Mueller Investigation pt5

[smartcooky]

Why, what did I say that's so egregiously wrong?

I don't think aup was referring to what you said, I think he was referring to someone's presumption of your alleged "dishonesty".

 

[newyorkguy]

...Every time the ******* Trump tower meeting is brought up, every conservative on this forum wipes their memory of past conversations about it clean, so that everyone has to start the presentation of the evidence over...

Very true. There's a "Groundhog Day" quality to it.

.

 

[Belz...]

Very true. There's a "Groundhog Day" quality to it.

.

It's deliberate. It's an effective way to shut down discussion entirely. Very counter-productive, which is the entire point.

 

[smartcooky]

Fringe reset.

This is no different than a discussion with a conspiracy theorist, except that the roles are reversed. Every time the ******* Trump tower meeting is brought up, every conservative on this forum wipes their memory of past conversations about it clean, so that everyone has to start the presentation of the evidence over.

You have been lurking in the JFK forums haven't you!?

 

[Belz...]

You have been lurking in the JFK forums haven't you!?

Well, I'm a 9/11 veteran, after all.

Plus a Jabba thread veteran. I know all about fringe resets.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I've found that screenshots work well with CTers and others using that tactic. When you post a reply, screenshot the question and reply. Next time the question is asked, just post the screenshot.

Worked so well with an alternative/CTer troll on Face that he blocked me .

 

[Stacko]

Just in: Mueller’s evidence on obstruction was alarming and significant — “much more acute than Barr suggested,” per one source. There was “immediate displeasure” among special counsel team members. WaPo matches NYT scoop tonight​

Link.

But members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant.

“It was much more acute than Barr suggested,” said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity.

The New York Times first reported that some special counsel investigators feel that Barr did not adequately portray their findings.

Some members of the office were particularly disappointed that Barr did not release summary information the special counsel team had prepared, according to two people familiar with their reactions.

“There was immediate displeasure from the team when they saw how the attorney general had characterized their work instead,” according one U.S. official briefed on the matter.

Summaries were prepared for different sections of the report, with a view that they could made public, the official said.

The report was prepared “so that the front matter from each section could have been released immediately — or very quickly,” the official said. “It was done in a way that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself.”

 

[Aridas]

Just in: Mueller’s evidence on obstruction was alarming and significant — “much more acute than Barr suggested,” per one source. There was “immediate displeasure” among special counsel team members. WaPo matches NYT scoop tonight​

Link.

Honestly, it would actually have been more surprising if Barr actually had done his job properly, given the circumstances at hand. I've been calling him a Trump toadie for good reason, regardless.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Honestly, it would actually have been more surprising if Barr actually had done his job properly, given the circumstances at hand. I've been calling him a Trump toadie for good reason, regardless.

Barr made a big deal in his hearings that he is neutral because he has nothing left to prove.
Well, whatever credibility he had he pissed away - just like anyone working for Trump.
Amazing that Republicans don't learn about Orange Germ Theory.

 

[Stacko]

Barr made a big deal in his hearings that he is neutral because he has nothing left to prove.
Well, whatever credibility he had he pissed away - just like anyone working for Trump.
Amazing that Republicans don't learn about Orange Germ Theory.

It's astonishing that the guy that helped Bush the Greater and Reagan get away with Iran/Contra would do it again.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Hooray for the whistle blowers! I knew there had to be some people seething somewhere.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Why would it disappear? Have you ever seen me edit a post to hide something I said earlier? It's insulting that you'd even imply it, and I'd like you to retract that.

How about you address my post instead? Is it legal or not for election campaigns to coordinate with foreign powers to gain advantages in elections?

Turnabout is fair play and ditto. I will address your post when the investigation is complete about the origin of the dossier that gave Mueller his start.
Chris B.

 

[Stacko]

Turnabout is fair play and ditto. I will address your post when the investigation is complete about the origin of the dossier that gave Mueller his start.Chris B.

That's a weird way to refer to Trump firing Comey for investigating things George Papadopoulos said while drunk.

On or about May 10, 2016, at London's Kensington Wine Rooms, Papadopoulos allegedly told the top Australian diplomat to the United Kingdom, Alexander Downer, that Russia was in possession of emails relating to Hillary Clinton. In July, after the DNC hacking had become known, the Australians told U.S. authorities about Papadopoulos's comment, leading the Federal Bureau of Investigation to open a counterintelligence investigation into the Donald Trump presidential campaign on July 31, 2016.[28][39]

 

[Cabbage]

Turnabout is fair play and ditto. I will address your post when the investigation is complete about the origin of the dossier that gave Mueller his start.
Chris B.

