Mueller vs Barr round 1

[TSA]

Perjury would be a hard bar to clear. Impeachment is certainly possible, but removal depends on a GOP Senate that has already shown it will go to the mat for Trump no matter what he does.

The Trump administration's threatened investigations against the Dems may make impeachment hard to resist. It's hardly unthinkable that Trump, perceiving himself as having been the target of a politically predicated invesigation, will use the DOJ to discredit his 2020 opponents. It's a personal vendetta at this point, Trump may find it hard to resist using the powers of his office and the state to crush his perceived enemies.

He has been fantasizing about it for three years -- well before there was any vendetta.

:lol perceiving

[boutons_deux]

The Repug Senate won't convict Trash or Barr, but Dem House impeachment, with a long list of articles of impeachment, would certainly damage Trash.

House Dems could censure both Trash and Barr and the Repugs couldn't stop it.

Letting these motherfucking assholes escape without punishment would provide a great example to a smarter Repug Pres and administration how to take over USA and kill the myth of American democracy and exceptionalism.

[Winehole23]

:lol perceivingPolitical adversaries aren't personal enemies.

Unless you're Donald Trump.

[Spurs Homer]

Trump: “it’s done”


there you go...

trump is completely free and clear of all legal danger!



lolololol

[TSA]

Political adversaries aren't personal enemies.

Unless you're Donald Trump.

I’m laughing at your use of the word perceive. Trump was the target of a politically predicated investigation.

[boutons_deux]

Trump was the target of a politically predicated investigation.

You Lie

[Spurs Homer]

I’m laughing at your use of the word perceive. Trump was the target of a politically predicated investigation.

You are the perfect russian asset!

Congrats!


:lmao:lmao


"Comrade - you make Russia proud - you must continue to spread this propaganda whenever and wherever you can!" signed - V.Putin

[boutons_deux]

Trump: “it’s done”



The Old Lesbian from SC refuses to call anybody, "It's Over"

[koriwhat]

:lol perceiving

the libs are the same everywhere; they're dumb as rocks while trying to throw shit to the wall hoping it sticks.

[Winehole23]

I’m laughing at your use of the word perceive. Trump was the target of a politically predicated investigation.We disagree about that.

Mueller played by the rules. If he was conducting a coup, why didn't he bring charges against Trump?

[Winehole23]

why didn't the FBI leak the investigation to the press in 2016 to prevent DJT from being elected?

[koriwhat]

why didn't the FBI leak the investigation to the press in 2016 to prevent DJT from being elected?

why would they need to do anything of the sort when they and the MSM saw HRC as a lock for pres? insurance policy or did you forget? plus there was no investigation into trump prior... say it with me now, he was SPIED on and so were most of his admin.

[boutons_deux]

why didn't the FBI leak the investigation to the press in 2016 to prevent DJT from being elected?

... while Comey swallowed the Repug bait of "butter emails", found nothing, but anyway went on national teevee to trash Hillary, while violating the FBI protocol of "if no indictment, then say nothing about the innocent investigated target"

yet, somehow, the deep state, esp the FBI, was out to trash Trash.

[koriwhat]

... while Comey swallowed the Repug bait of "butter emails", found nothing, but anyway went on national teevee to trash Hillary, while violating the FBI protocol of "if no indictment, then say nothing about the innocent investigated target"

yet, somehow, the deep state, esp the FBI, was out to trash Trash.

are you really trying to make the case that comey is in trump's pocket? lmao you slip further and further into psychosis as the days fly by.

[DarrinS]

why didn't the FBI leak the investigation to the press in 2016 to prevent DJT from being elected?

That's not how insurance policies work.

[Pavlov]

That's not how insurance policies work.
Walk us through how it was all supposed to work according to you.

[TSA]

We disagree about that.

Mueller played by the rules. If he was conducting a coup, why didn't he bring charges against Trump?

Not talking about Mueller as he didn’t start the investigation.

[Pavlov]

:lol not one Trumpista will ever have the balls to try to describe the conspiracy they've been pushing for two years.

[boutons_deux]

Donald Trump Publicly Suggested DOJ Investigate Joe Biden

Yet Attorney General William Barr fumbled when Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) asked him whether Trump had ever suggested he open an investigation on someone.

In one of the most damning and memorable exchanges of William Barr (https://www.huffpost.com/news/topic/william-barr)’s testimony

before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, Sen. Kamala

Harris (https://www.huffpost.com/news/topic/kamala-harris) (D-Calif.) asked the attorney general whether President Donald Trump (https://www.huffpost.com/news/topic/donald-trump) has suggested that he investigate anyone (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/william-barr-trump-investigate-political-opponents_n_5cc9f478e4b0d123954da424?sl&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvL05URWhITHhUUWs&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMNzocSlUroFv4aSFGRGWqat6wdO rJ1Y-K5DPH2aDLHnhqaAIXd2Vb2hmTiPpuoFyibw1txVDlm8k5rB0Dc G024b6OrsQn85tyTsBCTjvYJN-GL_143slXg2CnfvKOhjKxPK5uA5KkPD4p79GnW6CQXcXauwaxG 74-JcO1dE4XM2).

Barr, fumbling over his words, claimed that he did not know.
As it turns out, Trump has publicly called on the Department of Justice, since Barr took control, to

open an investigation into his former political opponent Hillary Clinton and

also a potential future opponent: former Vice President Joe Biden.

Trump suggested :lol to Fox News’ Sean Hannity (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-barr-will-look-at-incredible-possibility-of-ukraine-clinton-collusion) last week that

Barr should open an investigation into whether

Clinton’s campaign received help from the Ukrainian government during the 2016 election based on information allegedly gathered by the top Ukrainian prosecutor.

The president’s desired investigation could also ensnare Biden through the former vice president’s son Hunter Biden’s business with a Ukrainian oligarch, according to The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/us/politics/biden-son-ukraine.html).

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/william-barr-trump-investigate-biden_n_5ccb54ade4b0e4d7572fdf15?ncid=newsltushpmg news__TheMorningEmail__050319

iow, Barr's "he did not know" is a FUCKING LIE

[Spurminator]

The Trump administration's threatened investigations against the Dems may make impeachment hard to resist. It's hardly unthinkable that Trump, perceiving himself as having been the target of a politically predicated invesigation, will use the DOJ to discredit his 2020 opponents. It's a personal vendetta at this point, Trump may find it hard to resist using the powers of his office and the state to crush his perceived enemies.

And he'll do it out in the open, and TSA and Darrin and every other Trump-loving sycophant in here will cheer him on despite their years of loyalty to the Obama spygate conspiracy theory and the associated outrage.

