MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse
- Thread starter CdnGuy
- Start date
xy5jn0
New Member
The publisher of a website that serves as a platform for white nationalism was a guest last weekend at the home of President Trump’s top economic adviser, Larry Kudlow.
Peter Brimelow attended the gathering, a birthday bash for Kudlow, one day after a White House speechwriter was dismissed in the wake of revelations that he had spoken alongside Brimelow on a 2016 panel.
Brimelow, 70, was once a well-connected figure in mainstream conservative circles, writing for Dow Jones and National Review. But over the past two decades, he has become a zealous promoter of white-identity politics on Vdare.com, the anti-immigration website that he founded in 1999.
While Brimelow has long personally rejected the label of “white nationalist,” he acknowledged to the Harvard Crimson in 2016 that his website does “certainly publish a few writers I would regard as ‘white nationalist’ in that they stand up for whites just as Zionists, black nationalists do for Jews, blacks, etc.”
Kudlow said Tuesday that Brimelow was an invited guest to his birthday party at his Connecticut home and has been someone he has known “forever,” going back to their work in financial journalism. Kudlow expressed regret when he was described details of Brimelow’s promotion of white nationalists on Vdare.com.
“If I had known this, we would never have invited him,” Kudlow said. “I’m disappointed and saddened to hear about it.”
Kudlow said that Brimelow’s views on immigration and race are “a side of Peter that I don’t know, and I totally, utterly disagree with that point of view and have my whole life. I’m a civil rights Republican.”
xy5jn0
New Member
Ben Shapiro ...
Turning ... LOL
Turning ... LOL
xy5jn0
New Member
xy5jn0
New Member
xy5jn0
New Member
xy5jn0
New Member
xy5jn0
New Member
xy5jn0
New Member
Hope you're happy never Trumpers What if its your daughter next time? BUILD THE WALL
xy5jn0
New Member
THREAD. WHAT TO MAKE OF GIULIANI'S CLAIM THAT MUELLER SAID HE CAN'T INDICT TRUMP.
1. Don't forget the context: it's pretty incredible that we are having a conversation involving law enforcement officials about whether Trump can be indicted. That's astounding.
2. And don’t forget the source: Giuliani. He’s not exactly a stickler for details.
3. Context may really matter here. Why did Mueller say this? Is it because Trump’s lawyers said they were thinking of taking 5th Am priv against self incrimination, and Mueller said there can be no "incrimination"?
4. If so, the DOJ policy against indictment of a sitting President may actually hurt Trump, and be an argument against his ability to stay silent. It might be a way to ferret out truth.
5. The reporting is clearly incomplete. The Special Counsel regs, which I drafted, do NOT say DOJ policy must always be followed. They say that a Special Counsel can ask Acting AG (Rod Rosenstein) for permission to depart from DOJ policy and rules.
6. If Mueller has the goods on Trump, as I’ve said before, I think he will ask Acting AG to indict. The regs put a thumb on the scale in favor of Mueller doing so. If Rosenstein says no, it triggers a report to Congress-both majority and minority parties.
7. Otherwise, there is not necessarily such a report about these matters. The Special Counsel regulations dispensed with the "final report" requirement in the Independent Counsel Act. Reports are permissible, but not mandatory (but they are when Special Counsel overruled).
8. So I do not see this story as good for President Trump, in any way. END
Thread by @neal_katyal: "THREAD. WHAT TO MAKE OF GIULIANI'S CLAIM THAT MUELLER SAID HE CAN'T INDICT TRUMP. 1. Don't forget the context: it's pretty incredible that w […]"
1. Don't forget the context: it's pretty incredible that we are having a conversation involving law enforcement officials about whether Trump can be indicted. That's astounding.
2. And don’t forget the source: Giuliani. He’s not exactly a stickler for details.
3. Context may really matter here. Why did Mueller say this? Is it because Trump’s lawyers said they were thinking of taking 5th Am priv against self incrimination, and Mueller said there can be no "incrimination"?
4. If so, the DOJ policy against indictment of a sitting President may actually hurt Trump, and be an argument against his ability to stay silent. It might be a way to ferret out truth.
5. The reporting is clearly incomplete. The Special Counsel regs, which I drafted, do NOT say DOJ policy must always be followed. They say that a Special Counsel can ask Acting AG (Rod Rosenstein) for permission to depart from DOJ policy and rules.
6. If Mueller has the goods on Trump, as I’ve said before, I think he will ask Acting AG to indict. The regs put a thumb on the scale in favor of Mueller doing so. If Rosenstein says no, it triggers a report to Congress-both majority and minority parties.
7. Otherwise, there is not necessarily such a report about these matters. The Special Counsel regulations dispensed with the "final report" requirement in the Independent Counsel Act. Reports are permissible, but not mandatory (but they are when Special Counsel overruled).
8. So I do not see this story as good for President Trump, in any way. END
Thread by @neal_katyal: "THREAD. WHAT TO MAKE OF GIULIANI'S CLAIM THAT MUELLER SAID HE CAN'T INDICT TRUMP. 1. Don't forget the context: it's pretty incredible that w […]"
xy5jn0
New Member
xy5jn0
New Member
Similar threads
