Suicidal Dems Continue to Foolishly Malign Barr

  
Via:  make-america-great-again  •  2 months ago  •  60 comments

Suicidal Dems Continue to Foolishly Malign Barr
We are already--if you paid attention to Barr's testimony or even the story in general--well into Russia Probe II - The Predicate. And that investigation involves real, documented collusion with Russia (on the part of the Clinton campaign and who knows who else) augmented by pervasive media dishonesty. The investigation will attempt to determine, among other things, how this whole Trump/Russia conspiracy idea began and why a special counsel was appointed in the first place, considering it is...

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


You wouldn't know it from the hysteria emanating from Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with William Barr--desperate presidential candidates competing for the most outlandish accusation; Sen. Hirono jumping more sharks than may exist in her native Hawaii--but the ship has already sailed on the Mueller/Russia probe. There's no collusion and with that any sensible argument for obstruction.

We are already--if you paid attention to Barr's testimony or even the story in general--well into Russia Probe II - The Predicate. And that investigation involves real, documented collusion with Russia (on the part of the Clinton campaign and who knows who else) augmented by pervasive media dishonesty. The investigation will attempt to determine, among other things, how this whole Trump/Russia conspiracy idea began and why a special counsel was appointed in the first place, considering it is now clear there was never anything there. Indeed the real question may be whether that was obvious from the beginning. It will also try to ascertain when and where the surveillance of American citizens began and whether this spying (somehow couldn't come up with a better synonym for surveillance) was justifiable.

In other words, how did the USA drift into this totalitarian behavior? Who instigated this and how do we stop it from happening again? Serious punishments are probably necessary.

The Democrats prefer to forget or ignore that this second investigation--one that is likely to go on in one way or another until the 2020 election-- is now under the supervision of the very William Barr, attorney general of the United States, i. e. the chief law enforcement official of our country. And he is not about to resign, despite the clamoring of an army of fatuous hypocrites. These apparently include the aforementioned Ms. Hirono and Joe Biden, the well-known plagiaristwho stole his way through law school.

Nevertheless, irritating Mr. Barr, if you or your allies might be targets of this Russia Probe II, is, in the parlance, a dumb idea. In fact, you might even call it idiotic, in the realm of poking the tiger.

Yet the Democrats can't resist. Perhaps they think to smear Barr sufficiently to defang whatever findings might be coming. Good luck to them. One thing we saw at the hearing is that he is quicker than they are and better prepared.

But have no fear. James Comey is here. Writing in Wednesday's New York Times--a paper that still has a lot of explaining to do--the discredited (to put it mildly) former FBI director enlightens us on how fine public servants like Bill Barr go astray. Of course, it's Trump, who is to blame. "He eats your soul in small bites," Comey informs us.

Anything to deflect from the coming debacle. Mueller, Comey, and a host of others are afraid. They should be. America has a real attorney general.

What's interesting, and somewhat disturbing, in all this is how well these people know each other. It's quite incestuous. Mueller and Comey were buddies when Mueller was named special counsel after Comey was fired. Barr and Mueller have apparently known each other for thirty years.

So it was notable when Barr indicated in testimony Wednesday that when he phoned Mueller about the special counsel's letter of complaint, he did so on a speaker with others around, taking notes. Apparently, Bill didn't trust his old friend. Would you?

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
XXJefferson#51
1  seeder  XXJefferson#51    2 months ago

.....A number of Democratic lawmakers are calling on Attorney General William Barr to resign from office over his handling of the Mueller report's release, and his answers before Congressional committees on the subject.  These demands are baseless, partisan nonsense.  Barr has comported himself properly and honorably, fulfilling the two core promises he relayed to Senators during his confirmation hearings: First, that the Russia probe would be permitted to play out without interference, and second, that he would make Mueller's findings available to the public in the most transparent way possible.  He's betrayed neither of these promises.  Mueller completed his work without any limitations, and 92 percent of his final report has been accessible to the American public for weeks.  The balance of the document is blacked out with uncontroversial redactions, made in concert with Mueller's team, with certain members of Congress having access to an even less-censored copy.