[koriwhat]

the Obama spygate conspiracy theory

how is it a theory? lmao you're such a pawn and an easily manipulated one at that.

[boutons_deux]

Barr Unable to Give Honest Answer to Drive-Thru Window at Arby’s

BETHESDA, Maryland —Attorney General William Barr on Thursday proved unable to give honest answers to a drive-thru window at a Bethesda, Maryland, Arby’s restaurant.

Barr, who drove up to the window just after noon, appeared evasive and halting after the drive-thru attendant asked to take his order.

“I cannot recall what I would like to order at this time,”

Barr said, according to the attendant.

When pressed repeatedly to name a sandwich, drink, or side order that he preferred, Barr stonewalled,

the attendant said.

“The questions I was asking him couldn’t have been clearer,” the attendant told reporters. “I asked him if he wanted to order a
Smokehouse Brisket sandwich. He refused to give me a yes-or-no answer.”

“I came away feeling that he had been less than candid,” the attendant said.

Speaking through an official spokesperson later in the day,

Barr said that he would never appear at Arby’s again.

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/barr-unable-to-give-honest-answer-to-drive-thru-window-at-arbys (https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/barr-unable-to-give-honest-answer-to-drive-thru-window-at-arbys)

[TSA]

And he'll do it out in the open, and TSA and Darrin and every other Trump-loving sycophant in here will cheer him on despite their years of loyalty to the Obama spygate conspiracy theory and the associated outrage.

Oh shut the fuck up you hypocritical piece of shit. You cheered on a fraud of a collusion investigation for two years hoping it would take down Trump and now you are crying because there might be an investigation into some actual election collusion. You are pathetic :lol

[DarrinS]

Graham invites Mueller to testify


https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/graham-writes-to-special-counsel-regarding-barr-testimony

[Winehole23]

Oh shut the fuck up you hypocritical piece of shit. You cheered on a fraud of a collusion investigation for two years hoping it would take down Trump and now you are crying because there might be an investigation into some actual election collusion. You are pathetic :lolI don't recall Spurminator being such a big Russiagate proponent.

Can you give one or two examples?

[koriwhat]

Oh shut the fuck up you hypocritical piece of shit. You cheered on a fraud of a collusion investigation for two years hoping it would take down Trump and now you are crying because there might be an investigation into some actual election collusion. You are pathetic :lol

they're all the same spineless dudes.

[RandomGuy]

Graham invites Mueller to testify


https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/graham-writes-to-special-counsel-regarding-barr-testimony

DerpS still won't read the report, but just KNOWS what is in it... because REASONS.

[boutons_deux]

https://images.dailykos.com/images/671917/story_image/05-02-2019-mcfadden-915px.png?1556865532

[koriwhat]

https://images.dailykos.com/images/671917/story_image/05-02-2019-mcfadden-915px.png?1556865532

i bet the dude who drew this looks eerily similar to all the dipshits at starbucks with low-T.

[Winehole23]

That's not how insurance policies work.How was this one supposed to work?

[DarrinS]

How was this one supposed to work?

Well, when you run spies at a campaign, I'm pretty sure you don't announce it over a bullhorn.

[Winehole23]

Well, when you run spies at a campaign, I'm pretty sure you don't announce it over a bullhorn.Ok. How was the insurance policy supposed to work?

[DarrinS]

Ok. How was the insurance policy supposed to work?

It didn't work. Now, justice, hopefully.

[Winehole23]

It didn't work. Now, justice, hopefully.Yes, but how was it intended to work? I have a hard time seeing how it would or could have shaken out any differently than it already has.

[koriwhat]

Yes, but how was it intended to work? I have a hard time seeing how it would or could have shaken out any differently than it already has.

they went looking for crimes and weren't investigating a crime. that's the insurance policy tbh. they were out for blood but couldn't find any except on a few people and none of which pertained to russian collusion and all of which were dated crimes.

i'll get shit here for this but i really don't care how you libs view me; bongino is a good source if you're looking for one. the dude lays this all out and more. we'll see how it pans out but supposedly this whole thing was going on when mccain ran and glen simpson already had the script written with manafort as its star. mccain's campaign was tipped off by the fbi but where were these same agents when supposedly trump's campaign was infiltrated? hmm...

[Winehole23]

Bongino is a ridiculous clown, and the FBI warned Trump about the Russians.

[koriwhat]

Bongino is a ridiculous clown, and the FBI warned Trump about the Russians.

why is he a clown? and you're telling me mccabe and company, the same crooks, warned trump and his campaign? :lmao

[DarrinS]

Yes, but how was it intended to work? I have a hard time seeing how it would or could have shaken out any differently than it already has.

I don't know, dude, I wasn't in Andy's office.

[Spurminator]

I don't recall Spurminator being such a big Russiagate proponent.

Can you give one or two examples?

:lol I've asked for examples every time he's accused me of being Team Russiagate. He's never answered, because he's a coward who has to believe that everyone else is an all-or-nothing partisan, because that's how he's chosen to validate his shitty life.

I have never advocated for anything but letting the investigation play out without obstruction. I have not made predictions nor hoped for anything more than a credible conclusion. I'm satisfied with the conclusions in the report. I'm not happy with the PR campaign coordinated by our Attorney General following its release.

[Spurminator]

Oh shut the fuck up you hypocritical piece of shit. You cheered on a fraud of a collusion investigation for two years hoping it would take down Trump and now you are crying because there might be an investigation into some actual election collusion.

You didn't deny anything I said because you know it's true. You have no convictions, you're just Team Trump all the way. Pathetic how low you've sunk after being a somewhat credible, even-keeled Kasich supporter. I guess you were just desperate to fit in with all those super cool 4chan guys so you jumped on the bandwagon. :lol loser

[Th'Pusher]

You didn't deny anything I said because you know it's true. You have no convictions, you're just Team Trump all the way. Pathetic how low you've sunk after being a somewhat credible, even-keeled Kasich supporter. I guess you were just desperate to fit in with all those super cool 4chan guys so you jumped on the bandwagon. :lol loser

He was never a Kasich supporter. He just didn’t have the balls to come out as s supporter of Trump before he won.

[Winehole23]

I don't know, dude, I wasn't in Andy's office.You can't even explain the conspiracy you allege. At least kw tried.

[Winehole23]

:lol I've asked for examples every time he's accused me of being Team Russiagate. He's never answered, because he's a coward who has to believe that everyone else is an all-or-nothing partisan, because that's how he's chosen to validate his shitty life.

