Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
One nice thing about the Mueller investigation being over is that it marks the final shovel of dirt on resistance grifters like Seth Ambramson and others.

Here is one about one of the biggest failures:

Maddow melts down
 
RecoveringYuppy said:
You said "According to Mueller Barr misrepresented his report". Did Mueller actually say that or not?
Click to expand...

Barr said Mueller exonerated Trump. Mueller said no such thing.

This would be the same thing. Mueller NEVER exonerated Trump. He merely did not indict Trump. The two are not the same thing.
 
acbytesla said:
According to Mueller Barr misrepresented his report. He did not exonerate Trump or Don Jr or the Trump campaign.
Click to expand...
RecoveringYuppy said:
When did that happen?
Click to expand...
acbytesla said:
Barr said Mueller exonerated Trump. Mueller said no such thing.
Click to expand...
RecoveringYuppy said:
You said "According to Mueller Barr misrepresented his report". Did Mueller actually say that or not?
Click to expand...
From my imperfect knowledge RecoveringYuppy has a point. If Mueller has not made an explicit claim, we can't say he takes issue with Barr's letter.

But RecoveringYuppy, no word of Barr's letter is included by accident, including this: "The Special Counsel’s report states that 'while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.'"

That's on obstruction.

I'm not clear when Barr said Mueller exonerated him. I don't see it in Barr's letter. Much of the letter uses "we" to refer to Barr and Rosenstein. I believe Barr is trying very hard not to lie in writing.
 
The Big Dog said:
One nice thing about the Mueller investigation being over is that it marks the final shovel of dirt on resistance grifters like Seth Ambramson and others.

Here is one about one of the biggest failures:

Maddow melts down
Click to expand...

Willa Paskin is Slate's TV media editor. She admits that she hasn't been watching Maddow for years, yet nonetheless deduced that she's a conspiracy theorist like Glen Beck and Howard Beale. She apparently tuned in this week to see if Maddow is properly humiliated and instead sees her talking about all the stuff we still don't know.

Yeah, it's all over, Dog -- except for all that stuff we still don't know about.
 
acbytesla said:
Ahh you got me. Allow me to say it. Mueller misrepresented what Mueller said.
Click to expand...
Again I haven't parsed all of the language, let alone the punctuation. It's quite possible to lie with punctuation, but it would probably be harder to prove.

It seems Team Trump wanted to set up a buzz similar to the game "Chinese Whispers" or "Telephone" - allow the message to get distorted by traditional and social media. On both sides, although conservatives IMO have better game in this area. I'm not trying to set up a false equivalence, just to show how easily that can happen even without having strong biases one way or the other.
 
For example it is Barr's "hope" and "goal" to send a minimally redacted report to Congress. Meanwhile he lays the foundation for redactions.
 
Minoosh said:
From my imperfect knowledge RecoveringYuppy has a point. If Mueller has not made an explicit claim, we can't say he takes issue with Barr's letter.
Click to expand...
Correct. No matter how correct acbytesla may think his opinion is he doesn't get to claim Mueller said it unless Mueller actually said it. I really don't see how this point is so hard to get.

Minoosh said:
But RecoveringYuppy, no word of Barr's letter is included by accident, including this: "The Special Counsel’s report states that 'while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.'"

That's on obstruction.

I'm not clear when Barr said Mueller exonerated him. I don't see it in Barr's letter. Much of the letter uses "we" to refer to Barr and Rosenstein. I believe Barr is trying very hard not to lie in writing.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I agree, I'm not aware of Barr ever making the unqualified statement that Mueller exonerated Trump. I was going to bring that point out to after reviewing more recent news to see if Barr had said something like that since his memo. It appears acbytesla is completely wrong about what he said about both Barr and Mueller.
 
Venom said:
She definitely went full Truther and is looking really silly now.
Click to expand...

Utter ********. Unlike any Truther, she has been very accurately reporting what is known, not making unsubstantiated claims, and you and I both know why it was -- and still is! -- highly suspicious stuff.
 
acbytesla said:
?? What are You talking about? Mueller NEVER exonerated Trump. Barr said he did. Is that or is that not a misrepresentation?
Click to expand...

Sorry, AC, but the Yuppy is right. You said that "according to Mueller", Barr misrepresented him. The plain meaning is that Mueller has said that Barr misrepresented him.

You're re-interpreting your own words to mean that Mueller said X, Barr said that Mueller said NOT X and so "according to Mueller, Barr misrepresented him." But the proper way to express this is "Barr misrepresented Mueller" and leave "according to" out altogether.

This isn't a nitpicky criticism. I read your post and was confused -- when did Mueller say that? RecoveringYuppy was evidently confused too. It's fine if you didn't intend to imply that, just say so and drop the weak argument that you said nothing misleading.

No offense intended. I genuinely like your posts.
 
phiwum said:
This isn't a nitpicky criticism. I read your post and was confused -- when did

Mueller say that?
Click to expand...


I agree. It's not nitpicky. It would be super important if Mueller had actually said that. I hadn't been following the news for a couple of days so I could have actually missed that.
 
phiwum said:
Sorry, AC, but the Yuppy is right. You said that "according to Mueller", Barr misrepresented him. The plain meaning is that Mueller has said that Barr misrepresented him.

You're re-interpreting your own words to mean that Mueller said X, Barr said that Mueller said NOT X and so "according to Mueller, Barr misrepresented him." But the proper way to express this is "Barr misrepresented Mueller" and leave "according to" out altogether.

This isn't a nitpicky criticism. I read your post and was confused -- when did Mueller say that? RecoveringYuppy was evidently confused too. It's fine if you didn't intend to imply that, just say so and drop the weak argument that you said nothing misleading.

No offense intended. I genuinely like your posts.
Click to expand...

I believe that Barr was very careful not to say anything that would prove to be false. But Trump and his merry trumpers are gleefully misrepresenting what the Barr letter actually says.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom