souring on "Mayor Pete." "You don't meet a lot of guys like Mayor Pete who last long on a national level, because, quite frankly, he's kind of boring," Melvin said, according to the Free Beacon, after The TODAY Show aired a clip of Buttigieg speaking in South Carolina. "We've seen this from time to time in our politics, there's a man or a woman who manages to capture our attention for and then they fizzle, they fade, they peter out," Melvin said. "What's different this time?" The Boston Globe echoed Melvin, calling Buttigieg, "remarkably unremarkable." Buttigieg has been particularly successful at raising money, pulling in hundreds of thousands from Silicon Valley and Hollywood fundraisers in the last week, but at the same time, voter interest in Buttigieg has waned, per Real Clear Politics' tracking polls, falling from a peak of 8%, which put him into contention with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), back down to just a little more than 6%, placing him solidly in the second string of potential Democratic nominees. Newspapers have also begun questioning why Buttigieg is getting national attention, when his campaign is, by the numbers, still well behind those of more established candidates. On Thursday, The New York Times questioned why Buttigieg was appearing on magazine covers and scoring key interviews when Kamala Harris, who has long been a front-runner for the 2020 Democratic nomination, and who outraised Buttigieg by millions in the first quarter, is being almost completely ignored. It also appears that a signal has gone out authorizing mainstream media outlets — who, just last week, were writing glowing stories about Buttigieg's attractive family and one-eyed rescue dog — to criticize Buttigieg's campaign. NBC News, for example, published a hit piece Thursday morning, taking Buttigieg to task for having a "comprehensive" health care plan (which is scant on details) that would offer health care even to illegal immigrants, but failing to offer his own staffers a paid health care option. Buttigieg seems to have noticed. Just this week, he began taking more aggressive positions on the campaign trail, at one point even suggesting that God would be more apt to support a Buttigieg presidency than a Trump re-election — a barb aimed directly at Evangelicals who support Trump despite his history of marital infidelities, something Buttigieg, no doubt, considers hypocritical. He's also noticed that his base, while energized, is not exactly "diverse." At a townhall in South Carolina this week, he begged supporters to help him court minority voters, ABC News reports, especially in states like South Carolina where a diverse base of support is key to winning delegates. If Buttigieg has had one success, though, it is getting Beto O'Rourke out of the race for the Democratic nomination. After a brief dalliance with the limelight, it appears O'Rourke, heavily overshadowed by Buttigieg, may not make the first Democratic primary debate stage. Quite frankly, he let the party put him in this place - the gay candidate. He served his purpose, showing diversity in the party, now they want him out of the race. The other surprise is Bernie's drop in the polls......

Is Rush right? I am not a "legal beagle", but I think that Rule 6 E https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/rule6e.htm applies to this situation.

Sorry - If you don't want to read the entire article - then read the BOLD and UNDERLINED sections I provided for your convenience. The point is that congress is asking the attorney general to break the law, and trying to punish him for refusing.

USPS and AMtrack - same thing.