I have never advocated for anything but letting the investigation play out without obstruction. I have not made predictions nor hoped for anything more than a credible conclusion. I'm satisfied with the conclusions in the report. I'm not happy with the PR campaign coordinated by our Attorney General following its release.It's too easy to characterize anyone who merely disagrees as being a reverse cultist. A bunch of people who questioned Russiagate and Russiagate proponents get kicked in the same ditch by opportunistic Trump cultists who hope nobody remembers the actual conversation.



Anyone who hasn't been hanging out for awhile might be fooled by TSA's mendacious guile.

[DarrinS]

You can't even explain the conspiracy you allege. At least kw tried.

I'm sure more details will emerge as Russiagate is laid to rest.

[boutons_deux]

About that last cartoon frame, DINOs Jones, Sinema, Manchin voted for slimebag Barr

[Pavlov]

I'm sure more details will emerge as Russiagate is laid to rest.:lol I'm sure someone will tell me the conspiracy theory I wholeheartedly believe and repeat often but can't even begin to explain except for saying muh insurance.

[Spurtacular]

:lmao Chump and Chumpettes going hard for bad cops.

[a777pilot]

Thank God for Mike Rogers!

[a777pilot]

https://www.independentsentinel.com/whoa-adm-rogers-worked-with-fisa-court-on-illegal-spying-since-2016/

[spurraider21]

Would be a shame if something happened to him

[Winehole23]

:lol I'm sure someone will tell me the conspiracy theory I wholeheartedly believe and repeat often but can't even begin to explain except for saying muh insurance.Kind of like Russiagaters with the continual drumbeat of doom during the Mueller investigation.

[Winehole23]

Bonnerific strawmanning it up as usual.

First of all, who shut down Mueller and second of all, why do you think you can read other posters minds?

My trend of negging Trump and his suporters is well established. It won't cease.

You're just sore I have criticism left over for you.

[Winehole23]

Must sting getting filed in the motivated reasoning bin along with so many posters you hate.

[ElNono]

You didn't deny anything I said because you know it's true. You have no convictions, you're just Team Trump all the way. Pathetic how low you've sunk after being a somewhat credible, even-keeled Kasich supporter. I guess you were just desperate to fit in with all those super cool 4chan guys so you jumped on the bandwagon. :lol loser

After 20+ years living here, I still don’t understand that of Americans... the marriage with a particular political party. You would think getting older makes you wiser, yet I see the exact opposite. It hardens positions to the point where hypocrisy is rampant. There might be mild disagreements, and even admission of a wrong move between the fans of the same faction, but as soon as you bring up the other team, it’s borderline personal for some reason.

I don’t want to generalize, it doesn’t happen with everybody, but it is all too common.

[a777pilot]

...and the winners are: Horowitz, Huber, Rogers, Campbell, Collyer, Barr and god himself, Trump!

Repeal the 22d Amendment.....now!

[a777pilot]

After 20+ years living here, I still don’t understand that of Americans... the marriage with a particular political party. You would think getting older makes you wiser, yet I see the exact opposite. It hardens positions to the point where hypocrisy is rampant. There might be mild disagreements, and even admission of a wrong move between the fans of the same faction, but as soon as you bring up the other team, it’s borderline personal for some reason.

I don’t want to generalize, it doesn’t happen with everybody, but it is all too common.

Where did you live before here?

It would be nice, but doesn't happen on this site, that an opinion can be expressed without being labeled a retarded fucking fool.

Sad.

[a777pilot]

People to watch in the news....

Horowitz, Huber, Rogers, Campbell, Collyer, Barr and Trump. It's going to be an interesting year and a half.

Trump-2020!

[a777pilot]

But you are a fucking fraud. You are retarded, and a worthless piece of shit that needs to die.

So kill your self. It will the single honorable thing you will have ever done in your lie of a life

You're cute!

[rastaspur]

20% of it is redacted.

[rastaspur]

no you guys are moronic sheep that need to wake up.. you dont even know who is your enemy.. i know its hard but do some critical thinking

:rollin

Critical thinking. Heed your own advice, shit for brains.

[rastaspur]

One salient point to keep in mind for the Democrats and the members of the Obama Administration, the one point that got Nixon into hot water with impeachment was his misuse of the CIA and FBI toobstructe justice and to spy on the Democrat Party.

Obama and his minions, are in deep kimchi.

That unsung hero of all of this, who I am still waiting for y'all to figure out who, is going to put a multitude of Obama people, and just possibly, Obama himself in serious legal jeopardy.

Lol.

Delusional.

[rastaspur]

1) they agreed with white house counsel that they lacked authority to indict a sitting president

2) when somebody faces an accusation, they typically have the recourse of standing trial and being found not guilty. there's a process to clear their name.

3) as they could not indict trump, there would be no parallel to that. if they just said "we cant charge trump, but we conclude he's guilty of crimes" then its basically just a smear with no chance for him to defend himself in court and clear his name. that's the "fairness" concerns they cite

4) therefore they decided that they were not allowed to come to a formal conclusion that the president committed any crime


i posted about this in another thread... predictably didnt get a single response

https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=278376&p=9782553&viewfull=1#post9782553

:bobo

[a777pilot]

Again, I say....Horowitz, Huber, Rogers, Campbell and Collyer.

Obama and his people are in deep kimchi.

....nothing is going to happen however. It's the golden rule: He with the gold, rules!

[boutons_deux]

Mueller was a Special Counselor,

not, like in yet another Repug Nixon's case,

a Special Prosecutor.

[a777pilot]

Mueller was a Special Counselor,

not, like in yet another Repug Nixon's case,

a Special Prosecutor.

In Nixon's case there was an Independent Counsel. It was not a Special Prosecutor. Words have meaning, no as if we choose to pay any attention to the meanings of words these days.

[Pavlov]

In Nixon's case there was an Independent Counsel. It was not a Special Prosecutor. Words have meaning, no as if we choose to pay any attention to the meanings of words these days.Cox and Jaworski were special prosecutors. The term independent counsel wasn't used until 1983.

IOW, you're wrong again.

[a777pilot]

Cox and Jaworski were special prosecutors. The term independent counsel wasn't used until 1983.

IOW, you're wrong again.

I stand corrected. They were special prosecutors. Thanks for the correction.

[CosmicCowboy]

Why do you think mueller wrote letters to Barr with concerns about how he portrayed the findings in his report? Why do you think Barr refuses to release the summaries written by the special counsel?

He released them in full you dumbass.

[boutons_deux]

He released them in full you dumbass.

Congress wants the full unredacted report (with a few reasonable redactions), not Barr's heavy-redacted Trash-defending/"exonerating" cherry picking

[CosmicCowboy]

Muellers summary was released, asshole. You are not only a disgusting pig, you are fucking stupid too.

