Rachel again tonite pushed the narrative that Bannon's house testimony

[triron]

was curtailed because Mueller does not want him to spill the beans to the congress.
Yet everyone else is claiming it was the WH. Anyone have thoughts about this?

[L. Coyote]

1. Good discussion last night. Agreement seems lacking.

Jan 17, 2018b --- Rachel Maddow reports on new details about how Mueller's subpoena prevents Steve Bannon from testifying fully to Congress, and the questions surrounding the peculiar way that Bannon was subpoenaed by both Robert Mueller and the House Intel Committee.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[triron]

3. I'm sure Rachel is aware of all this?

Why would she continue this narrative in the face of it? I am really perplexed.

[AJT]

2. Afraid if he testifies to congress Nunes will report everything to 45.

[triron]

5. exactly. But this does not appear consistent with the reports L Coyote

cites.

[Phoenix61]

4. IMO if Bannon went against the WH

there is nothing they can do other than whine. If, on the other hand, he went against Mueller I can see how there might be some pretty significant repercussions. Bannon may be a lot of things but stupid ain't one of them. He is completely self serving.

[triron]

7. So could this be a cover for why he is avoiding testimony??

Or could this also mean perhaps both narratives are true?
So the WH essentially has been outfoxed by Mueller.

[Iliyah]

6. Sounds like Team Mueller

out maneuvered Team GOP.

[triron]

8. Please expound on what you mean.

[tblue37]

9. I think he is signaling the base that he tried hard to avoid harming Trump (in the House

investigation), but that the grand jury subpoena forced him to respond to Mueller's questions.

[triron]

10. hmm. This is very intriguing.