Because Congress wants Barr to break the law. And he won't. The only stuff redacted in the Mueller report is grand jury testimony.......which is illegal to make public...... https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/05/08/youre-watching-the-slow-creep-of-insanity/ We’re on the verge of the House — what is this committee? (interruption) The Judiciary Committee, Jerry Nadler. There’s so many of these damn committees. There’s the investigations committee, there’s the Judiciary Committee, there’s the Intelligence Committee. Regardless, they’re on the verge here of voting to hold the attorney general, William Barr, in contempt of Congress for failing to produce 2% of the Mueller report. That’s what they want to see. Barr has offered to let them see the least redacted version. The only thing that he will not let them see is that which is covered by grand jury testimony. Federal law requires that grand jury testimony cannot be made public. They are essentially demanding that the attorney general break the law and hand over an unredacted version of the Mueller report to them. Now, to prove that they don’t really want to see the Mueller report, that’s not what this is about. You’ve heard this term 6(e) material. 6(e) material is the legal identification for grand jury material when talking about law in statutory ways. And the truth of the matter is that it’s this Congress, the United States Congress which passes the laws in this country which declared grand jury testimony may not be made public other than by the people who testify before it. The prosecutors cannot make it public. Nobody in that room can make it public by an act of Congress. They are asking the attorney general to violate their own law in making it public. The question to ask, in the last two months, in the last two weeks, whatever time frame, has the Democrat majority in Congress attempted to change the law, allowing grand jury material to be made public? No, they have not! It is still illegal. They have not changed the law, which they can do if they want. They can try. Somebody could have introduced legislation saying, “You know what? Going forward, grand jury material will not be protected, it will not be redacted from any legal reports. We’re gonna make it all public.” They could have done that. They could have gotten that law changed. They didn’t make an effort to change the law. So what this boils down to is, and just synthesizing this down to its base element, this is not about the Mueller report. This is not about what they think is in it that they don’t know. It’s not about the fact that they think key evidence regarding collusion or obstruction is being withheld from them. It’s not about that at all. This is about discrediting the attorney general as he begins his investigation into the investigation into how this all happened. The investigation into the Obama DOJ, the investigation into James Comey, the investigation into the FISA court, the FISA warrant process, the investigation into the Steele dossier and its origins, which is Hillary Clinton, the DNC. That investigation, which Barr has already begun and which the current FBI director Christopher Wray has acknowledged he’s taking part in, this is all an attempt to discredit Barr. And the best way to discredit Barr is to have it reported in your sycophantic Drive-By Media that the attorney general conducting this investigation was held in contempt by Congress. They just want this vote to take place so that the attorney general will have it said about him that he has been held in contempt of Congress. That is supposed to discredit whatever his investigation produces. We got a random act of journalism on CNN today. Audio sound bite number 1 on the program they call Newsroom. Evan Perez, the Justice Department correspondent for CNN, was asked the following questions: “The Democrats are gonna vote to hold Barr in contempt. How symbolic is that? Is this a negotiation just like Republicans held Eric Holder in contempt and were able to get the White House to negotiate and get those documents on Fast and Furious? Is that the best case outcome for the Democrats here?” PEREZ: I find it odd that the Democrats decided to use this as the thing to hold the Attorney General in contempt over. I mean, look. They have a lot of things to be mad at him over. They accused him of misleading testimony. Obviously he didn’t show up for a hearing in the past week. So there’s a lot of things that they could be mad about. And this one, this is a report that is 92% public. Only 8% of it was unredacted. (sic) The Attorney General last week in his testimony said only 2% of volume 2, which is the thing that the Democrats say they care most about, the obstruction part, is redacted. So, you know, it’s kind of hard to understand how they went nuclear so quickly on this. It seems rather like they have started a constitutional crisis, not the other way around. RUSH: Well, it’s exactly right. Two percent of what they want — two volumes in the Mueller report. Volume 1 is on Russian collusion. A, there wasn’t any. Volume 2 is on obstruction in which Mueller said, “Hell, I can’t exonerate Trump on this, so I’m gonna turn it over to Congress.” He’s not supposed to exonerate anybody. It’s not what prosecutors do. Anyway, volume 2 of the Mueller report dealing with obstruction, only 2% of it is redacted! Only 2%! There’s nothing in this report that’s gonna shed any new light on anything, and they know it, and even