[CosmicCowboy]

Muellers summary was released, asshole. You are not only a disgusting pig, you are fucking stupid too. They were released in full on April 18th.

[Pavlov]

Muellers summary was released, asshole.You got a link to that? I thought there were summaries for each section tbh.

[CosmicCowboy]

You got a link to that? I thought there were summaries for each section tbh.

Just Google it. I read it through a link on snopes. There are summaries for both sections.

[spurraider21]

Thought the summaries were part of the report and are available.

Mueller was upset that at the time, Barr chose to release his own summary rather than the mueller summary.

[a777pilot]

Y'all do know that by law Barr is not required to anything with the Muller report other than announce it has been reported.

[Pavlov]

Y'all do know that by law Barr is not required to any with the Muller report other than announce it has been reported.So what?

Why would you want it kept from the public?

[ElNono]

Where did you live before here?

It would be nice, but doesn't happen on this site, that an opinion can be expressed without being labeled a retarded fucking fool.

Sad.

Many places, not much to do with what I was pointing out.

As far as the rest, opine away and never mind the fools

[a777pilot]

Many places, not much to do with what I was pointing out.

As far as the rest, opine away and never mind the fools

Good advice.

Thanks.

[Spurs Homer]

Thought the summaries were part of the report and are available.

Mueller was upset that at the time, Barr chose to release his own summary rather than the mueller summary.

the truth is that we only know what barr wants us to know

muellers letter asked barr to release his summaries on march 27
barr ignored him and did not release them

meanwhile - the cult spiked the football for weeks on a false conclusion

are muellers summaries out now?

barr says they are - but i dont believe one word that comes out of that sewer

more importantly is all the fbi302’s, grand jury testimony, everything is still hidden and i would bet

that barr stopped muellers investigation before mueller was done

[a777pilot]

I don't care who said what, when, to whom. It's over. We have real problems to solve, not this shit.

[spurraider21]

the truth is that we only know what barr wants us to know

muellers letter asked barr to release his summaries on march 27
barr ignored him and did not release them

meanwhile - the cult spiked the football for weeks on a false conclusion

are muellers summaries out now?

barr says they are - but i dont believe one word that comes out of that sewer

more importantly is all the fbi302’s, grand jury testimony, everything is still hidden and i would bet

that barr stopped muellers investigation before mueller was done
You don’t need Barr’s word on whether or not the summaries have been released. You can view them for yourself.

[Spurs Homer]

You don’t need Barr’s word on whether or not the summaries have been released. You can view them for yourself.

wrong

we can read what barr decided we could read

maybe there are no other summaries

maybe

[CosmicCowboy]

wrong

we can read what barr decided we could read

maybe there are no other summaries

maybe

Damn you are ignorant.

[Spurs Homer]

Damn you are ignorant.

Says the nazi

[Winehole23]

Why do you think mueller wrote letters to Barr with concerns about how he portrayed the findings in his report?Probably because he didn't like Barr's spin. It's understandable.

Barr has disgraced himself and his office, I hope he has a big pile of money to go home and cry on.

[Spurs Homer]

Probably because he didn't like Barr's spin. It's understandable.

Barr has disgraced himself and his office, I hope he has a big pile of money to go home and cry on.

Yes - and he did it right in front of your eyes and he did it to protect another criminal.

You saw it - just like you saw trump welcome russia's help in stealing an election - you saw it with your own eyes.

You seem to have slowly realized that your eyes were not "lying" to you.


Now look back and remember all the times you defended the criminals - AFTER -
you had seen things with your own eyes -

and just


MAYBE - JUST MAYBE -


you can educate the trump cultists into believing the crimes that are going on in front of their eyes right now - ARE CRIMES!

Like Trump and Barr openly obstructing justice, tampering with witnesses, lying to the American people, and conspiring with the man who attacked the USA to steal a presidential election and install his puppet. With your own eyes you saw trump tell you that he spoke to his handler and could not/would not defend the USA against Putin's attack - and he even called it a hoax in concert with the man who attacked the USA.


MAYBE

you can still do something - for your country.


(or just call me a bore instead and defend the criminals some more?)

[spurraider21]

wrong

we can read what barr decided we could read

maybe there are no other summaries

maybe
Mueller Letter to Barr: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/796-mueller-letter-to-barr/02499959cbfa313c36d4/optimized/full.pdf

first sentence references the "introduction and executive summary of each volume." thats what you're referring to.


here's the mueller report as released by barr: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

page 9: introduction to volume I
page 12:executive summary of volume I

page 213: introduction to volume II
page 215: executive summary to volume II

mueller had previously suggested that those sections be initially published as opposed to barr's shitty hand-crafted "summary." after barr released his version of the summary, mueller sent him that letter in protest. but when the report (minus redactions) was eventually released, it included those portions anyway. of course that doesnt undo the "damage" done by barr's pre-emptive spin job, but to say that we havent seen the executive summaries yet is just a lie

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller Letter to Barr: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/796-mueller-letter-to-barr/02499959cbfa313c36d4/optimized/full.pdf

first sentence references the "introduction and executive summary of each volume." thats what you're referring to.


here's the mueller report as released by barr: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

page 9: introduction to volume I
page 12:executive summary of volume I

page 213: introduction to volume II
page 215: executive summary to volume II

Yes I know all that - I am not saying that "those" summaries
are all NOT released -


I am saying something different - something outside the box


I am NOT accepting ANY OF BARRS INFO TO BE CREDIBLE


I am not accepting that there was "no conspiracy" - I need to hear Mueller testify - that ALL those decisions were unobstructed - that his investigation was

NEVER

hampered or altered or changed in ANY way by BARR OR ROSENSTEIN.


So Barr has released what HE calls "everything except the redacted parts and the classified blah blah"

Fuck him. I don't trust him.

BARR controls EVERYTHING so far -

BARR has released what would do the least damage to trump and has spun anything to help trump -

who is to say he didn't tell Mueller to end the investigation?
who is to say he didn't tell Mueller that Trump or Trump Jr. could NOT be interviewed?


Who is to say that Rosenstein didn't restrict Mueller's mandate? Who is to say that Rosenstein held/kept evidence from Mueller?
(like the memo Trump wrote after firing Comey)


BARR CANNOT BE TRUSTED.

All you have seen is what BARR ALLOWED YOU TO SEE.

