April 18, 2019

"I'm just going to get ahead of the spin and announce that the Mueller report supports everything I already thought."

"And if the redactions were removed, it would support everything I already though[t] even more."

Glenn Reynolds gets ahead of the spin.

I almost feel sorry for the TV news people. They have to put on a show, but they'll have to talk about the report without reading it. It's 400 pages. What can they do except roll out some pre-written material?

William Barr is doing a press conference on the report at 9:30, and the report won't be available until 11. That pretty much forces everyone to give immense priority to Barr's presentation, and not just for the 1 1/2 hours between 9:30 and 11. They'll have to keep talking about that, because they'll only be getting started reading the material.

What can they do, once 11 rolls around, to avoid continuing to analyze the Barr presentation (which will include denouncing his decision to do a press conference and dominate the news in advance of the release of the text)? You can be cynical and say the text won't affect the media, and everyone will keep saying what they were already saying, and that is, in fact, my baseline assumption. The TV news is awful.

But what could they do if they wanted to immediately and competently cover the report — the report and not the Barr press conference? Presumably, the media have teams of people to read the report quickly and get ready to go on camera with something. There should be different strategies for diving into it. Someone should be ready to go on camera opening the report and trying to read the first page, right there in real time (the way reporters struggled with the final Bush v. Gore opinion on camera, genuinely trying to figure out, under extreme pressure, what the hell happened).

The second person could be quickly reading the introductory section during this time and go live with a deeper explanation, detailing the conclusions, and the particularities of the language in the introduction. Or the second person could be someone who'd completed something that can be done in 2 minutes: an assessment of the extent of the redactions and where in the report the redactions were heaviest (with some ideas about what this means about why the redactions took place).

You could fill the first 20 minutes or more with material like that, and it would all be new and text-based — not about the Barr press conference. During that time, you could have teams of readers with different strategies for getting into the report. Some readers could be assigned to sections of the report, others could be assigned search terms (such as names or letter strings like "obstruct" or "collu"). I don't know how many readers CNN or MSNBC or Fox has to put on the reading task, but use the people you have and break up the assignment. Others who are good at grasping and analyzing material can go on camera without reading. Let them ask the questions in an effort to get what they need from those who've done the reading, and have someone listening to that and directing readers onto specific tasks, and cue up these readers to go on camera as soon as they've come up with answers.

Hey, now I think it would be great fun to run this project! I believe it can be done well. I presume professional newsfolk could come up with an even better strategy than I just sketched out. I'll watch and judge their work. I don't trust them even to try to do it well, and I understand Glenn's cynicism. Or is it cynicism? Maybe he's just doing what he can to make it harder for the media to do a bad job. That's what I'm doing too. I have hope!

140 comments:

exhelodrvr1 said...

The difference is that you are interested in presenting a quick, accurate, honest assessment of the report, so you're looking at it in that context. 90% of the media isn't interested in accurate and honest.

David Begley said...

Fake News already speculating and denouncing.

The other day I heard a news reader on CNN say, “New is news.” My addition? “”News isn’t speculation and opinion which is 90% of CNN.”

The Bergall said...

Even though no one hasn't read or seen it I have already formulated my opinion......

Matt Sablan said...

Most reports will have an executive summary and conclusions section where you can get your initial coverage from. But assuming Barr hasn't been lying about no collusion or obstruction there should be very little new there. Which should be news. But. Most places are going fishing to find the silver bullet to prove Trump and Barr pulled a fast one and are escaping justice. Very few media companies are going to do journalism with this report.

rhhardin said...

The media don't want to do a good job. They want to supply what their audience tunes in for.

What aligns with our usual spin.

Greg Hlatky said...

The word "collusion" occurs in the report. Therefore Trump is guilty of collusion. Impeach!

Kay said...

I’m not too worried about it.

rehajm said...

People have seen it. Those people leaked the juicy parts to CNN.

Jersey Fled said...

The bitter clingers will find some pretense to hang their Trump hate and self-righteousness on, but I have a strange prediction to make.

It's over.

rhhardin said...

No redaction of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted.

rhhardin said...

Every charitable redaction is a stepping stone toward heaven.

mccullough said...

Barr’s press conference is to explain that he met with Trump and they talked about his grandchildren but not the report.

rhhardin said...