their buddies in the Drive-By Media, “Of all things you want to hold Barr in contempt over, why not go get him for not showing up before you last week instead of this?” Even the Drive-Bys are confused. The Democrats are in a hurry, as you will hear. Pelosi is losing her mind. We’ve got more evidence of this. It goes above and beyond that which we had yesterday. The House Democrats, folks, are irresponsible, they are hysterical, and it’s fear, it is fear that can do this. We’ve got this Horowitz inspector general report looming out there. We have Barr’s investigation that has begun, the investigation of the investigation. It’s driving the Democrats insane. Mueller’s report, and again, try to think of it the way they do. For 2-1/2 years, however absurd this may sound to you and however unrealistic it may sound to you, these people — the Democrats on this committee, the Democrats in the House, the Democrats in the media, the Democrats everywhere — believed that Trump had colluded with Russia because their media told them. I think even those who didn’t believe it at first, got swept up, and they ended up believing it. And even if they didn’t believe it, they believed that Robert Mueller was going to deliver the silver bullet, was gonna show Trump the sign of the cross that would make Trump go hide in the darkness like Dracula. They really believed! They got up every day and they believed it in their hearts. They believed it in every fiber of their existence that Mueller was going to lower the boom — and then here comes Mueller, “Sorry. Ehhhh, no collusion. Ehhhh, not enough evidence to find any obstruction.” They have lost their minds. The Mueller report destroyed the “Trump is a traitor” narrative, destroyed the “Trump stole the election” narrative. But Mueller wanted to give the Democrats something to keep the country reeling, just like Vladimir Putin wanted. Mueller gave them “Trump must prove his innocence.” This, on the obstruction side. Mueller said, “Yeah, I can’t really… I don’t know. I can’t exonerate Trump on any of this.” Well, it’s not his job to exonerate anybody. The prosecutor’s job is never to exonerate anybody. The accused does not have to prove his or her innocence. Look, you know the drill on this. Mueller wasn’t fired. Mueller wasn’t obstructed. There wasn’t anything done to stop Mueller. His investigation was not impeded. It was not impaired. The only thing obstructed, the only thing impeded, the only thing that was blown up was the Democrats’ attempted coup. So here we are. Democrats are losing their collective minds because they have nothing more than threats, abuses of power, smears and abject panic over what is headed their way, and that is the sum total explaining everything they are doing here. The media’s gonna repackage Democrat panic and abuses of power as patriotism. It’s like Comey said. Comey said, “No, no, no. We don’t spy on people at the FBI. We investigate.” (chuckling) So they are reeling. They have fear of Barr. They have fear of Trump. They have fear of truth. They have fear of a great, roaring economy. They are afraid of their own lunatic base. They are afraid of having no ideas to counter that which is producing great results in the country at the moment — and they have an institutional fear of success, independence, and freedom, because all of those things enjoyed by people mean that people don’t need Democrats. None of this is playing out the way they dreamed for the last 2-1/2 years. It has blown up in their faces in every way imaginable. Now, you may have trouble looking at it this way because you’re watching tainted media report this. You’re seeing the media report that Trump is afraid. (impression) “Trump is scared to death! Trump is trying to hide the truth. Trump…” No. Trump is declaring and has asserted executive privilege over the full Mueller report, and let me explain to you what this means. Even if the Democrats in this committee and then in the whole House vote to hold Barr in contempt, all they have done is stymie themselves for perhaps months as this winds its way through the courts to be resolved. So they hold Barr in contempt with their vote today. The White House then declares and asserts executive privilege over everything in this investigation. What does that mean? It means the Democrats do not have the Mueller report; the White House does. The White House has everything associated with the Mueller report and Congress will get none of it until the courts have had a chance to deal with this. That means there’s gonna be lawsuits left and right. All of that means, it’s going to take a lot of time, and don’t think that… Nadler is out there saying that Trump is doing this because he wants to behave like a king, he wants to behave like a monarch, he wants to make like there is no coequal branch. That is not what is happening here. Trump is simply asserting the fact that the executive branch is independent, has its own area of government that it is in charge of and holds purview over, and they are asserting that. They are answerable to voters. They don’t operate at the whim of Jerry Nadler. The executive branch is not under permanent oversight like the Mueller report made it look like the executive branch is and like Trump is. They’re asserting executive privilege, and they’re telling Nadler and all these Democrats, “You do not get permanent oversight over everything. “We have cooperated with you. We’ve cooperated all the way down the line. But you are