Jesus Christ, dude, that's probably several months if not a few years away.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Turnabout is fair play and ditto. I will address your post when the investigation is complete about the origin of the dossier that gave Mueller his start.
Chris B.

You do understand that it was Trump's appointed Deputy AG who, with overwhelming bipartisan support hired a Republican FBI director to investigate the Russian interference, right?
At no stage, Democrats were involved in the process.

So I don't understand how you could "turnabout" against Republicans. Or was it The Deep State^TM ?

 

[smartcooky]

Just in: Mueller’s evidence on obstruction was alarming and significant — “much more acute than Barr suggested,” per one source. There was “immediate displeasure” among special counsel team members. WaPo matches NYT scoop tonight​

Link.

For two years, Meuller's crew does NOT leak... not a drop... nada.... nothing... and now, its starting to leak. This tells me there are some very pissed-off people who who don't like seeing the product of two years of their lives being mischaracterized and crapped all over by a Trump toady.

Interesting listening to Neal Katyal today, saying that Mueller, as Special Counsel, is independent of the DoJ and once he has completed his work, he is no longer under the auspices of the AG, which means he could testify before Congress and Barr could not block him from doing so. Katyal is the author of the Special Counsel Regulations, so he ought to know what he is talking about.

It would not surprise me in the least if one of Mueller's crew blew the whistle and leaked the report to Congress.... and if that happens....

 

[The Great Zaganza]

It seems clear to me that Mueller, being aware of the massively reduced power of the Special Counsel, was expecting the House to do what he might not be able to: subpoena Trump personally.

 

[TofuFighter]

For two years, Meuller's crew does NOT leak... not a drop... nada.... nothing... and now, its starting to leak. This tells me there are some very pissed-off people who who don't like seeing the product of two years of their lives being mischaracterized and crapped all over by a Trump toady.

...........

This was exactly my first thought.

As to whether they're pissed off about being misrepresented by Barr, I don't know. I'm curious about whether the Mueller team would have discussed whether it was ok to leak info after the end of the investigation, or whether the leak, such as it is, is somehow condoned by, presumably, Mueller himself.

I say 'such as it is', because I haven't seen any information specifically referring to the investigation being leaked, only apparent dissatisfaction that the report hasn't been treated the way it was expected to have been.

 

[smartcooky]

This was exactly my first thought.

As to whether they're pissed off about being misrepresented by Barr, I don't know. I'm curious about whether the Mueller team would have discussed whether it was ok to leak info after the end of the investigation, or whether the leak, such as it is, is somehow condoned by, presumably, Mueller himself.

I say 'such as it is', because I haven't seen any information specifically referring to the investigation being leaked, only apparent dissatisfaction that the report hasn't been treated the way it was expected to have been.

Its more than just that......from the link posted by Stacko in post #3047

[B]arr told lawmakers that he concluded the evidence was not sufficient to prove that the president obstructed justice.

But members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant.

“It was much more acute than Barr suggested,” said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity.

The New York Times first reported that some special counsel investigators feel that Barr did not adequately portray their findings.

Some members of the office were particularly disappointed that Barr did not release summary information the special counsel team had prepared, according to two people familiar with their reactions.
​

What we need here is an "after the fact" Mark Felt; someone to leak parts of the report to the press in order to force Barr's hand.

Perhaps the Democratic candidates should take a leaf out of Trump's book

"DoJ employees, if you're listening, we hope you will leak the Mueller Report to Congress, and if you do, we publicly guarantee that if you are indicted and charged, we'll pardon you"

 

[Mumbles]

For two years, Meuller's crew does NOT leak... not a drop... nada.... nothing... and now, its starting to leak. This tells me there are some very pissed-off people who who don't like seeing the product of two years of their lives being mischaracterized and crapped all over by a Trump toady.

Two possibilities:

1) It's a faked leak. We've seen people try this before - recall a couple of years ago when someone tried to slip a fake memo to Rachel Maddow's crew.

But the NYT, even more than Maddow, tend to be rather thorough when reporting on this sort of thing...

2) A few people, as you said, are very upset that Barr's lying about their years of work - and to Congress, no less. I think many of us can understand being angry if someone misrepresented our work.