IT'S NOT A TRANSCRIPT YOU ABSOLUTE CLOWNS

[kpete]

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Pacifist Patriot]

1. It is a transcript.

It's just not a verbatim one. A transcript is a written version of material originally conveyed in another medium. This is how the White House traditionally transcribes presidential phone calls. There is not a "court reporter" type sitting there taking dictation during such calls. So if that is what people are expecting, it just doesn't exist and it was unrealistic to expect that. Transcription from notes and memory is still a transcript. The disclaimers are legitimate and don't detract from what this is - a highly damning document.

[kozar]

2. and redacted version n/t

[Pacifist Patriot]

4. without doubt

[Gothmog]

3. From Prof Hasen-Not a transcript

Link to tweet

[Pacifist Patriot]

6. I'm worried this is going to be another "concentration camp" situation.

Splitting hairs over terminology instead of content. Regardless of which definition of "transcript" one uses, it is still a seriously damning document.

[sinkingfeeling]

5. It's a transcribed summary of a phone call. It certainly would be much longer than 5 pages if

it was a true transcription of a recorded 30 minute call.

[dalton99a]

7. It is another Barr summary.

[Goodheart]

8. The salient question: would this conversation as portrayed have given rise to an URGENT

whistleblower complaint?

I'm no fool. This is a Barr-type summary.

[dalton99a]

9. +1.

[Fiendish Thingy]

10. Isn't the in-house term used "Readout"?

I believe that's the common term used across administrations, to distinguish it from an actual verbatim transcript.

Of course the problem with Trump's read outs is his meandering, disjointed conversational style.

[Atticus]

11. THIS! Jesus Christ, THIS! nt