Matt Whitaker Doesn’t Know What You Mean By ‘Yes Or No?’

Matt Whitaker Doesn’t Know What You Mean By ‘Yes Or No?’

Unfortunately for Matt Whitaker, Matt Whitaker was compelled to voluntarily testify on Capitol Hill Friday before the House Judiciary Committee. There's a lot to unpack in that sentence. Let's start with "Unfortunately for Matt Whitaker, Matt Whitaker...". The public already knew Whitaker was hopelessly conflicted when it came to presiding over the Mueller investigation. Whitaker has a long track record of deriding the special counsel probe publicly and his Trump-friendly views on Hillary Clin
Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.

8 thoughts on “Matt Whitaker Doesn’t Know What You Mean By ‘Yes Or No?’

  1. Wow! Interesting your take on his testimony. Heis, yes or no – have your stopped stealing from your employer? Whitaker didn’t commit perjury at anytime but did make the Democrat side of the committee look not only foolish but also churlish. Just one mans take.

      1. H,
        I get it. No-one can be employed by another yet be so prolific a writer. Democrats could have saved everyone much time by simply asking one simple yes/no question. We know that Whitaker has not interfered with Mueller invest so far, therefore, the one question could have simply been – does he plan on improperly intervening in the Mueller crusade during his final 7 days as Acting Attorney General?
        Remainder of day could have been spent on trying to accomplish something for the Country.

    1. Both you and Whitaker seem incapable of understanding one very simple sentence — Whitaker works for America, not trump.

      His performance yesterday was very transparent — he is nothing more than a shill.

      One question for you – you state he did not commit perjury at any time – so you truly believe that he arrived to work in the WH in the middle of the enormous world-wide news event of the Mueller investigation and he has never once, ever, with any person, no one, had a conversation about this event with anyone in the WH?

      Anyone with one brain cell knows this lying coward was only hired because of his public comment on his opinion of the Mueller investigation and there is no doubt that within 10 minutes after arrival at the WH the Mueller investigation was the primary conversation.

      1. Murphy,
        My point is there is nothing to suggest he has improperly shared information with anyone in the Whitehouse nor has he interfered with the Mueller investigation. Your declaration that he is a “lying coward” isn’t supported by anything other than your apparent hatred for all things Trump.

        1. If this lying coward has never discussed the Mueller investigation with assface, then why in the hell would he try and claim Executive Privilege and refuse to answer their questions?

          and you Mr. Anonymous can go suck an egg.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.