Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
"the special counsel did not find any conspiracy to violate US law." – AG Barr

Where's the evidence that he is lying?
 
Bogative said:
"the special counsel did not find any conspiracy to violate US law." – AG Barr

Where's the evidence that he is lying?
Click to expand...
Where's the evidence that he is truthful?

(They're both in the report he's refusing to release.)
 
Bogative said:
"the special counsel did not find any conspiracy to violate US law." – AG Barr

Where's the evidence that he is lying?
Click to expand...
given that we haven't seen the report, and given that it will be redacted even when we do see it, this is the rhetorical equivalent of walking up to a clothed person lounging by the pool, challenging them to a race, and then you instantly start swimming.
 
varwoche said:
given that we haven't seen the report, and given that it will be redacted even when we do see it, this is the rhetorical equivalent of walking up to a clothed person lounging by the pool, challenging them to a race, and then you instantly start swimming.
Click to expand...


No reason to believe he is lying or that any crimes were redacted, then.
 
Barr said he considered Trump's motives when making the judgement not to see his actions as obstruction.
He doesn't get to do that in the absence of any testimony from Trump. It's like a Judge not wanting to hear from the defendant, but simply assuming that he didn't mean no harm.
Sorry, but Barr is full of BS. Others, including Mueller I wager, would have charged Trump if he hadn't the presidential get-out-of-jail-free card.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Barr said he considered Trump's motives when making the judgement not to see his actions as obstruction.
He doesn't get to do that in the absence of any testimony from Trump. It's like a Judge not wanting to hear from the defendant, but simply assuming that he didn't mean no harm.
Sorry, but Barr is full of BS. Others, including Mueller I wager, would have charged Trump if he hadn't the presidential get-out-of-jail-free card.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
Bogative said:
No reason to believe he is lying or that any crimes were redacted, then.
Click to expand...
Actually there's plenty of evidence to believe he's lying. There is:

- The fact that Barr did the exact same thing over a decade ago (gave a 'summary' of a report that ignored important conclusions the report made.) Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me and all that stuff.

- Barr had been critical of Mueller's work since before he was nominated. Kind of hard to think that after all that, he'd find it easy to act in a fair and unbiased manner

- Reports that some people who had worked with Mueller were unsatisfied with Barr's summary

Now MAYBE the report actually does what Barr claims it does. But he is an unreliable actor in this.
 
The clincher for me was no one from Mueller's team attending the press release. There's spin and there's coverup. This is definitely the latter.
 
Current and former members of the DoJ are saying that they are mortified by the way Barr has gone off the reservation. None of them have ever seen a situation where the AG has held given a press conference about a report that has not been released yet, without the author of the report present.

Its fairly obvious to me what Barr is up to here... he is acting as Trump's lawyer, as he pre-spins the report to create an environment for Trump's base to scream no collusion.
 
smartcooky said:
Current and former members of the DoJ are saying that they are mortified by the way Barr has gone off the reservation. None of them have ever seen a situation where the AG has held given a press conference about a report that has not been released yet, without the author of the report present.

Its fairly obvious to me what Barr is up to here... he is acting as Trump's lawyer, as he pre-spins the report to create an environment for Trump's base to scream no collusion.
Click to expand...

Mueller finding "no collusion" seems to be true, but the obstruction thing is totally different. Barr was simply arguing that obstruction is okay in this case because the POTUS was "sincerely" freaked out. :rolleyes:
 
kellyb said:
Mueller finding "no collusion" seems to be true, but the obstruction thing is totally different. Barr was simply arguing that obstruction is okay in this case because the POTUS was "sincerely" freaked out. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well Barr didn't get that from Mueller because Mueller never interviewed Trump, so where did Barr get that from.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom