They are fighting for their credibility, but it’s a little late.

Last edited Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:06 PM - Edit history (1)

Fact is, BF’s editor, or whatever his position, was a little weak on Maddow.

Heck, I’m for removing trump just because, but today was not good for the cause. But more creditable evidence is to come.

Trump calls Whitaker. Whitaker calls Rob. Rob calls Mueller. Mueller says "whatever".

It doesn’t help us.

they were asked questions about the content, not the finished article. "No comment" might have been fine in principle, but insufficient in practice.

One comment I've seen is that the article is written in such a way that one could interpret the sources as being people connected to Mueller. Obviously this gives Trump/Whitaker/Barr et al a pretense to mess with Mueller (i.e. his team is leaking to the media about an ongoing investigation). By putting out a statement about the article being inaccurate, his team effectively denies being the sources in the article, and removes that pretense for interference from above.

Last edited Sat Jan 19, 2019, 01:34 AM - Edit history (1)

To be top-secret, they must neither confirm nor deny.

Who were the two federal law enforcement officials cited as sources by Cormier and Leopold? Possible leak sting.

Its exactly what would be expected of Trump and Cohen. Buzzfeed and Mueller aside.

Just start the impeachment process already. I'm sure they will find him guilty of million crimes once they get their investigation going.

Until after it was published.