The sheer hypocrisy of Jerry Nadler

[hislegacy]

When the Special Investigation was about Clinton, he said the report has to remain secret and cannot by law be released.

Fast forward

Now the Special Investigation is about his political adversary and by law, it must be released.

Nadler Claimed Congress Is 'Entitled' to Unredacted Mueller Report ― That's Not How He Felt in 1998

 

[Hank77]

Their Nadler quotes are incomplete and don't give a true representation of Nadler's views on the Starr report and the Mueller report. They don't point out several differences in the timing and circumstances when those statements were made.
Trump Misstates Nadler's Position on Starr Report - FactCheck.org

 

[Pommer]

Their Nadler quotes are incomplete and don't give a true representation of Nadler's views on the Starr report and the Mueller report. They don't point out several differences in the timing and circumstances when those statements were made.
Trump Misstates Nadler's Position on Starr Report - FactCheck.org

Aww, yet another “GOTCHA thread” all shot to heck!

 

[PeachyKeane]

Their Nadler quotes are incomplete and don't give a true representation of Nadler's views on the Starr report and the Mueller report. They don't point out several differences in the timing and circumstances when those statements were made.
Trump Misstates Nadler's Position on Starr Report - FactCheck.org

You just had to go and ruin it, didn't you?

 

[hislegacy]

The video speaks for itself.

From the link:

During the Clinton investigation, Nadler also claimed that the judiciary committee should be able to make reductions to protect the “privacy of third parties.” He warned that Congress shouldn’t be able to see the unredacted report because of the risk for politically motivated leaks.​

“That means fifty people are going to see it. It’s going to leak out and those privacy rights are going to be violated,” warned Nadler.


He doesn’t seem to care about privacy rights anymore. Nor does he mind when leaking information occurs.

 

[PeachyKeane]

The video speaks for itself.

From the link:

During the Clinton investigation, Nadler also claimed that the judiciary committee should be able to make reductions to protect the “privacy of third parties.” He warned that Congress shouldn’t be able to see the unredacted report because of the risk for politically motivated leaks.​

“That means fifty people are going to see it. It’s going to leak out and those privacy rights are going to be violated,” warned Nadler.


He doesn’t seem to care about privacy rights anymore. Nor does he mind when leaking information occurs.

I think the full context says something different.

For instance, in the earlier instance it appears the House Judiciary Committee has access to the unredacted report, where today he's trying to get the House Judiciary Committee access to the unredacted report.

Stop me if I'm wrong.

The bit you quoted also continues:

"So, I assume what’s going to have to happen before anything else happens is that somebody — the staff of the judiciary committee, perhaps the chairman and ranking minority members of the judiciary committee — is going to have to go over this material, at least the 4[00] or 500 pages of the report, to determine what is fit for release and what is — as a matter of decency, and protecting people’s privacy rights, people who may be totally innocent third parties — what must not be released at all."

If we assume they have an unredacted report, he's talking about redacting it before it goes public.

See how these two situations are different?

 

[Allandavid]

Aww, yet another “GOTCHA thread” all shot to heck!

Yep...and what’s even more pathetic is having to start a thread with a ‘whatabout’...