Posted on 10/17/2019 4:19:36 PM PDT by Robert DeLong
wiki:
Zucker went on to Harvard University. He was president of the school newspaper, The Harvard Crimson, during his senior year and as such he encouraged the decades-old prank rivalry with the Harvard Lampoon, headed by future NBC colleague Conan O’Brien.[13] Zucker graduated from Harvard in 1986 with a Bachelor of Arts in American history.[14]
(no link)
Harvard debates merits of Reagan degree
Newswire UPI (USA)
Author: KEN FRANCKLING, UPI
May 13, 1985
At Harvard, where it is said the faculty will debate anything, the hottest issue up for discussion is whether America’s oldest college should give President Reagan an honorary degree at next year’s 350th convocation.
(snip)
At the Harvard Crimson, the student newspaper, editors were also mulling the issue.
‘Obviously, there are feelings on both sides of the issue,’ said newspaper president Jeff Zucker. ‘I’m sure we will take a position. It is too difficult to say which way that will go, but we have always been a liberal institution.’
Well they’re all running it now, perception becomes reality. Mulvany F’t Up but good. No it isn’t what he meant but he said the words.
You wouldn’t have any crescent wrenches left.
I loaned them to my neighbor...
I agree. Mulvaney really blew it. His words were detrimental to Trump!
Are they just trying to ram something through before the doj report comes out with actual criminal referrals for comey Brennan clapper etc??
Same on NBC from Lester Holt. I changed the channel. Didn’t mean to have NBC on in the first place.
CNN = Credibility Near Nothing
Fair enough. To me, it absolutely hinges on whether you believe the motivation for withholding the aid (which the Ukranians never seemed to mention eg; "where is the aid you promised?") and from accounts did not know was being withheld was motivated by conducting an investigation into A: 2016 election shenanigans; meaning, "old news", but definite criminal activity; or B: Biden's gas deal on behalf of his son and the presumed effect it would likely have on Biden's run in 2018.
Now; was this a threat (to withhold aid unless you do X...) or was it a request ABSOLUTELY covered under the criminal investigation treaty signed in 1998(9?) between the US & Ukraine?
This is a threat: "I am holding this loaded gun to the side of your head. If you do not do X, I am going to pull the trigger."
This is a request: "I am planning on going to the range today for my monthly firearms practice session. Can I get a ride from you since you're going that way?" (let's forget about weapon-in-car legal vulnerabilities/considerations)
I never heard anything explicit in the call transcript in the format of "we're withholding aid until you do X". If the inquiry is based upon the supposition or insinuation that such a QPQ (release aid in exch for Biden investigation) was being implied, then what is anyone to do about that if they do not believe the same? The Ukr's apparently did not know the aid was being withheld. They didn't ask for it; so, they weren't missing it; they did not know a gun was pointed at their head by the "threatener". So the question can be asked, "how did they know it was a threat"? If they did not know it was a threat, then where is the pressure/compulsion to act under the threat?
So it depends mightily upon which fork in the road you take, specifically, what was the motivation for Trump even bringing it up? If to investigate 2016, it's following the letter of the existing mutually signed 1998/9 agreement. If it's to shank Biden, then there's arguably some culpability there. Is it possible to discern one, the other, or BOTH? I myself have no idea how one would resolve this question. I'm sure you can guess how I lean.
Lol. I don’t think they were even called on to ask a question.
when you listen onwards from 19mins in, it’s clear the press has no other interest but to try to suggest a quid pro quo. Mulvaney clearly says no there wasn’t and that the President was talking about the interference in the 2016 election, while the press wants to make it about the 2020 election.
Mueller’s investigation should have ended immediately it was publicly known Clinton/Dems funded FusionGPS/dossier via Perkins Coie in Oct 2017. a new investigation should have begun into Clinton/Dems/FusionGPS/Steele etc and this phony TrumpRussia story would have been over long before the mid-term elections.
as it is, having this Mueller nonsnense continue probably led to the Dems taking the House and the phony impeachment nonsense that is now dominating the narrative. it’s a downright disgrace.
Jeff Z even looks like a nasty thug.
Having nuked its own credibility, CNN is now bombing the rubble.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.