Bizarrely, the thrust of the fury at Barr is focused on his original summary of Mueller's bottom-line findings, which has since been supplanted by the report itself.  Democrats have charged that Barr misrepresented what Mueller found in order to establish a narrative that helped President Trump -- a complaint they say was echoed by Robert Mueller in a leaked letter to Barr.  It's true that Mueller expressed concerns about Barr's memo, which Mueller wrote did not "fully capture the context, nature and substance" of the probe's results.  But Barr's letter was never intended to "fully capture" anything; it was meant to convey the report's bottom line legal findings.  Nevertheless, as a result of the letter, Barr and Mueller spoke on the phone, leading to this exchange, reported by the Washington Post:..... https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/05/01/the-lefts-barr-derangement-syndrome-is-ludicrous-n2545676

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    2 months ago

The truth is not maligning this lying sack of shit.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    2 months ago

One thing we saw at the hearing is that he is quicker than they are and better prepared  Anything to deflect from the coming debacle. Mueller, Comey, and a host of others are afraid. They should be. America has a real attorney general.

It's surprising that the democrat fools are not taking this seriously....yet!  Russia Probe II is a reality that will be coming to countless courtrooms in the near future.

 
 
 
epistte
2  epistte    2 months ago

If Barr has nothing to hide why was he a no-show in the House of Representatives today?

https://www.apnews.com/bfa49625a5114bb5b66ddc3b3e758804

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2    2 months ago

What were the idiots now running the House going to uncover that 6 hours in the senate couldn’t?  Nadler needs to be provoked and defied at every turn.  

 
 
 
tomwcraig
2.2  tomwcraig  replied to  epistte @2    2 months ago

You do realize that Nadler and the Democrats wanted a THIRD Party to conduct the questioning, correct?  They wanted an attorney whom is not a member of Congress to ask questions of Barr and Barr did not agree to that.  The question is, do you want Jerry "Torquemada" Nadler to continue to conduct his Inquisition to silence the non-believers instead of conducting fair and open hearings?  Did you see the tantrum Nadler made when Gaetz was asking to be recognized at the end of the 20 minute session?  Cutting off the microphone when someone is asking for recognition for a Point of Order request is childish.  I don't recall Grassley or any other Republican chairman doing that to the Democrats during all of their attempts to grandstand in previous hearings.

 
 
 
Sunshine
2.3  Sunshine  replied to  epistte @2    2 months ago

Why should he submit himself to the smearing and badgering of Democratic leaders?  They have shown that is their only interest.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.4  Freedom Warrior  replied to  epistte @2    2 months ago

I know the answer. But I have a better question.  WHy do you care?

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.5  It Is ME  replied to  epistte @2    2 months ago
If Barr has nothing to hide why was he a no-show in the House of Representatives today?

Just noting: 'Cause he didn't have to be ….. PART OF THE "SHOW" ! 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  JohnRussell    2 months ago

You posted the wrong link. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  JohnRussell @3    2 months ago

It’s been fixed. 

 
 
 
evilgenius
4  evilgenius    2 months ago

This isn't a circus - it's a fucking Shakespearean tragedy. Watch the suicidal Trump Administration talk itself into impeachment proceedings where the House will have the legal right to jail on contempt charges. 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
4.1  Freedom Warrior  replied to  evilgenius @4    2 months ago

Two can play that game. Guess what the DOJ is capable of doing in the prosecutorial arena.  There is a boat load of Dems that are shitting their pants right now given how exposed their corruption is becoming.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Freedom Warrior @4.1    2 months ago

What corruption from the dems?

Do tell what that corruption is from the dems?

When are those subpoenas against dems coming?

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.1.2  evilgenius  replied to  Freedom Warrior @4.1    2 months ago
Two can play that game. Guess what the DOJ is capable of doing in the prosecutorial arena.

Like I said it's a fucking Shakespearean tragedy. Or maybe a farce. I'm not sure which.

There is a boat load of Dems that are shitting their pants right now given how exposed their corruption is becoming.

You know me, if they are guilty of doing something they shouldn't then fuck 'em. They deserve to get what's coming. Maybe this will all serve to, you know, actually drain the swamp. Nawww... same swamp new swamp creatures.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @4.1.2    2 months ago
'You know me, if they are guilty of doing something they shouldn't then fuck 'em. They deserve to get what's coming.'

I agree - if there is corruption, find it and prosecute.