[spurraider21]

the truth is that we only know what barr wants us to know

muellers letter asked barr to release his summaries on march 27
barr ignored him and did not release them

meanwhile - the cult spiked the football for weeks on a false conclusion

are muellers summaries out now?

barr says they are - but i dont believe one word that comes out of that sewer

more importantly is all the fbi302’s, grand jury testimony, everything is still hidden and i would bet

that barr stopped muellers investigation before mueller was done


Mueller Letter to Barr: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/796-mueller-letter-to-barr/02499959cbfa313c36d4/optimized/full.pdf

first sentence references the "introduction and executive summary of each volume." thats what you're referring to.


here's the mueller report as released by barr: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

page 9: introduction to volume I
page 12:executive summary of volume I

page 213: introduction to volume II
page 215: executive summary to volume II

mueller had previously suggested that those sections be initially published as opposed to barr's shitty hand-crafted "summary." after barr released his version of the summary, mueller sent him that letter in protest. but when the report (minus redactions) was eventually released, it included those portions anyway. of course that doesnt undo the "damage" done by barr's pre-emptive spin job, but to say that we havent seen the executive summaries yet is just a lie
i dont care about the other shit you just brought up. you specifically were talking about the intros and executive summaries. i have proven that those are publicly available. you were wrong.

[djohn2oo8]

Nadler schedules vote for Wednesday to hold Barr in contempt

[pgardn]

From what I have read about Barr is that he rarely speaks with Trump and does not really like him.
Gave $44,000 to the Jeb bush campaign.

He is all in on the power of the president in the vein of Scalia and Bork.
So basically they say the department of justice can’t indict a sitting president yet they won’t give the full version of the investigation to the branch of government that can.

So the red team is going monarchy.
When blue team takes over in 2020 look out.

There may be some evidence that Trump has told Barr not to release as much as he already has as well.
Which would be one reason not to go in front of the house.

[Spurs Homer]

i dont care about the other shit you just brought up. you specifically were talking about the intros and executive summaries. i have proven that those are publicly available. you were wrong.

great

i dont care that you believe barrs word

i dont believe him

i knew and posted about those summaries because i read the alleged mueller report twice



i care about the truth and i wont take barrs word that the mueller report is intact

[Spurs Homer]

From what I have read about Barr is that he rarely speaks with Trump and does not really like him.
Gave $44,000 to the Jeb bush campaign.

He is all in on the power of the president in the vein of Scalia and Bork.
So basically they say the department of justice can’t indict a sitting president yet they won’t give the full version of the investigation to the branch of government that can.

So the red team is going monarchy.
When blue team takes over in 2020 look out.

There may be some evidence that Trump has told Barr not to release as much as he already has as well.
Which would be one reason not to go in front of the house.


Whether or not he likes trump is irrelevant

but i agree he is all in on the cheney

unitary whatever power

basically - an untouchable president -

is what they want

unless it is a Dem prez

[pgardn]

Whether or not he likes trump is irrelevant

but i agree he is all in on the cheney

unitary whatever power

basically - an untouchable president -

is what they want

unless it is a Dem prez

Of course it’s irrelevant to oversight particulars but it’s an interesting sidenote dumb shit
I also find it interesting he is wealthy enough to give that much money to another bush

[Spurs Homer]

Of course it’s irrelevant to oversight particulars but it’s an interesting sidenote dumb shit
I also find it interesting he is wealthy enough to give that much money to another bush

Of course idiot - he has russian money

oh and

GFY

[boutons_deux]

Unitary executive theory

holding that the President possesses the power to control the entire executive branch.

there is disagreement about the strength and scope of the doctrine.[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory#cite_note-Lessig-1)

It can be said that some favor a "strongly unitary" executive,

while others favor a "weakly unitary" executive.[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory#cite_note-Lessig-1)

The former group argue, for example, that

Congress (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress)'s power to interfere with intra-executive decision-making (such as firing executive branch officials) is limited, and

that the President can control policy-making by all executive agencies within the limits set for those agencies by Congress.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory#Theory

Obviously Barr, Cheney, probably all of the SCOTUS5, Federalists Soc support the strong version, where there is almost no oversight, minimum limits on the President.

I expect the final nail in America will be an authoritarian Repug Pres much more sinister, much more strategic and intelligent than Trash and his mafiya of clowns.

Something like 30% of Repug supporters actually want an American King who will punish the other 70%.

Then add in the so-called Christians of the evangelical dominionist faction that are working hard for (white male) Christian theocracy.

[spurraider21]

great

i dont care that you believe barrs word

i dont believe him

i knew and posted about those summaries because i read the alleged mueller report twice



i care about the truth and i wont take barrs word that the mueller report is intact
:lmao oh you think barr made up his own 400+ page report, put mueller's signature on it, and released it to congress? :lmao

[Spurs Homer]

:lmao oh you think barr made up his own 400+ page report, put mueller's signature on it, and released it to congress? :lmao

C'mon man - you are smarter than this.

I don't know why you are not reading between the lines and between Barr's lies -

ok

I didn't think I needed to spell it out for YOU?

Barr is doing the least he can. Sure - he put out a redacted report - bravo! yay!

Sure - the GOP is saying "Barr didn't have to...this and Barr didn't have to that"

and if you are on THAT team - well good for you - I thought you knew better.

The redacted Mueller report is out - bravo! Great! We should all go home now - nothing to see here.


We do not know Mueller's side of anything - and sure his words are on that report - but we do not know how Mueller arrived at all that -
and we do NOT know if he was obstructed or impeded.

We DO know that Rosenstein and Barr are on Trump team now - and this poses great problems for our country - for the truth to be exposed.

Two of the people who had great opportunity to obstruct/spin/meddle/hamstring this Mueller investigation are bonafide Trump ball lickers -

so I can read what Barr released - but I am in no way accepting or believing that the truth is out and EVERYONE should have at least a decent amount of certainty that a cover up is in progress and will only be uncovered through a long lengthy court process and Trump has stacked the ultimate court in his favor with Mitch McConnell's help and obstruction.



So save your laughter and snarkiness for those that are on the team that wants to bury this truth and those who support the people destroying our democracy.

I did agree that Barr released the redacted Mueller report and those summaries already - and have read them and it looks bad for Trump - but I am NOT one of those who is convinced of the "did not establish conspiracy" "conclusion" until we see ALL the evidence. All of the grand jury hearings. All of Muellers and the FBI's 302's. Hear all of Mueller's UNRESTRICTED testimony. Hear directly from Mueller that he wanted Barr to make the decisions on Trumps fate. Hear directly from Mueller if his intent was to pass the ball to Congress.

Why you would just take Barr's word on a lot of those things - is your issue to deal with.

