Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: THE DETAILS OF TRUMP'S HUSH MONEY PAYMENTS ARE ABOUT TO GO PUBLIC [View all]ancianita
(35,950 posts)36. Barr is going down behind this.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
42 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Rachel gave me hope about this tonight. Today I've felt pretty hopeless. Tomorrow, tomorrow...
ancianita
Jul 2019
#2
How can another court -- and what other court could-- stop this judge's ruling. Doesn't make sense.
ancianita
Jul 2019
#6
Brett knows better. Whoever delivers the message wouldn't get past the secretary.
ancianita
Jul 2019
#29
I think that we should not be saying that tRump is "immune" or everything drops off
Doitnow
Jul 2019
#15
We know that. We're thinking together, that's all. And you never know the influence DU has elsewhere
ancianita
Jul 2019
#28
I thought Barr's behind-the-scenes pressure caused this drop, which enraged Pauley. The
ancianita
Jul 2019
#8
And they lost! I want to send this judge a present, a token of my thanks. The more unredacted docs,
ancianita
Jul 2019
#40
Definitely. While scofflaw fakeprez runs his mouth, the Law will ensnare him.
ancianita
Jul 2019
#12
Haha. Yes. I hope so, too. But hey, he was born for this. He'll die trying to do what he's doing now
ancianita
Jul 2019
#16
I have a feeling a court injunction will come from another court stopping this release.
kimbutgar
Jul 2019
#17
Only a higher court can do this. What's a higher federal court to stop this? Name it. When a
ancianita
Jul 2019
#19
We don't know all of them. These redactions must name names, is what I'm thinking. It's a big deal
ancianita
Jul 2019
#25
Yes, you're right. But that has nothing to do with the ammunition this gives the Democratic leaders.
ancianita
Jul 2019
#26
That's how Rachel read it, too. He WAS pissed, regardless of neutral judicial wording.
ancianita
Jul 2019
#33