This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Friday, April 19, 2019

Jerrold Nadler demands 'entire' unredacted Trump report


16 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why would anyone not want to see the entire un redacted Special Council Report? The taxpayers paid for hundreds of Federal Employees, Law Enforcement and judges and now Republicans want to keep that information secret?

Sarkazien said...

You wouldn't want an investigation of you published if you weren't charged with the crime. An investigation is full of rumor, opinion, things remembered differently, false accusations, and speculation. In the Mueller case there are things covered by law that are not supposed to be published. That's "why".

Sarkazien said...

The only thing more unjust than publishing the Mueller report is giving it to Nadless and Shitfer.

Wolf's Head said...

"Why would anyone not want to see the entire un redacted Special Council Report?" anon

Because we have a life.

Johnny Rico said...

Funny how liberal socialist sheep don't want to see the unredacted documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious. Remember, Hussein obummer and eric holder claim executive privledge, and the documents remain closed to public view to this very day. Why nothing on that?

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Sarkazien said...

I think Trump obstructed injustice. The Russian collusion BS was an injustice.

Anonymous said...

Sark,

Is obstruction of Justice an impeachable offensive? Is perjury an impeachable offensive? Is tax evasion an impeachable offensive? Is money laundering an impeachable offensive? Is incompetence an impeachable offensive ?

Sarkazien said...

Look it up.

Wolf's Head said...

"Is obstruction of Justice an impeachable offensive? Is perjury an impeachable offensive? Is tax evasion an impeachable offensive? Is money laundering an impeachable offensive? Is incompetence an impeachable offensive ?" anon

YOU don't know if any of that occurred under Trump.YOU have no proof, just liberal wetdream fantasies.

Incompetence? Have you seen the economy, the manufacturing, the JOBS? Trump is finally getting things done despite severe opposition from dems AND rebuplican'ts.

IF there was ANY evidence of what you claim, it would have been leaked long ago by Establishment Moles.

Sarkazien said...

See "Clinton vs Jones"

Sarkazien said...

"Jones vs Clinton"

Anonymous said...

Wolf,

Let’s first establish what Conservatives believe to be impeachable offensive?

Johnny Rico said...

Again, why don't liberal socialist sheep scream for the unredacted documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious where Hussein obummer ordered the ATF to traffic guns to Mexico for the purpose of bolstering the supposed need for US gun control. People DIED as a result of Operation Fast and Furious. Obummer claimed executive privilege for both he and eric holder. Not a peep from liberal socialist sheep.

I see the noneymouse coward is recovering from the last shellacking he took a couple months back. What kind of meds did your psychiatrist prescribe you and what was the diagnosis?

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Nobody said...

"Let’s first establish what Conservatives believe to be impeachable offensive?"

No, let's first establish that you're an idiot. It is, "Impeachable OFFENSES!" To make that mistake once could be a careless error, which happens to all of us. I count the same mistake SIX TIMES in just your last two posts!!!

The constitution lists impeachable OFFENSES as "high crimes and misdemeanors." It is up to Congress to decide what those are. Thing is, you must be able to PROVE, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that such OFFENSES occurred. The Muller investigation was more than two years of intensive searching for said proof, the issuing of 2,800 subpoenas, interviewing of over 500 witnesses, and execution of over 500 search warrants. Conclusion? No PROOF of collusion. Not enough PROOF of obstruction of justice that would support a prosecution. If just BELIEVING someone is guilty is enough for impeachment, then just wait for the next Democrat president and Republican House. What you can do to Trump, Republicans can do to Sanders, or Biden, or Harris, or any of the other possible Democrat presidents. YOU"RE setting a precedent here. Be very careful...

Nobody said...

And my real wish is that Democrats would get about the business of governing and not waste all of their time and energy (and my tax dollars) trying to bring down the POTUS. Try negotiating legislation with the POTUS on .... well, anything! Who would trust these idiots to govern when they show no inclination to do so right now? Can anyone tell me anything Dems have done with their control of the House other than investigate Trump?

Anonymous said...

Also, the great news is that the ant-Trump media will focus in on the hearings. Then even if the dems do pass something we won’t even hear about it.