[CosmicCowboy]

Spurs Homer has caught terminal TDS.

[spurraider21]

I did agree that Barr released the redacted Mueller report and those summaries already
great. that's been my point all along, something you previously refused to accept


are muellers summaries out now?

barr says they are - but i dont believe one word that comes out of that sewer

[TSA]

C'mon man - you are smarter than this.

I don't know why you are not reading between the lines and between Barr's lies -

ok

I didn't think I needed to spell it out for YOU?

Barr is doing the least he can. Sure - he put out a redacted report - bravo! yay!

Sure - the GOP is saying "Barr didn't have to...this and Barr didn't have to that"

and if you are on THAT team - well good for you - I thought you knew better.

The redacted Mueller report is out - bravo! Great! We should all go home now - nothing to see here.


We do not know Mueller's side of anything - and sure his words are on that report - but we do not know how Mueller arrived at all that -
and we do NOT know if he was obstructed or impeded.

We DO know that Rosenstein and Barr are on Trump team now - and this poses great problems for our country - for the truth to be exposed.

Two of the people who had great opportunity to obstruct/spin/meddle/hamstring this Mueller investigation are bonafide Trump ball lickers -

so I can read what Barr released - but I am in no way accepting or believing that the truth is out and EVERYONE should have at least a decent amount of certainty that a cover up is in progress and will only be uncovered through a long lengthy court process and Trump has stacked the ultimate court in his favor with Mitch McConnell's help and obstruction.



So save your laughter and snarkiness for those that are on the team that wants to bury this truth and those who support the people destroying our democracy.

I did agree that Barr released the redacted Mueller report and those summaries already - and have read them and it looks bad for Trump - but I am NOT one of those who is convinced of the "did not establish conspiracy" "conclusion" until we see ALL the evidence. All of the grand jury hearings. All of Muellers and the FBI's 302's. Hear all of Mueller's UNRESTRICTED testimony. Hear directly from Mueller that he wanted Barr to make the decisions on Trumps fate. Hear directly from Mueller if his intent was to pass the ball to Congress.

Why you would just take Barr's word on a lot of those things - is your issue to deal with.

:rollin

[Spurs Homer]

Tsa ran like a bitch when i asked him about the trump call to his master

lol

[TSA]

“many of Barr’s actions are informed by his belief that the special counsel’s analysis related to obstruction was legally wrong and a dangerous precedent for the executive branch.”
https://www.lawfareblog.com/thoughts-barr-and-mueller-report
vy65 spurraider21 thoughts when you have time

The Special Counsel’s Constitutional Analysis: The Clear Statement Rule
https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-constitutional-analysis-clear-statement-rule

The Special Counsel’s Constitutional Analysis: Corrupt Intent and the Take Care Clause
https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-constitutional-analysis-corrupt-intent-and-take-care-clause

The Special Counsel’s Constitutional Analysis: Chilling Effects
https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-constitutional-analysis-chilling-effects

[Pavlov]

Now the story is "OK, Barr lied about the report but only because he didn't like it."

[Spurs Homer]

Now the story is "OK, Barr lied about the report but only because he didn't like it."


lol

why would an innocent person bury any evidence that exonerates him?

why is comrade tsa so invested in hiding all the evidence?

[TSA]

lol

why would an innocent person bury any evidence that exonerates him?

why is comrade tsa so invested in hiding all the evidence?

What evidence are you claiming is being buried? The public received a report with less than 9% redacted. A select group of congress has been offered the unredacted version and last I read not a single Dem went to the SCIF to view it. The Dems are throwing are doing nothing but throwing a tantrum right now because the report didn’t turn out how they hoped it would for 2 years.

[spurraider21]

What evidence are you claiming is being buried? The public received a report with less than 9% redacted. A select group of congress has been offered the unredacted version and last I read not a single Dem went to the SCIF to view it. The Dems are throwing are doing nothing but throwing a tantrum right now because the report didn’t turn out how they hoped it would for 2 years.
no. in response to their request for the unredacted version to be made available to congress, the DOJ instead offered to allow certain members of congress to view a "less redacted" version. democrats argued that it would be insufficient and therefore refused to accept that as a solution. their choices were effectively to accept that solution and drop their demands for the full version to be released to congress, or to reject that half measure and carry on with their demand

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-democrats-to-hold-contempt-vote-wednesday-after-barr-misses-deadline-to-provide-complete-mueller-report/2019/05/06/89f3bb02-6ffb-11e9-9f06-5fc2ee80027a_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f9783f91b714

pro tip: use google chrome's incognito mode instead of mentioning paywalls

[TSA]

no. in response to their request for the unredacted version to be made available to congress, the DOJ instead offered to allow certain members of congress to view a "less redacted" version. democrats argued that it would be insufficient and therefore refused to accept that as a solution. their choices were effectively to accept that solution and drop their demands for the full version to be released to congress, or to reject that half measure and carry on with their demand

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-democrats-to-hold-contempt-vote-wednesday-after-barr-misses-deadline-to-provide-complete-mueller-report/2019/05/06/89f3bb02-6ffb-11e9-9f06-5fc2ee80027a_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f9783f91b714

pro tip: use google chrome's incognito mode instead of mentioning paywalls

It’s nothing more than a political tantrum

1125454218784120833

[Pavlov]

:lol TSA ends up lying EVERY TIME.

[spurraider21]

It’s nothing more than a political tantrum

1125454218784120833
so they werent offered the unredacted version :tu

barr can simply request permission from the appropriate district court judge to release the grand jury information. he has stated that he will not make such request

[TSA]

so they werent offered the unredacted version :tu

You and I both knew it was unredacted minus Grand Jury info I don’t need to type that each time when referring to what they were offered. The lengths some of you will go to try and score a point :lol

Let me know when you have time to read the articles I linked in #361 concerning obstruction. Much more interested in your take on that than discussing the political stunts the Dems are trying to pull.

[spurraider21]

You and I both knew it was unredacted minus Grand Jury info I don’t need to type that each time when referring to what they were offered. The lengths some of you will go to try and score a point :lol

Let me know when you have time to read the articles I linked in #361 concerning obstruction. Much more interested in your take on that than discussing the political stunts the Dems are trying to pull.
we dont know that. all i know from the descriptions i have read was that it was a "less redacted version"

[TSA]

we dont know that. all i know from the descriptions i have read was that it was a "less redacted version"

When Barr released the public version of Mueller’s report earlier this month, he withheld four categories of material: classified information, material related to ongoing investigations, information that could damage the reputation of “peripheral third parties” and evidence collected by Mueller’s grand jury. Barr’s less-redacted report for the 12 lawmakers allowed them access to each category except grand jury material.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/30/mueller-report-redacted-1295105

[Spurs Homer]

What evidence are you claiming is being buried? The public received a report with less than 9% redacted. A select group of congress has been offered the unredacted version and last I read not a single Dem went to the SCIF to view it. The Dems are throwing are doing nothing but throwing a tantrum right now because the report didn’t turn out how they hoped it would for 2 years.