Maturity is the ability to redact your feelings within the bounds of dignity.

Chuck said...

Well Althouse I sense a whiff of criticism on your part; of the media for how today is likely to proceed. But the one and only reason that the assembled reporters for Barr's press stunt, er, conference, is that he has chosen to do a press conference for reporters who haven't seen the report and who haven't had a chance to study it. Which is too bad, because those reporters would likely ask some very good questions and perhaps even better than members of the House of Representatives when Barr and Mueller are subpoenaed to appear and produce the full unredacted Mueller report.

Temujin said...

I think they could get in front of the camera and start reading James Joyce's Ulysses and their expert panels would still stake their claim on what it means, with each of them bobbing their heads as the others took turns commenting. And of course, it would show that Trump had obstructed and, indeed, probably colluded.

Off with his head.

I have to sit in an airport for hours today. CNN will be my background noise. I have no words.

AllenS said...

Well, Chuck didn't disappoint us, did he? It will be the same for ABC, CBS, NBC, ABCLSD, CBSBS, and NBCPMS.

Francisco D said...

I recall how badly Rita Cosby of FoxNews totally botched her initial reading of the Bush v. Gore decision.

Just remember, newscasters are primarily actors reciting a script. They are not that bright and very few are actually journalists.

traditionalguy said...

The Media Division of the Dem Party is about to see what walls actually closing in feels like. Their downfall starts today. And Trump laughs.

Quayle said...

Whatever they do, they will all look very serious. It will be comical how serious they will look.

They will all have a very, very serious look on their faces.

(Did I mention how serious they will look? I’m talking really serious.)

iowan2 said...

Barr is having a press conference. The subject matter is unknown. The media has spun our host. We don't know what Barr is speaking about. He maybe is going to announce indictments against persons in the FBI and DoJ, being brought by the IG concerning the faked up FISA warrant. My bet, Barr would speak only to the proccess of redaction, who was involved, Mueller team members, Rosenstien, Barrs hires etc. The rest of the time, my bet is he has unrelated subject matter.

Regardless, by the end of business, the media will find the Pinata is empty, and start spinning the absence of evidence as a crime.

Freder Frederson said...

The hypocrisy here is rank. The vast majority of the commenters on this site have already decided what is in the report and spent a lot of time telling us exactly what the report says.

And now Ann complains that the press to carefully analyze it?!

mccullough said...

Maybe someday the 9/11 Commission report will be unredacted.

Ray - SoCal said...

The Mueller reporter has increased my level of cynicism on politics.

Or perhaps the right term is realism.

The observation that Ken Star in his report had a redacted version ready for release, explains why the Mueller report is a political hit job against Trump. To make it as negative as possible.

How will Trump use this to discredit the resistance?

How will the resistance over reach?

Trump is going to leverage / brand this as part of a witch hunt against him.

Interesting the term warlock hunt is not used, pretty sexist.

AllenS said...

As if you haven't already decided what is in the report, huh, Freder?

wwww said...

It's just a thought, but TV people could wait to comment until they read the report? nah, that's crazy talk. 24 hour news shows are boring and uninformative. Not much point in watching them, for any reason, unless watching a weather report.

stlcdr said...

Might have said this before, but if the Mueller report doesn’t support their age old narrative, the spin will be that mueller was holding back or that the Trump administration has something over him. ‘Why isn’t Mueller documenting the truth?!’

rhhardin said...

The hypocrisy here is rank

A predicate intensifier. The rarity is very.

traditionalguy said...

The people who are really in trouble today are in London and call themselves The British Crown.

All the Queens men actually did collude directly with Obama's men to create a fake attack on Trump showing him to be a Russian operative.This was done to rig the 2016 United States Presidential Election.

And that is a big deal. It is also called an Act of War.

mccullough said...

The Starr Report. The good old days. White water. Jim McDougal and Susan McDougal. Webb Hubbell. Vince Foster. Monica Lewinsky. Linda Tripp. Paula Jones. Vernon Jordan.

Some characters in that saga.

Amadeus 48 said...

Nah. They'll just keep spitting out the same three sentences for the rest of the week. That's what they always do.

Henry said...

I think the "open a random page and quote" would be an interesting exercise.

