To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (2293 ) 4/22/2019 9:47:21 PM From: sense Read Replies (2) | Respond to One of the more obvious issues in "legal terms" of the effort in co-opting legitimacy... ?prior post of a link Pelosi also conceded Democrats don’t all agree on what course they should take following the report’s release last week"... misses what matters in prior history... what Pelosi knows that others don't... about the ownership of the origin of the scheme to "get Trump" using the FBI and DOJ... in ways far outside the legitimacy of the law. That having failed... leaves only the need for fully exposing what it was... how it failed... and who is at fault. The old guard in the Democratic Party... are not going to survive the truth coming out. Exposing what it was that failed... and who is at fault... IS going to happen. Nancy knows it. Many if not most others may not know what they were signed up to. The most desperate among them clearly do... Pelosi, Shumer, Feinstein, Cummings, Nadler... Schiff, Swalwell... are desperate for a reason... Brennan, Comey, Clapper... Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama. The lucky ones are the names people already know, who might avoid some of what's coming by having already gotten a bit of it. I doubt Peter Strzok or Andrew McCabe are going to dodge additional pennance, though. Remember the look on Rosensteins face as Barr read his statement on Mueller's Report. Yeah. It is "important to know that the facts regarding holding the president accountable can be gained outside of impeachment hearings." means VERY different things depending on what you already know. But, that's not what I intended to address, that being this: "As we proceed to uncover the truth and present additional needed reforms to protect our democracy, we must show the American people we are proceeding free from passion or prejudice, strictly on the presentation of fact," she wrote. If you read that in context of "let's keep going after Trump" you get one thing... if you know the effort to "get Trump" was a crime far worse than Watergate... and that it has failed spectacularly... you read another. " present additional needed reforms" ? That's the the only real content I see in the entire statement. It's the only part that is in any way actionable... all of the rest being blather at best. I expect there will be some disagreement about what that might mean. I don't expect it will be possible for that to be settled until after the next election. I'm probably seeing that differently, too, than the herd of wannabees lining up on the left for what they assume will be a cakewalk... because... he's so orange.