ALL of the evidence

100 percent should be released - at least to congress

anything less is a cover up

now

answer my questions;

are you ok with trump calling putin and saying exactly what putin told him to say

that it was all a hoax - and that it was a mountain that ended up as a mouse?

are you ok that your president is on the side of the criminal who ordered an attack on our country?

or run like a little bitch and repost your shitty list of made up “tough” actions by the traitor

[Spurs Homer]

Over 400 prosecutors submitted a signed letter saying that trump committed at least several obstruction FELONIES

were it not for the OLC policy

[TSA]

ALL of the evidence

100 percent should be released - at least to congress

anything less is a cover up Barr is following the laws as written. Should he not follow the law because the Dems are having tantrums?


now

answer my questions;

are you ok with trump calling putin and saying exactly what putin told him to say

that it was all a hoax - and that it was a mountain that ended up as a mouse?

are you ok that your president is on the side of the criminal who ordered an attack on our country?

or run like a little bitch and repost your shitty list of made up “tough” actions by the traitor

Well it was all a hoax, what else is Trump supposed to say? There was no conspiracy with Trump’s campaign and Russia during the election.

[TSA]

:lol Putin’s puppet

1124863813378027520

[Spurs Homer]

Barr is following the laws as written. Should he not follow the law because the Dems are having tantrums?



Well it was all a hoax, what else is Trump supposed to say? There was no conspiracy with Trump’s campaign and Russia during the election.

does the mueller report say it was a hoax?

no

it says

russia attacked in a systematic fashion to help trump and expected something in return

trump and team were receptive and expected to benefit - and did

show me what page mueller concluded it was a hoax

or

tell me why it is ok for your president to side with the criminal who ordered it

[koriwhat]

does the mueller report say it was a hoax?

no

it says

russia attacked in a systematic fashion to help trump and expected something in return

trump and team were receptive and expected to benefit - and did

show me what page mueller concluded it was a hoax

or

tell me why it is ok for your president to side with the criminal who ordered it

but but but obama said otherwise during the run up to the presidency in 2016. your golden god was nothing more than a used car sales man.

lose your mind some more bonerchamp because we need some more humorous material to laugh at like your faux intellect and faux outrage.

[Spurs Homer]

:lol Putin’s puppet

1124863813378027520

yeah

his people said russia was interfering with vz

trump says “putin says he is not involved with vz”

why tsa?

just like your shitty list

the govt says one thing

trump is ordered by putin to personally say the opposite

tell my why the white house personally had mcconnell kill the bill this past week to protect the 2020 elections?

you wont

[TSA]

does the mueller report say it was a hoax?

no

it says

russia attacked in a systematic fashion to help trump and expected something in return

trump and team were receptive and expected to benefit - and did

show me what page mueller concluded it was a hoax

or

tell me why it is ok for your president to side with the criminal who ordered it

You missed answering this question. I’m not going to continue to answer yours if you continue to do such.

Barr is following the laws as written. Should he not follow the law because the Dems are having tantrums?

For over two years the MSM reported that Trump and his campaign were illegally conspiring and coordinating with Russia.

Mueller’s report stated there wasn’t evidence found showing a single American illegally conspired or coordinated with Russia.

Trump is correct in calling it a hoax.

[Spurs Homer]

You missed answering this question. I’m not going to continue to answer yours if you continue to do such.

Barr is following the laws as written. Should he not follow the law because the Dems are having tantrums?

For over two years the MSM reported that Trump and his campaign were illegally conspiring and coordinating with Russia.

Mueller’s report stated there wasn’t evidence found showing a single American illegally conspired or coordinated with Russia.

Trump is correct in calling it a hoax.

you are lying

show anyone where mueller says “ no evidence”

barr is legally able to request a judge to release grand jury info

he wont

congress will take months to be able to do likewise

but barr does not want “full transparency”

cover up

[spurraider21]

When Barr released the public version of Mueller’s report earlier this month, he withheld four categories of material: classified information, material related to ongoing investigations, information that could damage the reputation of “peripheral third parties” and evidence collected by Mueller’s grand jury. Barr’s less-redacted report for the 12 lawmakers allowed them access to each category except grand jury material.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/30/mueller-report-redacted-1295105
my bad, you're right :tu

thanks for info

[Pavlov]

:lol Putin’s puppet

1124863813378027520"Notably, Trump himself has said nothing this week about Russia’s role in Venezuela."

Your defense of Trump is that he's just a pussy when it comes to Putin. Who am I to argue?

[vy65]

“many of Barr’s actions are informed by his belief that the special counsel’s analysis related to obstruction was legally wrong and a dangerous precedent for the executive branch.”
https://www.lawfareblog.com/thoughts-barr-and-mueller-report
vy65 spurraider21 thoughts when you have time


I think Mueller made a mistake, one that diminishes the perception of his independence and the credibility of his report, in failing to make a prosecutorial judgment one way or the other on obstruction, and especially in his extra-prosecutorial insistence that he was not “exonerating” the president. (Mueller opened himself up to this powerful rebuttal from the president’s special counsel, Emmet Flood.) Mueller’s action seems inconsistent with what the regulations tried to accomplish, which was to prevent extra-prosecutorial editorializing. In effect Mueller made an impeachment referral that the regulations do not contemplate, though he followed the regulations in leaving it to Barr to make the report public, which he knew Barr had pledged to do.

This doesn't seem well thought out to me. Where's the specific statutory text and an explanation of how Mueller's inconsistent actions. Note that he's pussyfooting around here by a) using the word seems -- you either violate a statute or you don't, you can't be half-pregnant and b) acknowledges that Mueller "followed the regulations" but somehow made a referral beyond the statute's contemplation. He's talking out of both ends of his mouth.


In this light, and especially in light of subsequent events, I fail to see how Barr warrants the super-harsh personal criticism he has received over the letter. Those subsequent events include (i) publicly clarifying that he, Barr, did not purport to capture or summarize everything in Mueller’s report; (ii) working around the clock to get the relatively lightly redacted report made public—something Barr had no legal duty to do; (iii) testifying twice before Congress to explain his reasoning; and (iv) allowing Mueller to testify before Congress if he wants. These are not the actions of a man trying to mischaracterize the report or hide the ball. And they cured any objections that might have properly been lodged against the quickly written original letter.

