9/26: Acting DNI hearing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maguire isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

I don't know. He seems fine. He also seems scared. I'd hate to be in his shoes. Schiff destroyed his logic and Nunes is treatig him like a hostile witness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nunes is focused on leaks, and is saying leaks are coming from intelligence agencies.

Actually the leaks were coming from the White House to front-face the material in as benevolent a manner as possible.

Nunes was going for the 'deep state' narrative and McGuire wasn't having any of it.

[Anonymous]

I just posted on the other thread: Nunes is saying he's mad the public found out and he prefers this is handled privately in secret. Real honorable. He's mad the criminal was caught red handed.

[Anonymous]

Who made the decision to defy the subpoena?

- blah blah blah, not answering the question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Schiff mentions conflict of interest.

Maguire explains that this was a serious matter, and says he had to work with what he'd got, because Legal Counsel said it was not an urgent matter. He does not know the whistle-blower. Maguire thinks the whistle-blower did the right thing.

When the law says "Shall forward to the Congress" and among the named culprits are the people at DOJ and the White House, consulting with the DOJ and White House is a direct conflict. McGuire reallt erred in that.

I wouldn't say so. We're here, having this hearing today. The report was released to the public earlier today.

It's pretty basic that you don't tip off a defendant.

[Anonymous]

So Himes is upset it took 7 days longer for the complaint to be forwarded after it was approved by Schiff? Director took time to have it go through proper review; it did and now it's out in the open. Sorry Dems, another conspiracy down the tubes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Schiff mentions conflict of interest.

Maguire explains that this was a serious matter, and says he had to work with what he'd got, because Legal Counsel said it was not an urgent matter. He does not know the whistle-blower. Maguire thinks the whistle-blower did the right thing.

When the law says "Shall forward to the Congress" and among the named culprits are the people at DOJ and the White House, consulting with the DOJ and White House is a direct conflict. McGuire reallt erred in that.

I wouldn't say so. We're here, having this hearing today. The report was released to the public earlier today.

By law, it should have been delivered to the Congress a month ago, without any consultation to DOJ or the White House.

THIS. I understand everyone was in a bind and this was unprecedented and everyone is a thousand times more concerned with executive privilege, or rather what this administration deems to be executive privilege, than they should be, but this was not at all how this was supposed to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Schiff mentions conflict of interest.

Maguire explains that this was a serious matter, and says he had to work with what he'd got, because Legal Counsel said it was not an urgent matter. He does not know the whistle-blower. Maguire thinks the whistle-blower did the right thing.

When the law says "Shall forward to the Congress" and among the named culprits are the people at DOJ and the White House, consulting with the DOJ and White House is a direct conflict. McGuire reallt erred in that.

I wouldn't say so. We're here, having this hearing today. The report was released to the public earlier today.

By law, it should have been delivered to the Congress a month ago, without any consultation to DOJ or the White House.

Eh. This involved the president directly. And it will bring him down. Consulting with the DOJ and WH isn't going to prevent that.

McGuire was in a terrible position, because the law didn't contemplate this situation. He has been doing the best he can. And we can see that it's enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Schiff mentions conflict of interest.

Maguire explains that this was a serious matter, and says he had to work with what he'd got, because Legal Counsel said it was not an urgent matter. He does not know the whistle-blower. Maguire thinks the whistle-blower did the right thing.

When the law says "Shall forward to the Congress" and among the named culprits are the people at DOJ and the White House, consulting with the DOJ and White House is a direct conflict. McGuire reallt erred in that.

I wouldn't say so. We're here, having this hearing today. The report was released to the public earlier today.

By law, it should have been delivered to the Congress a month ago, without any consultation to DOJ or the White House.

If this is people in the IC, maybe they have them more rope to hang themselves. Now they have the initial crime PLUS obstruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Schiff mentions conflict of interest.

Maguire explains that this was a serious matter, and says he had to work with what he'd got, because Legal Counsel said it was not an urgent matter. He does not know the whistle-blower. Maguire thinks the whistle-blower did the right thing.

When the law says "Shall forward to the Congress" and among the named culprits are the people at DOJ and the White House, consulting with the DOJ and White House is a direct conflict. McGuire reallt erred in that.

I wouldn't say so. We're here, having this hearing today. The report was released to the public earlier today.

It's pretty basic that you don't tip off a defendant.

Frankly, giving it to Nunes would also be tipping off the defendant.

[Anonymous]

The written complaint presents the conversation in a very different manner from the transcript. Of course, reading WAPO's front page also presents a very different view than the transcript which is buried deep in the A section.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So Himes is upset it took 7 days longer for the complaint to be forwarded after it was approved by Schiff? Director took time to have it go through proper review; it did and now it's out in the open. Sorry Dems, another conspiracy down the tubes.

When Barr and Trump re specifically named in the complaint, the proper review is NOT with Barr and Trump.

This isn't hard to understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Schiff mentions conflict of interest.

Maguire explains that this was a serious matter, and says he had to work with what he'd got, because Legal Counsel said it was not an urgent matter. He does not know the whistle-blower. Maguire thinks the whistle-blower did the right thing.

When the law says "Shall forward to the Congress" and among the named culprits are the people at DOJ and the White House, consulting with the DOJ and White House is a direct conflict. McGuire reallt erred in that.

I wouldn't say so. We're here, having this hearing today. The report was released to the public earlier today.

It's pretty basic that you don't tip off a defendant.

+1
There are two main reasons that a whistle-blower complaint is kept secret until it has been investigated - (1) to guard against a frivolous or fraudulent complaint and (2) to not tip off the people accused of wrong-doing so they can't destroy evidence, threaten or intimidate witnesses, or otherwise cover-up before the complaint can be investigated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So Himes is upset it took 7 days longer for the complaint to be forwarded after it was approved by Schiff? Director took time to have it go through proper review; it did and now it's out in the open. Sorry Dems, another conspiracy down the tubes.

When Barr and Trump re specifically named in the complaint, the proper review is NOT with Barr and Trump.

This isn't hard to understand.

Who else is going to review it?

We're having this hearing today. I'm not sure exactly what you're complaining about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Schiff mentions conflict of interest.

Maguire explains that this was a serious matter, and says he had to work with what he'd got, because Legal Counsel said it was not an urgent matter. He does not know the whistle-blower. Maguire thinks the whistle-blower did the right thing.

When the law says "Shall forward to the Congress" and among the named culprits are the people at DOJ and the White House, consulting with the DOJ and White House is a direct conflict. McGuire reallt erred in that.

I wouldn't say so. We're here, having this hearing today. The report was released to the public earlier today.

By law, it should have been delivered to the Congress a month ago, without any consultation to DOJ or the White House.

Eh. This involved the president directly. And it will bring him down. Consulting with the DOJ and WH isn't going to prevent that.

McGuire was in a terrible position, because the law didn't contemplate this situation. He has been doing the best he can. And we can see that it's enough.

The best he can do is to follow the law and deliver the complaint to the Congress within 7 days of receipt as the law mandates.