Otherwise the gop needs to shit or get off the pot.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.1.4  evilgenius  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.3    2 months ago
Otherwise the gop needs to shit or get off the pot.  

It seems there are a lot of people telling the DNC to do the same. I'm only pointing out to people here is political theater.

There is a lot of BS, posturing and obfuscation going on in both branches of government right now from both parties and will only get .... (I don't know the word) .... MORE, maybe, as it ramps up to the election. Remember Clinton was on trial during his re-election and the Republicans took a bath on that one. Pelosi knows that. Pelosi also knows there are plenty of skeletons in plenty of Trump closets and will make as much political hay out of that as she thinks she can get away with. If she smells blood in the water she'll bite! Trump will always hit back to the point he looks like a bully. That's been his MO forever. We'll see who comes out on top in Nov next year. Until then I have doubled down on stock in popcorn and aluminum foil.

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.2  Ronin2  replied to  evilgenius @4    2 months ago

After the shit Obama pulled only letting a very select few of his administration officials talk to Congress? Wishful thinking.

Fuck the Democrats. They have proven to be big bigger children then the Republicans. 

Go for impeachment- it will pass the House strictly on a party line vote- and then die in the Senate. The Dems will become the Demons the Republicans were for impeaching Clinton- who committed a real crime of lying under oath before a Grand Jury.  What the hell, maybe we will get to see Republicans pulling the same asinine move of standing on the White House lawn in support of Trump after partial impeachment.

The only person I feel sorry for in this whole mess is Carter Page. Accused of being a spy- having the FBI wire tap him, and everyone even remotely associated with him, trying to find a hint of any crime. His name and business have been dragged thru the mud by Steele, the FBI, and the leftist media morons.  Of course there is not one shred of truth to the him being a spy. Damage done- too bad so sad for him. No investigation into what morons in the FBI thought he was a spy; or the legality of the FISA warrants.

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.2.1  evilgenius  replied to  Ronin2 @4.2    2 months ago
Go for impeachment- it will pass the House strictly on a party line vote- and then die in the Senate.

Oh, you misunderstand. It's not about actual impeachment. Pelosi knows it will die in the Senate. It's about the expansion of power impeachment discovery gives the House. 

The only person I feel sorry for in this whole mess is Carter Page. Accused of being a spy- having the FBI wire tap him...

You need to go back and read up on this one. They were wiretapping the Russians (which is their job) when Page started taking phone calls with them. Then they expanded FISA warrant as they would for anyone to keep tabs on him. It's been pretty standard MO for the FBI since wiretaps. Page then lied to investigators about talking with the Russians - Why did he do that if he didn't think it was wrong?

 
 
 
Sunshine
4.2.2  Sunshine  replied to  evilgenius @4.2.1    2 months ago
Oh, you misunderstand. It's not about actual impeachment.  

So, there is no basis or underlying crime for impeachment, Dems only using it as a weapon to find some dirt on Trump.

mmmm...this sounds familiar.

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.2.3  evilgenius  replied to  Sunshine @4.2.2    2 months ago
o, there is no basis or underlying crime for impeachment, Dems only using it as a weapon to find some dirt on Trump. mmmm...this sounds familiar.

If it sounds familiar, it is House used non-compliance of the Nixon Administration during the Watergate investigation as the basis to open impeachment proceedings then. This House can do the same. I have no opinion on whether they will or whether they should, only it's been done before and can be done again. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
4.2.4  Sunshine  replied to  evilgenius @4.2.3    2 months ago

In the Articles of Impeachment for Nixon, the crime was a burgulary and the basis for the investigations.

There is no underlying crime involving Trump or his campaign that I am aware of.

The Democrats have been trying their hardest to fabricate something, but to no avail.

mmmm...this sounds familiar.

It wasn't Nixon I was referring to.

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.2.5  evilgenius  replied to  Sunshine @4.2.4    2 months ago
In the Articles of Impeachment for Nixon, the crime was a burgulary and the basis for the investigations.

Only one of the 3 articles of impeachment was for abuse of power. The other two were for obstruction of justice and contempt of Congress.

