General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs anyone else surprised...?
Lt. Col. Vindman says that the official transcript of the 7/25 telephone call is not an accurate transcript.
Haven't we seen this before?
And doesn't the Presidential Records Act apply to any of this? And isn't a violation of that Act against the law?
And isn't THAT an impeachable offense?
Cary
(11,746 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)The "official transcript" is currently under lock and key by the Trump administration. The heavily barbered document the administration released is a compilation of various memoranda of the call. It's not a transcript. Certainly the administration is heavily invested in pretending that the call memorandum is a full transcript, but it isn't. For some reason unclear to me, the media have bought into calling the not-a-transcript a transcript, even though they clearly know the difference. Unless the mix-up is deliberate, and this is the media's effort at confusing the public; but that's not really what they claim to be their mission.
Trump continues to insist that his July 25 phone call was "perfect," whatever that's supposed to mean in his worm-riddled brain. Yet he refuses to release the actual transcript of the call, and because of the media's failure to use accurate language, nobody is pressuring Trump to release the transcript because they think they've already gotten it.
What is being peddled as the transcript is no such thing.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)Nitram
(22,801 posts)version of the conversation. But I'm glad to hear that the redactions may be very significant, and we have a witness to bear testimony to that.
krkaufman
(13,435 posts)Haven't we seen this before?
Yes.
Doctored story Re: Trump Tower meeting, Bill Barrs misleading summary of Mueller report, off the top of my head.
wnylib
(21,465 posts)this before is to the 18 missing minutes from the Nixon tape. Another crooked Republican who needed impeachment.