attempting to use this material for something totally unrelated to what your stated purpose is, and we’re not gonna let you get away with it. We’re simply not gonna hold ourselves up and put ourselves in the firing line so you can start shooting at us.” Again, the Democrats are not doing this because they want to know what’s in the Mueller report. They’re not doing this because they think there’s a silver bullet in there that’s gonna get Trump. JORDAN: I don’t think last week’s hearing was actually about having staff questioning the attorney general. I think it’s like my colleague said earlier. I think it’s all about trying to destroy Bill Barr, because Democrats are nervous he’s gonna get to the bottom of everything. He’s gonna find out how and why this investigation started in the first place. The attorney general said 3-1/2 weeks ago in front of the Senate Finance Committee, “spying did occur.” He said it twice: “Yes, spying did occur.” Third, he said, “There’s a basis for my concern about the spying that took place,” and maybe the most interesting thing: Two terms he used that, frankly, I find frightening. He said there was — in his judgment, he thinks there may have been — “unauthorized surveillance and political surveillance.” Scary terms. RUSH: There was political surveillance, and now… It’s amazing how things that have been hidden for a while are now being produced. John Solomon has found records of a meeting that took place in the Department of Justice that pretty much establish that Christopher Steele knew he was producing the dossier for political usage, that pressure was being applied to Steele to produce this thing, the dossier, before Election Day.Steele was putting pressure on his people that were sourcing this thing to get it done by Election Day because it had political purposes. It was not intelligence related. It was not related to any allegation that Trump or his team were colluding with Russia. It was a political hit piece. It had to be readied by Election Day. There was pressure. It’s been discovered. So political surveillance in addition to unauthorized surveillance. All of this is taking place. The Democrats have been put on notice that we’re going to get to the bottom of it. Do not doubt me when I tell you they are in fits of rage over this (because that’s consistent and constant), but they are afraid of this. The last thing in the world they ever expected was for this to do a 180. This was what was going to get rid of Trump. This was what was going to reverse the election results of 2016. Their entire existence, their lifeblood believed this. They were devoted to it for 2-1/2 years. They thought they had the game fixed. They thought they had everything rigged. They control all the people involved in making this happen, and it didn’t turn out their way — and now, there’s abject fear and panic. BREAK TRANSCRIPT. RUSH: Folks, this contempt citation if they end up voting for it, and they will, holding Barr in contempt, it’s going to backfire on them. The next thing you do after you hold him in contempt is you have to impeach him. What good is holding him in contempt if you don’t do anything about it? And they’re not gonna impeach Barr. They’re not gonna get anybody thrown out of office because The Turtle, Mitch McConnell, just proclaimed all of this is dead on arrival over in the Senate. So this is gonna be it for Nadler and Pelosi. This is it. They’re not gonna be able to get rid of Barr. Barr is not going to be dissuaded from his duties by however this taints him, because it’s gonna end up backfiring on the Democrats like all of this has. All of this has backfired on them in ways they never imagined, and so is this. Because the backfire procedure is underway and is not changed at all. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Now, there could be another reason why the Democrats do want to see the 2% of volume 2 that has been redacted. But to hold the attorney general in contempt for not producing the full unredacted version. They did, by the way. You’ve heard the old saw, “Well, the Republicans held Eric Holder in contempt, and it’s common, it’s nothing.” Yeah, but it took the Republicans 10 months of negotiating with the Department of Justice. Back then it was about documents proving Fast and Furious. You remember what that was. That was the Obama administration attempt to create public outrage about guns to facilitate action on chipping away at the Second Amendment. What Fast and Furious was, was an Obama administration program that took guns, high-powered rifles and so forth, from American gun shops in Phoenix and saw to it that they ended up in the hands of drug cartels. And the drug cartels, of course, they kill people. They murder and they maim people. They do it with guns. And they wanted the news to be that guns from an American gun shop ended up in the hands of drug cartel murderers and thugs and people are now dead. That’s why we need to have controls and more controls over guns. This was the attempt. It was discovered. It was found out. The guns would not have ended up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels were it not for policies of the Obama administration. Okay. So there were documents proving this. Republican Congress wanted them. The attorney general was Eric Holder, and he refused for 10 months to turn them over, and after 10 months of negotiations is when they finally declared him in contempt of Congress. Now ask yourself this. How has being