When John Cage gave his Charles Eliot Norton lectures at Harvard, he used an algorithm based on the i-Ching to select random pieces of text from a large source repository:

Using the computer as an oracle in conjunction with a large source text, he happens upon ideas, which produce more ideas. Chance, and not Cage, makes the choices and central decisions. Such a form is rooted, Cage tells us in his introduction, in the belief that “all answers answer all questions.”

stlcdr said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Henry said...

"All answers answer all questions."

That's John Cage's way of saying what Glenn Reynolds said.

TJM said...

The Dems are such children. They bought into Hildabeast's and Obama's lies. The facts point to Dem collusion with the Russians, e.g. $$$ to the Clintoon Crime Foundation from the Russians, Horndog Clintoon giving $500,000 30 minute speeches in Moscow, the Reset Button, and Obama being caught on a hot mic telling the Russians he could be more "flexible" with them after the 2012 election. Our Pravda Media could report on those 24/7, but they won't because it reflects badly on their party.

As Glen Reynolds would say, think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines and you won't be far off

iowan2 said...

Freder Frederson said...
The hypocrisy here is rank. The vast majority of the commenters on this site have already decided what is in the report and spent a lot of time telling us exactly what the report says.


Trey Gowdy was interviewed yesterday. He said the entire Mueller investigation was a massive waste of time and money. After the proper amount of shocked posturing by the interviewer, Gowdy went on the explain that all the people has talked to, read, listen to, etc. Not a single person on either side of the debate will be swayed by the facts presented in his report. This report will continue to provide what it has always provided. Talking points.

Nothing more, nothing less.

stlcdr said...

Freder, the commenters here are simply taking what Barr has summarized at face value (which is not unreasonable) and thus expect the report to say exactly what Barr has said just in more words.

We also expect that Mueller dug up a range of dubious business dealings - unrelated to anything ‘Russia’ - that needs to be redacted, based on the potential for future prosecution in those matters.

walter said...

Blogger rehajm said...People have seen it. Those people leaked the juicy parts to CNN
--
Perhaps. And it could be presented as a lightning fast digestion a la FBI's Hil's newfound emails.
FWIW, Rosenstein will (reportedly) be accompanying Barr in the Presser.
There is very little mention that Rod and Bob were in on the redactions.
Look for Scowlface Brennan to be spewing on (MS)NBC

Henry said...

Now I imagine brave reporters dashing into conflagration of the Mueller Report to rescue a crown of thorns.

TJM said...


"We also expect that Mueller dug up a range of dubious business dealings - unrelated to anything ‘Russia’ - that needs to be redacted, based on the potential for future prosecution in those matters."

Yep, the Clintoons and their buddies have committed a lot of crimes which need to be prosecuted

stlcdr said...

Using the old Scott Adams technique used for book quotes. A quote from the report:

“Trump...is...guilty...of...collusion...must...prosecute”

walter said...

"Someone should be ready to go on camera opening the report"
Like those ridiculous product unboxing videos. Those definitely kill time.

gspencer said...

Now once, I was down-hearted
Disappointment, was my closest friend
But then your report came and it soon departed
And you know he never
Showed his face again

That's why your report (your report keeps lifting me)
Keep on lifting (keeps lifting me)
Higher (lifting me)
Higher and higher (higher)

I said your report (your report keeps lifting me)
Keep on (keeps lifting me)
Lifting me (lifting me)
Higher and higher (higher)
Alright

Bob Boyd said...

Apprehensive dawn
Narrative dies, journos weep
into the report

MadisonMan said...

The vast majority of the commenters on this site have already decided what is in the report and spent a lot of time telling us exactly what the report says.

I would say that if there were anything fabulous for Democrats in the report, it would have been leaked to the press already. Observation tells me that's how the Democrat Media works with the bureacracy. Freder, do you not pay attention?

Also: rhhardin at 723: LOL!!!

Sebastian said...

"it would be great fun to run this project!"

Sure, having the MSMers who aided and abetted the coup attempt for more than 2 years trying to continue the scandal would be "fun."

EDH said...

"Alright, let's get serious now."

Here's secret footage of the press corps preparing for the Mueller Report's release.

Birkel said...

Certain Leftist Collectivists and their quasi-LLR comrades-in-arms have already deployed the approved talking points.

(moron)
Trump is guilty of something because he's not our kind.
That is obvious.
(/moron)

iowan2 said...