If this is all try, what's the point in writing the letter in the first place? Why was that necessary - other than to get out the claim that Barr/Rosenstein decided not to prosecute? Again, more talking out of both sides of one's mouth.


First, Barr believes that the Justice Department’s job in this context is to decide (as he told Sen. Richard Blumenthal) “whether or not there is a crime” and nothing more. That is what the special counsel regulations and Justice Department traditions counsel as well. This is why Barr objected to Mueller’s strange in-between decision “not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment.” No U.S. attorney would ever do that, and Barr clearly thinks it odd, and probably wrong, that Mueller did that. Whether one thinks Barr is right or wrong (I think he’s right), this is a perfectly respectable judgment for an attorney general to make.

Blatantly dishonest. The SC statute contemplates that congress - not Justice - has ultimate decision making on whether or not there is a crime. See, 28 CFR 600.9 (AG notifies chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for each action ...). Again, for being a lawyer, Fat Harvard prof sure is afraid to talk about what the terms of the actual law says.


Third, Barr thinks that Congress and the American people should be the ultimate judges the appropriateness of Trump’s actions beyond their criminality. He released hundreds of pages of very damaging information on the president that he did not have to release, and he clearly does not think that his prosecutorial judgment is the end of the matter. As Barr said in his May 1 testimony: "The report is now in the hands of the American people. Everyone can decide for themselves. There’s an election in 18 months. That's a very democratic process. But we [the Justice Department] are out of it. We have to stop using the criminal justice process as a political weapon."

More dishonesty. Why is he getting out in front of the report with a letter saying Justice won't prosecute? Why didn't he just release the executive summaries prepared by Mueller? For someone who wants the Congress and American people to be the judges, why is he crafting opinion/saying anything at all?

I'll also leave this here. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/us/politics/mueller-report-william-barr-excerpts.html

[spurraider21]

This doesn't seem well thought out to me. Where's the specific statutory text and an explanation of how Mueller's inconsistent actions. Note that he's pussyfooting around here by a) using the word seems -- you either violate a statute or you don't, you can't be half-pregnant and b) acknowledges that Mueller "followed the regulations" but somehow made a referral beyond the statute's contemplation. He's talking out of both ends of his mouth.
well he said that mueller followed regulations as to one aspect but not another.... dont think that was inconsisnent

[vy65]

well he said that mueller followed regulations as to one aspect but not another.... dont think that was inconsisnent

Not really. He said "Mueller’s action seems inconsistent with what the regulations tried to accomplish, which was to prevent extra-prosecutorial editorializing."

What the fuck does that mean? Is an action that is *seemingly* inconsistent with the intent of the regulations a statutory violation? Where is he getting the notion that the statute is intended to prevent extra-prosecutorial editorializing? I took a quick look again: he's not citing anything for this claim; not the statute, or the legislative history, or anything. This is lazy and shitty lawyering.

[vy65]

All of which is to say that Fat Harvard Prof doesn't really have a basis for claiming that anything that Mueller did was actually inconsistent with the CFR. Fat Harvard Prof just doesn't like certain things Mueller said and has invented an inconsistency out of whole cloth.

[spurraider21]

Not really. He said "Mueller’s action seems inconsistent with what the regulations tried to accomplish, which was to prevent extra-prosecutorial editorializing."

What the fuck does that mean? Is an action that is *seemingly* inconsistent with the intent of the regulations a statutory violation? Where is he getting the notion that the statute is intended to prevent extra-prosecutorial editorializing? I took a quick look again: he's not citing anything for this claim; not the statute, or the legislative history, or anything. This is lazy and shitty lawyering.
yeah i feel you. was just addressing in your post where you noted that he said that mueller both did and did not follow regulations... than in and of itself is not necessarily poor logic if he's talking about different things, which he was. he might have been bullshitting one of those things, but its still logically sound

[vy65]

yeah i feel you. was just addressing in your post where you noted that he said that mueller both did and did not follow regulations... than in and of itself is not necessarily poor logic if he's talking about different things, which he was. he might have been bullshitting one of those things, but its still logically sound

Fair point. I was a little sloppy there.

[TSA]

This doesn't seem well thought out to me. Where's the specific statutory text and an explanation of how Mueller's inconsistent actions. Note that he's pussyfooting around here by a) using the word seems -- you either violate a statute or you don't, you can't be half-pregnant and b) acknowledges that Mueller "followed the regulations" but somehow made a referral beyond the statute's contemplation. He's talking out of both ends of his mouth.



If this is all try, what's the point in writing the letter in the first place? Why was that necessary - other than to get out the claim that Barr/Rosenstein decided not to prosecute? Again, more talking out of both sides of one's mouth.



Blatantly dishonest. The SC statute contemplates that congress - not Justice - has ultimate decision making on whether or not there is a crime. See, 28 CFR 600.9 (AG notifies chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for each action ...). Again, for being a lawyer, Fat Harvard prof sure is afraid to talk about what the terms of the actual law says.



More dishonesty. Why is he getting out in front of the report with a letter saying Justice won't prosecute? Why didn't he just release the executive summaries prepared by Mueller? For someone who wants the Congress and American people to be the judges, why is he crafting opinion/saying anything at all?

I'll also leave this here. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/us/politics/mueller-report-william-barr-excerpts.html

I actually wanted your thoughts on the three links I pulled from the Fat Harvard Prof's article relating Mueller's analysis concerning obstruction being legally wrong.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-constitutional-analysis-clear-statement-rule

https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-constitutional-analysis-chilling-effects

https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-constitutional-analysis-corrupt-intent-and-take-care-clause

[vy65]

jesus christ

[vy65]

Initial thoughts are STCL is a shitstain law school with shitstain profs.

Also this: Josh is the founder and President of the Harlan Institute, the founder of FantasySCOTUS, the Internet’s Premier Supreme Court Fantasy League, and blogs at JoshBlackman.com.

[TSA]

Initial thoughts are STCL is a shitstain law school with shitstain profs.

Also this: Josh is the founder and President of the Harlan Institute, the founder of FantasySCOTUS, the Internet’s Premier Supreme Court Fantasy League, and blogs at JoshBlackman.com.

dude, I entertained an article you posted from Comey's BFF :lol the least you could do is give it a quick glance.

[vy65]

dude, I entertained an article you posted from Comey's BFF :lol the least you could do is give it a quick glance.

I stand by my initial thoughts ...

I'll review later

[TSA]

I stand by my initial thoughts ...

I'll review later

:bobo