An impeachment process against Richard Nixon was formally initiated on February 6, 1974, when the United States House of Representatives passed a resolution, H.Res. 803, giving its Judiciary Committee authority to investigate whether sufficient grounds existed to impeach Richard Nixon. Following a subpoena from the Judiciary Committee, in April 1974 edited transcripts of many Watergate-related conversations from the Nixon White House tapes were made public by Nixon, but the committee pressed for full tapes and additional conversations. Nixon refused, but on July 24, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered him to comply. On July 27, 29, and 30, 1974, the Committee approved three articles of impeachment against Nixon, for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress, and reported those articles to the House of Representatives.
 
 
 
Sunshine
4.2.6  Sunshine  replied to  evilgenius @4.2.5    2 months ago

Again, there was an underlying crime.  As stated in Article 1.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_process_against_Richard_Nixon

On July 27, 1974, the Committee voted 27–11 to recommend the first article of impeachment against the president: obstruction of justice.[93][94] The Committee then recommended the second article, abuse of power, on July 29, 1974.[95] The next day, on July 30, 1974, the Committee recommended the third article: contempt of Congress.[97] Article I alleged in part:
On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-election of the President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his close subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities.[98]

The current House Democrats have no crime or basis for an investigation.  They are not interested in impeachment as you stated, they are only looking for dirt on Trump to get a resignation.  Using taxpayers dollars to do so.  

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
4.2.7  Colour Me Free  replied to  evilgenius @4.2.1    2 months ago
Page then lied to investigators about talking with the Russians - Why did he do that if he didn't think it was wrong?

Here are two different versions of the Carter Page timeline [I think it is important to have something to compare to] of events prior to joining the Trump campaign and after. Interesting that he was not charged for lieing to investigators if he did do so. I know that Page continued to deny having met with the Russians the Steele Dossier says he met with ... I am sincerely curious if you have a link that I have missed regarding Carter Page .. outside of a 'meeting' in July of 2016 .. where did Page 'lie' to investigators?

https://www.justsecurity.org/46786/timeline-carter-pages-contacts-russia/

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/11/a-timeline-of-carter-pages-contacts-with-russia.html

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.3  Greg Jones  replied to  evilgenius @4    2 months ago
the suicidal Trump Administration talk itself into impeachment proceedings where the House will have the legal right to jail on contempt charges. 

Nonsense genius....if the dopey dems had any reason to impeach, they would have already done so. They know it would amount to yet another utter progressive failure with the elections coming up.

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.3.1  evilgenius  replied to  Greg Jones @4.3    2 months ago

I never said they would or should. Only that they could. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5  Sean Treacy    2 months ago

I see support for impeachment is down to 29% in a Qunnipac poll.

Democrats have spent two years believing Mueller was going to expose Trump as a Russian agent who coordinated the theft of the 2016 election, vindicate the Steele dossier and lead to his impeachment and removal from office.  When instead the Mueller report put the nail in the coffin of the Russia collusion conspiracy and consisted of little else then regurgitated stories that had already been published, Democrats were bound to lose their minds. They've just learned their is no Santa Claus and are acting out.

So now they are raging because a document that was released to the public summarizing a report that was released to the public wasn't released on the schedule they demanded.  Like angry toddlers, they are irrationally  lashing out and it will pass when they get distracted by the next shiny object of hatred.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5    2 months ago
So now they are raging because a document that was released to the public summarizing a report that was released to the public wasn't released on the schedule they demanded. 

In a couple weeks we will possibly know what Mueller thinks. If he says that Barr misrepresented the ful context nature and substance of the report in his "summary", and since we know Barr lied about the disagreement, it will be time to impeach Barr. 

You are somehow willing to accept all sorts of low behavior from the Trump administration. 

We now know that ONE DAY after Barr's Mar 24 summary, Mueller was expressing disagreement with it, and asking Barr to release the full report's executive summaries. ONE DAY. That means that as soon as Mueller saw it, he recognized that Barr's summary was incomplete (at best).  This was before the "media" got much involved. Before public concerns. But rather simply based on what Mueller saw in the Barr summary. 

Mueller intended to leave it up to Congress to act on the obstruction of justice. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
5.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    2 months ago
Mueller intended to leave it up to Congress to act on the obstruction of justice. 