Watching msdnc. They have seen the entire report. It does completely exonerate President Trump. How do I know? They are spending an entire block trashing Barr. He is now a loathsome political hack. His crime? They aren't specific. Must be too horrible to say aloud. Killing the messenger, the message is too ugly to consider.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Someone should be ready to go on camera opening the report and trying to read the first page, right there in real time...


Where have you gone, Geraldo Rivera
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

MayBee said...

It's funny because MOST of their reporting is speculation - did you once label it "preporting"? But suddenly they are up in arms having to wait a few hours.

Also, after years of having Adam Schiff and John Brennan on to spin the story, they can't stand the idea of Barr having a press conference.

What dangerous hacks the media is.

Birkel said...

Freder Frederson just elevated each of us to the same position as MSM news readers.
I concur.

Bully for Freder Frederson for finally making a worthwhile point!

cf said...

The scheme @NPR last night was to lay thick fog of "serious" sounds, the text of which is meaningless, innuendo-nudging word salad.

I continue to be stunned at the abdication of journalistic principles of the last 20 years by those we are supposed to be able to trust. I have to pray there is a reckoning, and that we can look back on this era as the shameful Yellow Journalism 2.0 that it is, ever the optimist am I!

Jon Burack said...

Good for you Ann. You have hope. But then comes change.

stevew said...

If the report supports the released Barr summary then the focus will be on the amount of stuff redacted and what that means to the legitimacy of the findings, and Barr and Mueller (as iowan2 seems to have seen).

jaydub said...

After two plus years of daily lies and bullshit from the cable and network newstitutes, why would anyone, excepting the most rabid douches like our boy Chuck, waste time listening to any more of their drivel. You already know the investigation, itself, was purely political, that there were no indictments for collusion or obstruction, and you know how the report is going to be spun for Democrat purposes. So what's left of the Mueller investigation other than a few more weeks of incoherent BS to fill air time? The report I'm waiting for is the one that details the FBI/Justice Dept/Intel crimes and it's a few months off.

RNB said...

Althouse's suggestion assumes the major news networks can scrape together half a dozen people who can read with comprehension.

Birches said...

We already know what's in the report because there was a summary given. Wow. Get out the tinfoil hats.

Birkel said...

Obstruction has been redefined to mean an innocent man protesting a political prosecution.
The Deep State is revealed in that moment.

It has literally defined as a crime resistance to itself!

What is a quasi-attorney to do?

Bob Boyd said...

"I had two priorities: to save the narrative and a modicum of credibility.

We needed time and excerpts to spin the report, which I clearly didn’t have.

I invited my producer to worry about his own house if he didn’t want to finish his career in a tent under a bridge in New Jersey.

The one who tells you that he’s not afraid in that kind of situation is either very dangerous or foolish. Even for a famous anchor, to go on air with his pants in flames, isn’t that natural.”

gilbar said...

the Mueller report supports everything I already thought.

Doesn't it show A LOT about people, that they don't even have to read something to KNOW it supports EVERYTHING they already thought? What an amazing example of faith in action!

The MSM shouldn't have to pay taxes, they are Obviously a religion

Francisco D said...

Hey Freder,

I don't know what is in the report. It should be interesting.

I have a good sense of what is not in the report - evidence to support the Russian Collusion Hoax.

You must be very sad. The attempt to bring down a sitting POTUS failed. Now the plotters will face the criminal justice system.

Birkel said...

MSNBC is doing its dead-level best to deny that Hillary Clinton funded all the anti-Trump 'information' that Brennan and Clapper spun into an FBI investigation.

They are stupid.

Browndog said...

Based on the predicate that launched this report, I'll take it as seriously as a report on Bigfoot that was based on an investigation launched on a doctored photograph.

Dave Begley said...

Count down clock on CNN.

Maybe they will have a drone camera track the movement of the Mueller Report from DOJ to Congress.

What a bunch of clowns.

Birkel said...

Browndog,
That is not fair.
There are pictures of Bigfoot.
And I saw Bigfoot fight the $6 million man.

That is more evidence than supports the ridiculous Russia conspiracy claims of Brennan and Clapper.

chuck said...

Can we just have cheerleaders? Thanks.

Chuck said...

