DC Tom

That's good, because that's probably how I'm going to be spending my Social Security years.

Additionally, the letter was not the only communication. There was apparently further communication - a call between Barr and Mueller - where Mueller clarified his concern was misinterpretation of the summary by the media and public, and that he had no concerns with the content of the summary. This was both written up in the news articles the Democrats had based their questioning on, and testified to by Narr. Given that, Barr's statement that he wasn't aware of concerns on Mueller's part is entirely truthful, since he had explicit confirmation from Mueller that he had no concerns.

Every player is a knee injury away from being a bust. Ask Ki-jana Carter.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/variety.com/2019/film/news/peter-mayhew-dead-dies-chewbecca-star-wars-1203203816/amp/

Plus...if Facebook is infrastructure that must be secured from tampering for free and fair elections, that argues that this is a First Amendment violation. And election tampering.

Yes, "extra smart person."

Why not? Works for me. Pretty sure, when I croak, the vast majority of people who know me will say "Gee, that's too bad, maybe I should - hey look, a Happy Days marathon on TVLand!"

NOT SHOWN: any time where Josh Allen drops the ball.

But in his defense... ...no, just kidding. He's an indefensible blockhead.

Intersectionality.

No, my posts are fine.

And racism.

She's probably got the best mortician money can buy...

So by your analogy...Trump is corrupt, he's just really, really bad at it?

What's truly amazing is that usually the committee will ask questions to frame a narrative that the media then reinforces with reporting and opinion pieces on leaked info. This time, the media framed the narrative with reporting leaked info that the committee reinforced with questions. Literally, the process was: report what the letter means, ask Barr questions based on that reporting, then publish the letter after it doesn't matter. And argue Barr perjured himself by disagreeing with the initial news reports.

He's not.

Important point, though: it's not illegal or treasonous for the media to make one-sided or dishonest reports, decide to not report exculpatory stories, or even lie.

You ***** idiot. Mueller looked at the evidence, and generated a report which Barr read and released. It's not Barr's job to investigate the investigation.

You can probably make a case for them being "accessories after the fact," if you wanted to flip them.

You joke, but that's pretty much the argument that's going to be made to the courts to block it. Civil rights/invasion of privacy/racism in DNA profiling.

Used to be "all of them." The epidemiological definition of "eradicated" is "no longer endemic in the described area." Even though the US has seen measles cases since it was eradicated in 2002 (in North and South America), all those cases have been imported directly or transmitted from imported cases. That eradication lasted all of 12 years or so, because people are stupid. Now measles is certainly endemic to the US again, as well as Central America. It almost certainly came back to the Americas from Central Africa, probably Somalia (given historical vaccination and refugee patterns).

Avengers: Endgame viewers exposed to measles. Dammit, people...get vaccinated.

I'm surprised they waited until after the hearing to publish. I mean...they break the Mueller letter last night, double-down on it this morning...you know they were doubling down again on the letter with this. I wouldn't doubt they had this written before the hearings were over, if even that late.

How is his name not blocked by the board filter, like *****, *****, #######, and the other Senators?

But c'mon..."Wolfgang Blitzer?" Obvious East German spy...