Of which there was none, as both the summary and full report have made clear. jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5.1.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    2 months ago

f he says that Barr misrepresented the ful context nature and substance of the report in his "summary",

We have the full report. Mueller's opinion, whatever it is, isn't particularly meaningful.  The full report and Barr's letter speak for themselves. If you can use the actual report to show what conclusion of Mueller's Barr misrepresented, go right ahead.  There's no need to wait for Mueller.

now Barr lied about the disagreement, it will be time to impeach Barr

When did Barr lie? I think you need to look at what he he said again. 

 That means that as soon as Mueller saw it, he recognized that Barr's summary was incomplete (at best)

Let's say you are correct. So what?  Mueller reported to Barr, not the other way around.  Barr had every right to simply keep the entire report private.

Mueller intended to leave it up to Congress to act on the obstruction of justice. 

He's an idiot then. His report was to Barr, not to Congress.  

And his full report was given to Congress anyway.  So there's nothing keeping Congress from acting on it. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @5.1.1    2 months ago
Of which there was none, as both the summary and full report have made clear.

Greg, you really should quit while you are behind. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.1.2    2 months ago
Barr had every right to simply keep the entire report private.

It's not a matter of rights, it's a matter of right and wrong. 

You could look at it as the Volume II of the report as being much more negative about Trump than most people realize, considering that in the very first paragraphs of the volums Mueller says that before they started they had determined that Trump would not be indicted, per Justice Dept guidelines. 

Even so, Mueller concludes that Trump cannot be exonerated. 

"I can't indict him"  but "he is not exonerated".

Sounds a lot like "I wish I could indict him". 

 
 
 
It Is ME
5.1.5  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.4    2 months ago
It's not a matter of rights, it's a matter of right and wrong.

You sound like Uber "Lefty" Sen. Mazie Hirono. jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/1/18525727/william-barr-testimony-mazie-hirono-senate

"Hirono  asked Barr questions after her speech, including whether he thought Trump’s behavior — when he fired FBI Director James Comey, for instance, or when he asked White House counsel Don McGahn to lie for him — was “appropriate,” even if it didn’t rise to the level of a crime."

Mueller was investigating a Supposed "Crime", not some "Feelings" SHIT !

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5.1.6  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.4    2 months ago
Mt's not a matter of rights, it's a matter of right and wrong.

But he published the entire report.  That was the right thing to do and he did it, even though there was no obligation to do so.

ueller says that before they started they had determined that Trump would not be indicted

Okay. So Mueller couldn't actually indict Trump for obstruction. That doesn't mean he couldn't say "we believe the President committed the crime of obstruction and these are my reasons for believing that", without actually indicting him.  That's what Ken Starr did.

Mueller knew there was no there, there, so he did the worst thing he could and aired all the dirty laundry he could about Trump without putting his name behind a laughable allegation of a crime. As the leaked letter on the eve of Barr's testimony proves, this was a political operation by Mueller and he tried to harm Trump politically, since he knew he didn't have a legal leg to stand on. 

Mueller concludes that Trump cannot be exonerated.

Prosecutors don't "Exonerate" people. They charge them, or they don't.  

 
 
 
tomwcraig
5.1.7  tomwcraig  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.4    2 months ago

So, you are okay with Congress violating the separation of powers?  Mueller worked for the Executive Branch, the entire investigation was started by the DOJ not Congress.  As such, Congress has no rights to the Mueller report or to use that information against the Executive Branch.  This is unlike Ken Starr, whom was appointed by the Judicial branch to investigate Whitewater and as such was bound to release his report to Congress due to Congress being the only branch able to act on his investigation as they were independent to both the Judicial and Executive branches, which respectively were the branches that appointed him and he was investigating.

https://www.nytimes.com/1994/08/06/us/the-whitewater-inquiry-the-decision-judges-appoint-new-prosecutor-for-whitewater.html

 
 
 
epistte
5.1.8  epistte  replied to  tomwcraig @5.1.7    2 months ago
As such, Congress has no rights to the Mueller report or to use that information against the Executive Branch.  This is unlike Ken Starr, whom was appointed by the Judicial branch to investigate Whitewater and as such was bound to release his report to Congress due to Congress being the only branch able to act on his investigation as they were independent to both the Judicial and Executive branches, which respectively were the branches that appointed him and he was investigating.

The law was changed in 1999, after the Starr report.

