SDNY

[Anonymous]

The only difference between yesterday and today is that Barr has openly exposed his intention to obstruct justice.

Infrastructure Week is LIT!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

Nor has anyone explained why Barr would lie about this guy leaving his position.

Barr is corrupt. Needs to go to prison

There is a huge difference between making ethically questionable decisions and committing a criminal act. That’s why Hillary isn’t in prison and why Barr won’t be either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

Nor has anyone explained why Barr would lie about this guy leaving his position.

Well, that one has some easy explanations. Possibly, he thought Berman would agree. Relatedly, he may have thought the pressure of a public announcement would cause Berman to back down.

This is what I think. But it's really dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

The fact that Barr and Trump want him in the position creates the presumption that he is in on the obstruction of justice scheme.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

The fact that Barr and Trump want him in the position creates the presumption that he is in on the obstruction of justice scheme.

That’s just dumb. He’s done a good job at the SEC and he is hardly a Trump loyalist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

Nor has anyone explained why Barr would lie about this guy leaving his position.

Well, that one has some easy explanations. Possibly, he thought Berman would agree. Relatedly, he may have thought the pressure of a public announcement would cause Berman to back down.

Why would he want Berman to back down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

The fact that Barr and Trump want him in the position creates the presumption that he is in on the obstruction of justice scheme.

That’s just dumb. He’s done a good job at the SEC and he is hardly a Trump loyalist.

I'm a good engineer. Next week I will be your dentist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

Not necessarily nefarious but likely a conflict of interest. Clayton counted Deutsche Bank as a client and defended them in a massive Russian money-laundering scandal. “There is a criminal investigation into Deutsche Bank occurring in SDNY,” Stedman said, adding: “Deutsche Bank is Trump's lender.”

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

And you should be able to find many articles about Trump and DB. "Donald Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank has lasted longer than any of his marriages and is cloaked in more secrecy."

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

The fact that Barr and Trump want him in the position creates the presumption that he is in on the obstruction of justice scheme.

That’s just dumb. He’s done a good job at the SEC and he is hardly a Trump loyalist.

Based on what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

Not necessarily nefarious but likely a conflict of interest. Clayton counted Deutsche Bank as a client and defended them in a massive Russian money-laundering scandal. “There is a criminal investigation into Deutsche Bank occurring in SDNY,” Stedman said, adding: “Deutsche Bank is Trump's lender.”

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

And you should be able to find many articles about Trump and DB. "Donald Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank has lasted longer than any of his marriages and is cloaked in more secrecy."

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

And the easy answer is that he would recuse himself from cases where he has a conflict of interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

The fact that Barr and Trump want him in the position creates the presumption that he is in on the obstruction of justice scheme.

That’s just dumb. He’s done a good job at the SEC and he is hardly a Trump loyalist.

I'm a good engineer. Next week I will be your dentist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

Not necessarily nefarious but likely a conflict of interest. Clayton counted Deutsche Bank as a client and defended them in a massive Russian money-laundering scandal. “There is a criminal investigation into Deutsche Bank occurring in SDNY,” Stedman said, adding: “Deutsche Bank is Trump's lender.”

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

And you should be able to find many articles about Trump and DB. "Donald Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank has lasted longer than any of his marriages and is cloaked in more secrecy."

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

And the easy answer is that he would recuse himself from cases where he has a conflict of interest.

No one does that in this administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

The fact that Barr and Trump want him in the position creates the presumption that he is in on the obstruction of justice scheme.

That’s just dumb. He’s done a good job at the SEC and he is hardly a Trump loyalist.

I'm a good engineer. Next week I will be your dentist.

First of all, that’s not a remotely comparable analogy. I lawyer who has done mostly civil investigative work (that often proceeds in parallel with criminal cases) is far more qualified to lead a prosecutor’s office than an engineer would be to serve as a dentist. Your analogy is frankly ridiculous.

And even if you criticize his qualifications for the job, that’s a far cry from saying he is in on an obstruction scheme.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

Not necessarily nefarious but likely a conflict of interest. Clayton counted Deutsche Bank as a client and defended them in a massive Russian money-laundering scandal. “There is a criminal investigation into Deutsche Bank occurring in SDNY,” Stedman said, adding: “Deutsche Bank is Trump's lender.”

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

And you should be able to find many articles about Trump and DB. "Donald Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank has lasted longer than any of his marriages and is cloaked in more secrecy."

https://www.ft.com/content/efbc8fd4-99a5-11ea-8b5b-63f7c5c86bef

And the easy answer is that he would recuse himself from cases where he has a conflict of interest.

Sure. Anything is possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deutsche Bank

Still no one has explained what supposedly nefarious ties to DB Clayton has.

The fact that Barr and Trump want him in the position creates the presumption that he is in on the obstruction of justice scheme.

That’s just dumb. He’s done a good job at the SEC and he is hardly a Trump loyalist.

I'm a good engineer. Next week I will be your dentist.

First of all, that’s not a remotely comparable analogy. I lawyer who has done mostly civil investigative work (that often proceeds in parallel with criminal cases) is far more qualified to lead a prosecutor’s office than an engineer would be to serve as a dentist. Your analogy is frankly ridiculous.

And even if you criticize his qualifications for the job, that’s a far cry from saying he is in on an obstruction scheme.

DP. No, the analogy was spot on. Sorry it hurt your feelings.