held in contempt of Congress changed Eric Holder’s life? Answer: Zip, zero, nada. It didn’t matter, and in fact most people don’t even remember it. So I’m just telling you that William Barr is not quaking in his boots. This was predictable. The Democrats are nothing if not predictable, particularly when they’re insane and losing their minds. Now, there could be a reason why they want to see the 2% of the Mueller report, volume 2, on obstruction that has been redacted. And I think over on the collusion side it’s 8% that has been redacted. All of this is one of two things: It’s either grand jury testimony, or it is material that gives away techniques and sources used by investigators that we wouldn’t want our supposed enemies to learn. So those are the two primary reasons things would be redacted. Also, there’s a third reason, and that is not to harm people who are peripherally or on the fringe involved in this. They had nothing to do with it, they were interviewed, they were investigated, found they had nothing to do with it, they’re redacted so as no harm comes to their reputation or any of that. So those are the three primary reasons. And all of these reasons are resulting from acts of law passed by Congress that they now want the attorney general to ignore. They want him to essentially break the law and unredact everything and give them full view and knowledge of the Mueller report. And it could well be that one of the things — don’t doubt me — they know that there’s nothing in this Mueller report that’s gonna convict Trump of anything. That’s a dead end, and they know it. They’re just servicing their base. They’re just keeping their lunatic base happy when they act like, “Yeah, there’s something in there. We know there’s something in there that could get Trump in trouble, but Barr’s protecting Trump and that’s why we need to see it.” It’s all a caca, folks. They want their base to think that, but they know that no such evidence exists. They know it’s exact opposite. But maybe they think that there is stuff in there, stuff in the Mueller report that would be really helpful for them to know so that they can protect themselves and the Obama administration from any future investigations of their own criminal activity during Spygate. It could well be that they are afraid of what Barr — well, we know they’re afraid of what Barr’s gonna find. Maybe they want to get a heads-up on the kind of things that were done that Barr is going to discover that they don’t yet know that the Mueller report may have found out and reported. And it may be in grand jury material. It may be in grand jury testimony that it was discovered that the investigation was corrupt or flawed in various ways. They have no way of knowing until they see it. I think the one thing you can be confident in, they don’t want to see the full Mueller report because they honestly think there’s evidence in there to get Trump thrown out of office. They want their voters to believe that, but they know that’s not the case. This is about discrediting Barr going into his investigation and perhaps learning things that Barr is going to find out about them and their buddies. Now, with Trump asserting executive privilege, what’s gonna happen as far as the media is concerned, Pelosi and Nadler, they’re gonna get their little win here, the media’s gonna be breathlessly reporting, “The attorney general has just been found in contempt of Congress by a vote of the Judiciary Committee,” blah, blah. But then that’s all they’ve got, and they’re not getting any more because Trump’s asserted executive privilege, and that means the Mueller report and everything about it and everything to do with the people who were interviewed all stays out of their reach and for months. This is this is a tactical mistake they are making. They’re making a huge tactical mistake for the thrill and excitement of a one or two day news story they’ll look like heroes by holding Barr in contempt. But as to the substance with executive privilege now claimed over all this, and, by the way, most of this that Trump is asserting executive privilege over is probably not gonna be overturned. They’re not gonna get to see the 6(e) grand jury material. It’s still against the law. There’s no judge in the world that’s gonna make the attorney general break the law and release that, the very people who wrote the law claiming it must remain secret or private. So by virtue of asserting executive privilege, the administration is going to deny the Democrat run Congress, the opportunity to see anything more than what they already have, which, in the long game, defeats the exact objective the Democrats went into this trying to achieve. They’ve been frozen out. And even if Trump loses on the executive privilege claims, it’s gonna be months before that is known because it’s gonna have to wind its way through the courts with all the appeals and everything involved. You know how slow that process is. And by the time this gets anywhere near payoff, we’re gonna smack-dab in the middle of the presidential campaign, and all of the oxygen is gonna be taken up by the Democrat primary race. So whatever result of this court case involving executive privilege, yeah, it would end up being a factor in the campaign, but it’s gonna come so long after the emotional attachment to this issue, the emotional reservoir of this is gonna have run dry and they’re gonna have to try gin it all back up again, and they’re not gonna be able to do that.