 
 
 
tomwcraig
5.1.9  tomwcraig  replied to  epistte @5.1.8    2 months ago

They still don't have any rights to the report due to separation of powers.  They cannot force the Executive branch to hand over its enforcement duties to Congress, which is what Nadler is trying to do here.

 
 
 
epistte
5.1.10  epistte  replied to  tomwcraig @5.1.9    2 months ago
They still don't have any rights to the report due to separation of powers.  They cannot force the Executive branch to hand over its enforcement duties to Congress, which is what Nadler is trying to do here.

The congressional intelligence and judicial oversight committees can subpoena it. 

If Trump is innocent of obstruction and collusion then what does he have to hide? Should he want everyone to see how innocent he is, if you sincerely believe that claim to be true? 

 
 
 
tomwcraig
5.1.11  tomwcraig  replied to  epistte @5.1.10    2 months ago

You do realize that they HAVE the report already, right?  Granted it is the same redacted report that we have access to, but they do have it.  They are calling for Barr's impeachment because Mueller had a letter saying that the full context wasn't released in the 4 page summary, not that the conclusions of that 4 page summary was incorrect.  In truth, the Democrats are grandstanding and conducting their version of the Spanish Inquisition to gain cheap political points.  Frankly, Nadler and company need to be held accountable for their lack of ethics in regard to this entire matter as they want everything so they can leak it and use it to gain political power not to actually hold Trump accountable for wrongdoing, since the report finds no wrongdoing by Trump.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
5.1.12  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  tomwcraig @5.1.11    2 months ago

Your summation is perfect! jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
tomwcraig
5.1.13  tomwcraig  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @5.1.12    2 months ago

Thank you.

 
 
 
luther28
6  luther28    2 months ago

Suicidal Dems Continue to Foolishly Malign Barr

Now that I have come to after passing out from the sheer shock of what I am about to admit, I agree to a point.

That some of the Dems saw fit to make this a personal attack on Mr. Barr is a bit disconcerting. That is exactly how they lost much public support during the Kavanaugh confirmation attempting to make it personal with a dash of histrionics mixed in for good measure. Drill for the facts, we can figure out Mr. Barr's act on our own.

While many folks today revel in the transformation of Government into another entertainment vehicle, filled with drama, cliffhangers and the like, some of us still want the Government to function in a professional fashion. I suppose that notion has been dead for some time along with duty and honor.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
7  Greg Jones    2 months ago

One thing we saw at the hearing is that he is quicker than they are and better prepared  Anything to deflect from the coming debacle. Mueller, Comey, and a host of others are afraid. They should be. America has a real attorney general

Mr. Barr is no fool, nor a person to mess with. He's been around a long time. He's got a lot of evidence and facts, and is in the process of gathering more. The Dems can't seem to learn from their ongoing series of mistakes. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
8  Sunshine    2 months ago

384

 
 
 
epistte
8.1  epistte  replied to  Sunshine @8    2 months ago
 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.1  1stwarrior  replied to  epistte @8.1    2 months ago

320

 
 
 
epistte
8.1.2  epistte  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.1    2 months ago

Barr lied when he said that the Mueller report exonerated Trump.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.3  1stwarrior  replied to  epistte @8.1    2 months ago

You're close - but no cigar.

This is what Mueller and Barr said - Barr called Mueller and pointedly asked whether he was claiming that Barr’s March 24 letter articulating Mueller’s findings was inaccurate. Mueller responded that he was making no such claimhe was, instead, irritated by the press coverage of Barr’s letter. 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/the-big-lie-that-barr-lied/

The press - the media - the Dems/Libs lying through their teeth publicity source.  Mueller's staff pushed Mueller to sign a letter because they didn't get the attention they thought they would receive after such momentous and arduous work.  They wanted their 15 MINUTES OF FAME and Barr didn't give it to them in his four page "White Paper" that was released.  In fact, Mueller's letter was not for public purview - but, guess what - some of the poor misunderstood and under-appreciated staff members LEAKED the letter the night before Barr was to testify on Wednesday.

 
 
 
epistte
8.1.4  epistte  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.3    2 months ago

That is not what Bob Mueller said,

Mr. Mueller’s tone and tenor are remarkable — and a sharp rebuke to Mr. Barr.

“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions,” Mr. Mueller wrote in a letter addressed to Mr. Barr, whose characterizations of Mr. Mueller’s investigation have also come under fire by members of the special counsel’s team.