So is this the blog version of Glenn Reynolds sticking fingers in his ears and yelling, "NYAAH, NYAAH, NYAAH, NYAAH, NYAAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" ?

PackerBronco said...

For the first time in my memory, the press has protested being given a press conference. The very idea!

Ignorance is Bliss said...

At 11:00 Barr should release the report to Congress, just as he promise.

A single, printed copy. Eight point Comic Sans font. Italics Single spaced. Double sided.

stevew said...

"Can we just have cheerleaders?"

Already in place, CNN, MSNBC, Adam Schiff, Brennan, Clapper, Comey and have been cheering on Team Collusion for a solid 2+ years.

Rory said...

"Presumably, the media have teams of people to read the report quickly and get ready to go on camera with something. There should be different strategies for diving into it."

If you've seen "The Naked Prey," that's about how it should be done.

Birkel said...

Let me just point out the inherent weakness of quasi-arguments that emanate from a quasi-attorney.
Brennan and Comey spun lies from Clinton's opp research and the FBI went full Deep State to protect its own interests.

Some people support that actual corruption.
Most of them are quasi-pussies.

Bay Area Guy said...

Here we go, (clears throat), are you ready for my close up?

Collusion!

Manafort!

Pappadopoulous!

Trump Tower!

Emoluments!

Putin!

Whew. I feel much better now. Who can possibly rebut this legal argument?

Birkel said...

Bay Area Guy,
Don't forget that somebody today will claim Michael Cohen really did travel to Prague.
His passport notwithstanding.
His proven existence on those dates in America.

But in no way does that prove illegal spying by Brennan and Clapper.

Just trying to help.

Mike Sylwester said...

I heard that Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller found that Barron Trump's godfather is Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and that the Russian Embassy sends a Russian-language tutor to Barron every morning. Mueller included this finding in his report.

However, William Barr did not mention that finding in his summary.

Bay Area Guy said...

Not to rain on anyone's parade. but Mueller was appointed as "SPECIAL PROSECUTOR" and, as such, he prosecuted some folks, Pappadopolous and 13 Russian trolls.

For others, like Manafort, he diverted the prosecution over to US attorneys (DC and Virginia) to prosecute, because he felt the crimes were not within the scope of Russian collusion or obstruction.

However, as to meat of the matter, he declined to prosecute:

Don Jr.
Kushner
President Trump

For most sane folks, that usually ends the inquiry.

Stoutcat said...

Jersey Fled: I have a strange prediction to make. It's over.

Jim Acosta: Over? It's not over until we say it's over!

Christiane Amanpour: I think this situation absolutely requires that a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part.

Rachel Maddow: And we're just the guys to do it.

https://youtu.be/q7vtWB4owdE

Birkel said...

On MSNBC just now the woman newstalker just said "imagine if Obama had these sort of contacts with Iran's mullahs" without any sense of irony.

And without mentioning $150 billion released to those anti-American fuckheads.

Also, she said if the investigation goes on for 22 months, there must be something to it.

That is the game.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The democratic dies in darkness press must put on a show, indeed.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Stoutcat,

I see what you did -- even without the link. You are now my best friend.

Trump's attorneys to Mueller: You fucked up! You trusted us. Now make the best of it.

I can't wait till they "roll" Nadler out for a press conference. Somebody should subpoena his sous chef. Lotta gravy on those mashed potatoes....

Birkel said...

MSNBC: "It taints Barr."

That is the editorial position.
Brian Williams approves.
And the next comment is about impeachment.

Quasi-lawyers no doubt agree.

walter said...

Methinks the Schitt Squad effort will be to show "unfit".
It's not like Obama, Biden and Hildebeast had/have concerns over being "unfit".
I mean..we all saw that Obama channeling RBG workout video.

Birkel said...

Nadler is spherical.
Rolling him out is discriminatory.
Spherical-Americans need protection from the Trump DOJ.

Barr is tainted!

Leland said...

They could spend the time discussing Notre Dame. Perhaps special interest stories about Holy Week for Christians and Jews. Maybe run a few stories about the conditions away the border. And do all that with a "we will get to the Mueller Report whenever we have news developments worthy of discussion.

But then they wouldn't do that thing of pretending the world is coming to an end and we need to tune in.

walter said...

Brian Williams was there during the redaction process.

Birkel said...

