and the leg humper wonders why...

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/201...bama-tell-the-whole-truth/?xid=rss-topstories

This is obviously early on in the trial, but given that it is sworn testimony now... it is an example of why people laugh at organizations that 'investigate' themselves and determine that 'we did nothing wrong'.

 

[Bonestorm]

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/201...bama-tell-the-whole-truth/?xid=rss-topstories

This is obviously early on in the trial, but given that it is sworn testimony now... it is an example of why people laugh at organizations that 'investigate' themselves and determine that 'we did nothing wrong'.

What was inaccurate about the Craig report?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

What was inaccurate about the Craig report?

Balanoff's testimony, given under oath, raises questions about what else Craig left out of his 2008 report. It is not explained, for instance, why the Craig report mentions a conversation Balanoff had with Jarrett about the seat, but not the one Balanoff had with Obama. Asked about Balanoff's testimony at Tuesday's press briefing, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he would not comment on “an ongoing trial.”

The Balanoff disclosures stop short of incriminating Obama in Blagojevich's allegedly criminal scheme. But they shed new doubt both on President Obama's declared commitment to transparency and the credibility of the staff account of his role in the Blagojevich matter. If the Craig report chose to omit any mention of a conversation with a known go-between for Blagojevich, in which the President is, at least, understood to be recommending Jarrett, then there is no telling what other salient facts were also left out. The trial continues today.



Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/201...whole-truth/?xid=rss-topstories#ixzz0sNGPiIvR