justifying why he was trying to get rid of comey, but then his lawyer said don t, so is there really any consternation about whether it was appropriate to have this kind of two-prnonged fbi probe? it is whether the president is acting wittingly or unwittingly as an agent of the russian government. that should be a bombshell indictment in and of itself. the fact that s not a crazy scenario is one of the most amazing things we have ever seen in american politics. i think that point is worth emphasizing. the fbi was sitting there in the spring of 2017, yes, 2017, watching the sort of different threads come together. jim comey had these weird
detailed reporting and evidence about the president s efforts to obstruct this serious ongoing criminal investigation into himself and his administration and this campaign, you would think you were reading a bombshell indictment, right? that signaled the end of a presidency, or at least the middle of impeachment proceedings, right? but instead that s just the public record. just piled up piece by piece, week after week, month after month into what has ended up into a really big mountain of evidence just on the issue of obstruction of justice. you don t realize how big the mountain is until you realize how far down the ground is, but we re way up here now. on the day after the midterm election when the president fired attorney general jeff sessions and installed matt whitaker in his place, he admitted almost instantly in an interview with the daily caller he put matt whitaker there because of the russia investigation.
prosecutor. but now, with this new development with manafort, now the president is doing that with a convicted felon, to whom he s also openly dangling a pardon. i mean, if you had been sealed in a vault for the last two years, and you came out today and somebody handed you that litany of basically uncontested detailed reporting and evidence about the president s efforts to obstruct this serious ongoing criminal investigation into himself and his administration and his campaign, you would think you were reading a bombshell indictment, right? that signaled the end of a presidency, or at least the middle of impeachment proceedings, right? but instead that s just the public record. just piled up piece by piece, week after week, month after month, into what has ended up into a really big mountain of evidence just on the issue of obstruction of justice. you don t realize how big the mountain is until you realize
white house. so maybe that made it go down easier. now we all await this visit to the white house which will be timed to the midterms i presume? the white house is saying this fall. but you know, early november is lovely in washington. while this terrible new series terrible new series of the man in the high castle plays out in our real lives now and we await this next putin visit, we are also still waiting for some other shoes to drop with some of the legal cases around the russia attack and the question of american cooperation and coconspiring with that attack. and some of what we re waiting for is fairly straightforward. obviously, the felony criminal trial of paul manafort is due to start in less than a week. potential jurors are expected to show up for the paul manafort case, starting on tuesday. also in the gru case, that bombshell indictment of 12
for is fairly straightforward. the fell criminal child is due to start in less than a week. potential jurors are expected to show up for the paul manafort case, starting on tuesday. also the bombshell indictment. we don t expect the military agents to show up any time soon but we are waiting some revv plagss we expect to derive if that indictment. for example, it also says bluntly, or or about august 15, 2016, the conspirators, posing as goosifer 2.0, received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for the u.s. congress. based on the timing, this means it was a general election, congressional candidate in 2016