Also, Brian Williams loves the taint.
I wonder how many journalists talk about Barr's taint today.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

I want Brenner frogmarched in Hillary's orange pantsuit.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Brennen

Big Mike said...

I understand Glenn's cynicism. Or is it cynicism?

It’s cynicism. But well-earned and deeply deserved.

PackerBronco said...

Also, she said if the investigation goes on for 22 months, there must be something to it.

It takes a lot longer to prove that something didn't happen than to prove that it did.

MikeR said...

Sounds like law school exams.

Browndog said...

Watching Rosenstein standing there cracks me up. As a central player in the coup to remove Trump, Barr forces him to stand front and center as it crumbles before his very eyes.

He now has Barr's permission to retire.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

We already know what's in the report because there was a summary given. Wow. Get out the tinfoil hats.

Bingo

All the rest of the hype is just the DNC/MSM driven hope that there are salacious details in the report that will somehow salvage their failed narratives.

Fen said...

"The hypocrisy here is rank"

No, that's your mother's stank.

I need to wash up.

Darkisland said...

Blogger traditionalguy said...

All the Queens men actually did collude directly with Obama's men


All the Queen's men (and women?) speaking proper Queen's English could not defeat a Queens man speaking Queens English.

John Henry

Darkisland said...

I think speaking Queens English has probably always been Donald Trump's greatest sin in the eyes of the deep thinkers.

John Henry

Uncle Mikey said...

Almost is the operative term. Crush them for what they've done. Utterly.

Brian said...

Chuck, if you were Mueller would you voluntarily agree to testify before the HJC?

Remember that there will be questions not just about how you investigated the President, but who else you didn't investigate, and how well you managed your team, including Strozk and Page.

Even today Nadler has asked Mueller to voluntarily testify, they aren't issuing subpoenas. Why is that?

I'm not sure Mueller testifies. If I were him I'd just defer Congress to Rosenstein and Barr (his supervisors).

Friendo said...

Bob Boyd @7:42
Democrats dream on
Redactions hide evil deeds
Narrative lives on

Birkel said...

Mueller would have to testify, under oath, about when he determined there was no illegal collusion/conspiracy between Trump campaign operatives and the Russians buying $100,000 of Facebook ads.

That happened in about August of 2017.

Mueller will be hard-pressed to admit that much.

Brian said...

Chuck, I'll go you one better. If you were Nadler would you want to subpoena Mueller? Force him to testify under penalty of obstruction of Congress? What pitfalls await?

You have his report. Mueller won't testify to anything outside of that, at least in open session. Even the redacted parts (his team had a say in the redactions after all).

Mueller's not going to come out and reverse his report and say "Yeah, Trump obstructed". If he was going to say that he would have said it in a report, or in a press conference after Barr's letter.

No, if you're Nadler, you want to be seen demanding he testify, while hoping he doesn't so that you can hold out the "what ifs", and blaming Barr and the administration.

Less than even money he testifies. If they wanted him to testify he'd already be on the schedule. Nadler's letter today not-withstanding.

Hey Skipper said...

@Bob Boyd:

Apprehensive dawn
Narrative dies, journos weep
into the report


Brilliant!

Birkel said...

Brian,
Mueller's going to testify.
His love of the limelight will compel him.

Char Char Binks said...

As long as there's even one word redacted there's room to believe in Russian collusion and obstruction of justice.

Brian said...

His love of the limelight will compel him.

Really? I haven't seen a love of limelight. He has had plenty of opportunity to be in the limelight. He could have shown up to todays' press conference after all. Or held his own.

No value in talking outside the 4 corners of the report. (Or leaks to the press).

Birkel said...

Brian,

You haven't seen the love of limelight because Mueller has been fellated by the press at every turn. He's been getting rim jobs for 20 months in an attempt to topple a duly-elected president. He's known for at least 20 months that there was no Trump campaign involvement with Russian purchases of $100,000 of Facebook ads.

And he stayed in the public eye for all that time.

Brian said...

BTW, the DNC the public demands for Mueller to testify are the tells that they plan to throw Mueller for the failure to bring about the collusion case. If Mueller testifies he's left holding the bag. If he doesn't (while insinuating that he can't because Barr is his boss won't let him) then they can shift that case to Barr.

Mueller doesn't testify.

Greg Q said...

Chuck said...
Well Althouse I sense a whiff of criticism on your part; of the media for how today is likely to proceed. But the one and only reason that the assembled reporters for Barr's press stunt, er, conference, is that he has chosen to do a press conference for reporters who haven't seen the report and who haven't had a chance to study it. Which is too bad, because those reporters would likely ask some very good questions and perhaps even better than members of the House of Representatives


HAHAHAHAHAHA

You're so funny!

The press are a bunch of 27 year old MFA majors who don't know anything about anything, and whose sole purpose is to get spun be the Left to advance whatever "Narrative" the Left finds most useful this second.

Now, it is true that they might ask better questions than the Schiff for brains Democrats in Congress, but that's only because the Democrats in Congress have the job of obstructing any attempt to find anything out, whereas the Democrats in the MSM have the job of getting sound bites to opine on.

No one is forcing any of the press droids to go to Barr's "press stunt." You don't like it? Fine!

Blame the people who are coving it, and giving it air time, not the person who put it on

Greg Q said...

Blogger Birkel said...
Mueller would have to testify, under oath, about when he determined there was no illegal collusion/conspiracy between Trump campaign operatives and the Russians buying $100,000 of Facebook ads.

That happened in about August of 2017.


Yes. Precisely. So please, Lefties, bring out Mueller under oath.

Fen said...

"for Barr's press stunt, er, conference"

When did Barr become Chuck's enemy?

readering said...

Have Rosenstein and Barr become buddies? Barr just made Time 100 and Rosenstein provided the blurb. Fawning. To see how to provide an ironic blub read Christie's for Trump.

Birkel said...

Fen,
15 seconds after Barr proved to be honest?

Birkel said...

readering has nothing of substance to offer.
And offers it fervently.

Drago said...

Fen: "When did Barr become Chuck's enemy?"

At the precise moment it became clear that Barr is unwilling to go along with the far left coup that LLR Chuck supports.

I have to say, watching the quality of LLR Chuck's lefty-approved commentary devolve over time and completely destroy his years-long efforts to falsely position himself as a conservative online has been an absolute delight to behold.

And to think that has happened because Trump has, once again, defeated the treasonous dems/Left/LLR-left AGAIN!!!

What sweet sweet poetic justice.

Trump is laughing at YOU today Chuck, just like he is laughing at all your co-leftist coup-meisters.

What an absolutely glorious day.

GLORIOUS!

Ken B said...

On the question of limelight. I see no evidence Mueller seeks it. Comey surely does.

Freeman Hunt said...

Or viewers could wait until someone has had time to read and analyze it soberly. Then the viewers could turn off the television and read an article by that person because nothing that intelligent and measured will ever be on TV.

Or everyone could get a life and stop obsessing over the "issues" marketed to them.

Birkel said...

Ken B,

If Mueller didn't seek the limelight why didn't he close up show in August 2017 when he found there was no underlying crime to investigate done by Administration officials?

You're TDS is showing. It's fucking sad.

Birkel said...

Freeman Hunt,

AG Barr already did.

Sam L. said...

YOU have hope. I don't.

Freeman Hunt said...

We watched All the President's Men the other night and were laughing out loud every time the journalists worried over getting things exactly right and making sure that information was confirmed. Journalism from another age!

Birkel said...

A lie about journalism from another age.

Bob said...

"I almost feel sorry for the TV news people."

I do not feel the least bit sorry for the news-readers. Few have been honest brokers during the course of the Mueller investigation, and the media invented "instant analysis" decades ago.

The media built this house of cards on a fake foundation of objectivity and omniscience, and they fully deserve to have it fall on them like a ton of bricks.

Seeing Red said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
readering said...

Sounds like Barr's press conference about to become inoperative.

Seeing Red said...

Chuckles...because those reporters would likely ask some very good questions...

Via Insty seen on FB:

I loved Barr’s response to some reporterette who asked why he called President Trump’s situation at the beginning of his presidency, with him, his family, and associates under intense scrutiny and investigation “unprecedented.”
Reporter: “Why do you say that is unprecedented?”
Barr: “Has it happened before?”
Reporter: “No.”
Barr: “Then it’s unprecedented.”

readering said...

