Mary, did you miss Bush letting Wall Street use the FBI to leak to the media to force Gov. Spitzer out of office? http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1003960,00.html … Why hasn't the DOJ under Bush, Obama, or Trump indicted even one Wall Street CEO for crashing the economy in 2008?
-
-
Replying to @runtodaylight @emptywheel and
That's a bit far afield. Sorry, I have no idea. My guess would be rich guys stick together (political appointees), the guys at the top aren't dumb enough to get their hands dirty, and/or the law didn't actually prohibit their shitty behavior. But your guess is as good as mine.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Marys_musings @emptywheel and
Neither base thinks its "a bit far afield." http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596363/ … Ask Valerie Plame about emptywheel's definitive work on the U.S. invasion of Iraq. https://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-Deceit-Bush-Administration-Media/dp/0979176107 … I'm sure she and Joe are still very grateful. Pat Fitzgerald will confirm ew was his wingwoman in his
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @runtodaylight @emptywheel and
Far afield of what we were discussing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Marys_musings @emptywheel and
Mary, is ew defending Mueller's team from Kory Langhofer's ambush "too far afield?" https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/12/16/trump-transition-team-outraged-to-be-treated-as-transition-team/ … Please note the brief interval from when Mike Allen published and when ew responded. You might want to consider that folks at DOJ and FBI appreciate her work.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @runtodaylight @emptywheel and
Dude, we discussed 702. You're all over the place.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Marys_musings @emptywheel and
Mary, your first sentence is correct. According to you, FISA had nothing to with Spitzer. I have no reason to doubt you. Rhetorical, because your defense in this tweet and others with ew is broad and unmoored to public records, could any be construed as leaking classified info?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @runtodaylight @emptywheel and
Nope. I was actually the only one who cited to a public *unclassified* record. And we were talking about Section 702 which was not yet a law when the Spitzer story broke, which was too bad. I thought he was doing a great job.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Marys_musings @runtodaylight and
Mohamud (district & circuit(), 3 Khan cases, Moalin (district & circuit), In re Sealed Case (FISCR transcript), Gartenlaub (district & circuit), Xi, public recorded Bob Litt appearance. Please tell me how a lawyer claims those aren't references to public unclassified record?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @runtodaylight and
Sorry, correction: I cited a record, described it, and noted why it was relevant to the discussion. You did, indeed, list names of defendants. But, seriously, this went on too long yesterday. It turned out to be an unproductive exchange, so let's let it die its overdue death.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Gotcha. We'll agree that you offered no evidence to support your claim that defendants are getting notice and I raised multiple cases where they clearly did not. Fair enough. Go Pats.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel @runtodaylight and
You did not, however, point me to the evidence that there should have been notice in those cases. Many look to be pretty old. But the bottom line is we aren't going to convince each other. At least we can agree that Tom Brady is the GOAT.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.