I see that the ol' Twittersphere is discussing things involving "the Mueller Report," "Trump," and "exoneration," so I'm just going to drop this here lawfareblog.com/obstruction-ju…
There’s useful info here. But Barr’s self justification is far too cute. The guy you thought was bad was actually (according to him) good and principled, the whole time!
This is a) an excellent response to what the NY Post did (publish nonconsensual pornography, which I'm not going to link to), and b) a response that nobody should have to give
The idea that publications will release intimate images of people without their consent—even, yes, candidates for public office!—is a dangerous guardrail to breach. This is far less high-profile than the Katie Hill case but it's still very bad lawfareblog.com/nonconsensual-…
Once again, we end up in a weird situation where the platforms are actually providing more guidance than "traditional" news orgs: Twitter bans nonconsensual pornography (though it seems unclear whether the account that initially posted this image was actually taken down)
I'm not blaming non-journalists for not knowing what's in the report. I am saying that many (not all!) journalists and media organizations whiffed on reporting this in the moment, and that it's irresponsible to write about this news now as if we haven't known it for two years.
The explicit comparison of the 1/6 commission to the 9/11 commission here just seems ... wild. The 9/11 commission would not have worked if half the members had belonged to a political party whose supporters included a lot of people in favor of 9/11 homeland.house.gov/news/press-rel…
I would be interested to know to what extent those two cross-cutting attitudes map onto one another. Anecdotally it seems to me that there's some pretty significant correlation
Sometimes this can have paradoxically good effects, like getting Never Trump conservatives to start taking voting rights seriously!