Reporters will spend effort demonstrating stories Trump folks called lies confirmed in the report. Report shows Trump viewed lying as a matter of course. Reason his great lawyer Roy Cohn took no notes! (I witnessed Cohn's handiwork for Trump back in '85.)

readering said...

Trump and his circle are facing weeks of harmful stories after this report. What will be do to distract?

Quaestor said...

Sounds like Barr's press conference about to become inoperative.

readering is not listening

Anonymous said...

I am reminded of that December night in 2000 when Bush v. Gore came out and those television reporters were frantically looking through the slip opinion trying to figure out what it meant. They didn't but they tried to bluff their way through it. Hilarious.

Jim at said...

The hypocrisy here is rank. The vast majority of the commenters on this site have already decided what is in the report and spent a lot of time telling us exactly what the report says.

Bullshit, Freder. The reason we 'knew' what was in the report is because if there was anything remotely resembling collusion, we would've found out about it two days into the investigation.

Instead, people like you spent two years and millions of dollars looking for a pony in a pile of shit. While the rest of us were smart enough to figure out there was no pony.

Nothing hypocritical about that. It's actually called using your freaking brain. Try it sometime.

Freeman Hunt said...

When the list of questions Mueller wanted to ask Trump was made available, it was clear to any critical reader that the investigation had nothing. It's not news, it's "news" dished up by media platforms to keep people coming back for seconds and counted for the ad men.

Chuck said...

Fen said...
"for Barr's press stunt, er, conference"

When did Barr become Chuck's enemy?



That's one of the first sensible things, and probably the first sensible question, I've ever seen from you. It's a good question. I'm not sure Barr is my "enemy." I rather expect that you are recalling that at the time of Barr's confirmation, I supported it. Even after his confirmation hearing. I am quite certain that if I had been in the Senate, I'd have voted to confirm Barr.

But Barr has released the Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Election. He's done it with what I think is a mostly reasonable number of redactions. (We'll set aside the specifics of the various redaction disputes until later.)

I see a whole lot of disappointing pro-Trump weaselyness from Barr now. And it is disappointing. But I don't yet see Barr as an enemy. I say that respectfully (it is so strange and refreshing to address you with respect and seriousness) insofar as I think you had some good reason to ask this question.

Martin said...

Or, you could approach this not as click-bait but as an important and complicated matter, have a qualified team analyze it part-by-part, and assembling all that into a coherent analysis that hits the high points (and Fox and MSNBC can and would disagree on what those high points are).

But, that might take 3 or 4 days and God forbid we ever take the time to do something the right way, when we can quickly do it all wrong.

The approach they are taking is like having the TV weather reporter stand in the middle of a storm just to get a visual of a person standing in a storm, but serving no real purpose. Because by next week people will have done the kind of analysis I suggest and those results will be available. But in the meantime we all have to hyperventilate until we pass out, because civilization will end if this (not life threatening) issue that has been percolating for 3 years were to percolate another 3 days.

Birkel said...

"...pro-Trump weaselyness..."

This should be interpreted to mean not indicting Trump for quasi-crimes.

RobinGoodfellow said...

Blogger Temujin said...
I think they could get in front of the camera and start reading James Joyce's Ulysses ...


I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.

RobinGoodfellow said...

Blogger Stoutcat said...
Jersey Fled: I have a strange prediction to make. It's over.


“Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”

RobinGoodfellow said...

Blogger Browndog said...
Watching Rosenstein standing there cracks me up. As a central player in the coup to remove Trump, Barr forces him to stand front and center as it crumbles before his very eyes.


Rosenstein’s look reminded me of the goat chained up as T Rex fodder in Jurassic Park—not sure what’s going on, but expecting something bad.

Fen said...

"it is so strange and refreshing to address you with respect and seriousness"

Don't kiss my ass. You're a fucking traitor. Our first date you'll be beaten to death with your own jawbone.

Smooch!





narciso said...

how about reciting proust, that's almost worth a shot in the agonizer,

Kevin said...

I almost feel sorry for the TV news people. They have to put on a show, but they'll have to talk about the report without reading it. It's 400 pages. What can they do except roll out some pre-written material?

If they assume Barr is telling the truth, they’d be discussing what this means for the Democrats going forward. The news isn’t what’s in the report but the report itself.

But if they assume Barr is lying they have to read 400 pages to look for the “lies”.

Which did our media choose?