Mueller Report Imminent

#4,652
#4,652
volfanjustin said:
Let's see over the past 3 years we have heard:
Trump is cooked
Don Jr is cooked
Kushner is cooked
So now it's Barr???? Hahahaha suck it up libs and move on, can't handle you all lost again
Click to expand...


Trump is crooked. I give Don, Jr. a bit of a pass because he is dumb. Jared "a couple of Facebook ads" Kushner is a conman who launders Russian money on a weekly basis.
 
#4,654
#4,654
Trump Derangement Syndrome at it's finest. Extremely selective on what was said.

"Mueller...Objected...Barr...Report."
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#4,656
#4,656
AM64 said:
So when do we get past:

When does that distinction become "close enough" to be accepted and to move on? In science we have to recognize the limits of ability to measure, resolution, measurement accuracy, etc. If you can only measure to a couple of decimal places, it's wrong to keep adding digits to falsely imply greater accuracy. In this case the bar would appear to be whether there was anything to warrant prosecution; if not, it's over. If two years of a witch hunt didn't find it, it's not there.
Click to expand...
If your laboratory buys some fancy new machine that, among other things, determines whether a liquid is an acid or a base, you pour in a gallon of liquid and the machine tells you it’s pH is somewhere between 4 and 11, do you go around telling people that the machine told you the liquid was acidic?

NorthDallas40 said:
If I misinterpreted your text my bad Rocky. It just read that way to me is all. It could just be your narrative was close enough to the rest of the ongoing diatribe of never relenting on collusion and I threw you in that group. We rarely agree on the final position but at least we’ve been able to keep it civil.

Do a quick search about Barr and his supposed reaction to Mueller not issuing an obstruction finding one way or the other. He was supposedly madder than a pissed on hornets nest.
Click to expand...

I will.
AM64 said:
I'll have to admit that if you misread his comments, you weren't the only one who was confused. I sure thought that he was saying that Meuller's conclusions weren't satisfactory.
Click to expand...

I’m not saying his conclusions are not satisfactory, I’m saying the report’s conclusion do not support your personal conclusions like “it’s proven there was no collusion” and, if I’m reading it correctly, “if a prosecutor doesn’t prosecute that means no crime occurred.” (I’m sure all the unsolved murder victims’ families will be heartened by this.)

Let me try it a different way. I’ll try to try to make this engineer/scientist friendly:

Basically envision “proof” as a Y axis that runs from -1 (absolute guilt) to 1 (absolute innocence). Probable cause is something like -.51, and beyond a reasonable doubt would be about -.8.
We don’t know what threshold Mueller set for doing what he did in Volume II. It’s at least probable cause (the legal standard for an indictment) but IMO as the investigation winds down the level of certainty needs to be higher to bring a charge or make a charging recommendation, I can’t say for certain that Mueller would agree with that.

The point at which the analysis changes from “can’t prove conspiracy” to “proven to be no conspiracy” is also debatable, but it’s definitely greater than 0.

Mueller’s conclusion was that the proof fell somewhere between those two points. Basically, that there was evidence to justify suspicion, but not to bring a charge.

Saying, “well he’s a prosecutor and he didn’t prosecute” tells you next to nothing about how compelling evidence was. It certainly doesn’t prove there was no collusion, and it’s not even necessarily “so close as to basically be the same as no collusion.” In fact, it could be “got off on a technicality,” which is kind of the opposite of that.

You can get a sense of where those conclusions fall on that spectrum by evaluating at the evidence, but avoiding doing that seems to be the point of this whole “there can be no suspicion without a criminal referral” rhetoric.

I look at it and I don’t see a case for charging a conspiracy against anybody in the campaign, even Manafort, who came the closest. I’d want there to be more evidence than probable cause and while I think Manafort’s case rose to probable cause I don’t think you could ever hope to get reliable testimony out of Klimnik (who I mistakenly called Kislyak the other day). I agree, it’s been 2 years, if they didn’t find it, it’s time to let it go.

But acting like it’s been proven to be a hoax and even being suspicious that it might have happened at all is pure fantasy.
 
#4,661
#4,661
hog88 said:
So in short all of this outrage over nothing.
Click to expand...
Correct! There is absolutely zero information in that letter that indicates Mueller disagrees with Barr’s conclusions. He just sounds pissed that Barr didn’t do what he wanted on the summaries his team provided... which is Barr’s prerogative as AG.

Can’t wait to see these interrogations by House and Senate Dims on AG Barr. While I don’t expect him to do so, I’d like to see him fire back at them in the same petty fashion i know they’re gonna fire at him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, davethevol and tennvols77
#4,662
#4,662
NorthDallas40 said:
Correct! There is absolutely zero information in that letter that indicates Mueller disagrees with Barr’s conclusions. He just sounds pissed that Barr didn’t do what he wanted on the summaries his team provided... which is Barr’s prerogative as AG.

Can’t wait to see these interrogations by House and Senate Dims on AG Barr. While I don’t expect him to do so, I’d like to see him fire back at them in the same petty fashion i know they’re gonna fire at him.
Click to expand...

What I'm waiting for (still have my doubts that it will happen) is the Muells testimony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#4,670
#4,670
hog88 said:
So in short all of this outrage over nothing.
Click to expand...


Only deaf, dumb, and blind Trumpian soldiers could read that letter and think it means nothing.

Mueller is specifically saying that the letter that Barr wrote was misleading the American people because it substituted Barr's political spin and protection of Trump for the actual conclusions by the investigatory team.
 
#4,671
#4,671
evillawyer said:
Click to expand...


I don’t think that’s any more accurate than trying to downplay it.

What he’s saying is that the oversimplification has caused confusion, they had already boiled it down to its simplest terms, and Barr should release this to clear up the confusion.

You can infer more from what took place later, but saying this is Mueller going after Barr in super secret lawyer talk is hypocritical coming from a guy (Toobin) that, I’m sure, has dunked on Barr’s credibility in the last 3 weeks.

For context of what Mueller might have been concerned about, you can read or skim starting here for a few pages:

Matt2496 said:
Apparently the summary could be sent after 5PM ET.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#4,673
#4,673
lawgator1 said:
Only deaf, dumb, and blind Trumpian soldiers could read that letter and think it means nothing.

Mueller is specifically saying that the letter that Barr wrote was misleading the American people because it substituted Barr's political spin and protection of Trump for the actual conclusions by the investigatory team.
Click to expand...

That is not what that letter said or even implied. You have to be looking for that to come to your conclusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and tennvols77
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top