The special counsel notes in his letter that just a day after Mr. Barr’s effort to spin the findings of the investigation (which Mr. Trump crowed was a “Complete and Total EXONERATION”), Mr. Mueller raised “concern” about all the confusion and misreporting that the attorney general had caused.

“There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation,” Mr. Mueller wrote. “This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”
 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.5  1stwarrior  replied to  epistte @8.1.2    2 months ago

He never said that - "AG Barr to Congress: "No, I did not exonerate” President Trump. “I said that we did not believe that there was sufficient evidence to establish an obstruction offense;” says Americans can decide for themselves.

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/ag-barr-no-i-did-not-exonerate-president-trump-1515637315942

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.6  1stwarrior  replied to  epistte @8.1.4    2 months ago

Where's that link of yours.  Your "quote" came many days before the Congress shuffle.  I, and I'm sure others, would love to see the link of that statement.

 
 
 
epistte
8.1.7  epistte  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.6    2 months ago
Where's that link of yours.  Your "quote" came many days before the Congress shuffle.  I, and I'm sure others, would love to see the link of that statement.

Do you not know how to use the Google machine to locate the source of the quote?  Copy the quote, paste it to Google and search.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/opinion/barr-mueller-letter.html

My post in 8.1 has the Robert Mueller letter in its entirety on a PDF at CNN.com

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.8  1stwarrior  replied to  epistte @8.1.7    2 months ago

Didn't want to read the New York Democratic Times tale of woe.  Not interested in how the media has portrayed the "letter".  More interested in the conversation Barr and Mueller had which is why I posted what I did.  Especially since the "conversation" included Mueller's statements that he WASN'T dissatisfied with Barr's summary - he was just dissatisfied with the LACK OF MEDIA COVERAGE.

Pretty well tells all where their priorities are.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
8.1.9  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.8    2 months ago

It’s a good thing that the Barr Mueller phone call was on speaker phone and notes were taken.  Dems are simply trying to damage Barr before the investigations of the AG and IG reveal all the democrat sleaze in the Clinton campaign and Obama regime.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
8.1.10  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @8.1.7    2 months ago

Mueller made his report .  All of it save means and methods for national security purposes and grand jury testimony that’s protected has been released to congress and to the public.  It’s time to move on and subject Trumps Hillary campaigns and  obama regime hack attackers to the same scrutiny as they put on Trump, Family, and friends

 
 
 
tomwcraig
8.1.11  tomwcraig  replied to  epistte @8.1.4    2 months ago

Here is what happened:

1) Mueller sends his report to the AG

2) AG reads report and summarizes the report

3) AG releases summary of report

4) Mueller objects to the summary of the report as not giving the full context of the report completely ignoring the fact that a summary is meant to only do one thing: MAKE YOU WANT TO READ THE COMPLETE WORK.

If it wasn't meant to draw you in, then ALL the books out there would never have them on the jacket sleeve or published online, in newspapers, and/or in magazines.  That is almost like claiming that the movie trailer failed to give you the full context of Avengers: Endgame or the synopsis of "The Hobbit" didn't give you the full context of Bilbo's adventure to The Lonely Mountain.  It is not meant to do so, it is only meant to as Inigo Montoya says "Let me explain, no there is too much, let me sum up." in "The Princess Bride".

 
 
 
lib50
9  lib50    2 months ago

Lets just see what the Mueller report really does say and what Mueller has to say about what Barr said and did.  We know we can't trust Barr to do anything but protect Trump, and I think he will end up like John Mitchell, in jail.  These people aren't above the law and will have to face their actions.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
9.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  lib50 @9    2 months ago

We already know what the Mueller report says.  We already know what Mueller said to Barr about the summary of the report.  As to what you seek, there is no there there. 

 
 
 
epistte
9.1.1  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @9.1    2 months ago
We already know what the Mueller report says.  We already know what Mueller said to Barr about the summary of the report.  As to what you seek, there is no there there. 

Have you read Robert Mueller's letter to the DOJ  saying that was AG Barr said about the investigation was incomplete and not entirely accurate?  Read the 3rd paragraph very carefully.

-1x-1.jpg

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online






devangelical
ArkansasHermit-too


57 visitors