Mueller Report Imminent

#5,001
#5,001
NorthDallas40 said:
Seeing a lot of reference to “Barr did not review the evidence himself” narrative. So I guess this spiked based on the Ho’s interrogation.

So let’s see...

  • Barr needed to immediately release the Mueller report.
  • In which Mueller punted on doing his job
  • So Barr had to do Mueller’s job
  • Now Barr didn’t fully do Mueller’s job since he didn’t review all of the evidence Mueller collected before he released the redacted report
  • Mueller needs to testify immediately
  • Barr said he has no problem with that
  • But Barr is changing the message of Mueller’s report
  • But he should have released the report immediately anyway.

All y’all Dims are gonna make some unfortunate beta males some great wives one day 🙄
Click to expand...
You left out 2 bullet points.

  • Barr has quickly concluded that spying did occur on the Trump campaign but didn't need to review the underlying evidence in the Mueller report to conclude that obstruction of justice did not occur.
  • Whether or not you think Barr is guilty of perjury, the question he was asked by Senator Crist on April 9th was a prompt to discuss any feedback he had received from the Mueller team about his "summary of principal conclusions". Instead of being forthright and discussing the letter he had received from Mueller, Barr was unnecessarily coy and he chose to play dumb. There was no reason not to discuss Mueller's letter. That wasn't classified or sensitive information and it was bound to be leaked anyway (and it was).
 
#5,004
#5,004
volfanjustin said:
After hearing Mazio Hirono's statement towards AG Barr, she is without a doubt one of the biggest hacks and pieces of trash in the socialist party and that's a party that sets a new low daily. She is an embarrassment and should step down
Click to expand...
It's a crying shame that her parents weren't at ground zero in Hiroshima or Nagasaki in 1945.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, volfanjustin, VolStrom and 1 other person
#5,005
#5,005
luthervol said:
It has nothing to do with Hillary losing. Is that some kind of right wing talking point?
It is about TRUMP, and his being a horrendously despicable human unfit to to hold the office of POTUS.
Click to expand...
Sure it is. Hillary lost, quit your whining.

ecfb6a5438335ee7ae958f110ad1cf87.jpg


Win the next election. All this Russian Collusion BS, is just that BS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, Ernest T. Vol, FLVOL69 and 1 other person
#5,007
#5,007
Sin City Vol said:
How the hell can he make a decision when he admitted today under oath that he hasn’t reviewed the evidence. Just another cult member falling in line.
Click to expand...

So you and Kamala want Barr to personally review two years worth of gathered evidence by Meuller, double check his work so to say, instead of using Meullers report that we paid 30-35 million to put together? If that were truly the expectation then we might have seen the final report around 2025 and Barr would be reviewing evidence 24-7 even when he was on the schiffer till 2025.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and FLVOL69
#5,008
#5,008
BowlBrother85 said:
Attorney General William Barr: I did not personally review all underlying evidence in the Mueller report.

Attorney General William Barr: No, I did not exonerate President Trump.

What exactly would you say it is that you DO here, Bill?
Click to expand...
I just hope that Barr can live up to the high bar set by Eric Holder as the President's "wingman."
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and 0nelilreb
#5,011
#5,011
RockyTop85 said:
So why are you freaking out about not being told Bob Mueller’s opinion if you’re capable of forming your own?
Click to expand...

I have my opinion. Bob Meuller was not assigned to give his opinion. Why is that so hard to understand? He was appointed to investigate and file charges or not file charges. He sure had no problem prosecuting multiple people over the last two years. Why stop at Trump if his “opinion” was that Trump obstructed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, FLVOL69 and joevol33
#5,013
#5,013
37L1 said:
Sure it is. Hillary lost, quit your whining.

ecfb6a5438335ee7ae958f110ad1cf87.jpg


Win the next election. All this Russian Collusion BS, is just that BS.
Click to expand...
Exactly. All of this, every single bit is because Hillary lost, and the can't accept it. I knew when the media broke the story of trump getting 2 scoops of ice cream that the left had completely lost it. Not one candidate for the democrat party has a legit campaign for 2020. It's either meh Trump, or free stuff. They have nothing left since Hillary lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, AM64, davethevol and 2 others
#5,016
#5,016
hog88 said:
He very well may be, the muell got paid a petty decent amount of money and didn't even finish the job.
Click to expand...

You’ve yet to explain why that means anything.

Weren’t you literally just saying “don’t trust the government or media” in another thread a few days ago?

There’s a report. It recites the evidence. It provides the applicable law. It’s publicly available. You can read it.

Why do you need it to have a two sentence conclusion from some government lawyer to puzzle out what it means?
 
#5,018
#5,018
roosterjbh said:
Harris helped her campaign here with her questioning
Click to expand...

How so? By proving correct that all the republicans prior assertions that Ole Rod should have recused himself because he was overseeing an investigation that he was a witness in? I saw her time as a Sparticas moment. Funny that Sparticas himself was next to her the whole time. It was an act for the cameras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#5,021
#5,021
nuclearjunky said:
I have my opinion. Bob Meuller was not assigned to give his opinion. Why is that so hard to understand? He was appointed to investigate and file charges or not file charges. He sure had no problem prosecuting multiple people over the last two years. Why stop at Trump if his “opinion” was that Trump obstructed?
Click to expand...
About three weeks behind there, sparky?

Volume 2, Page 1.

Literally, page 1. Office of legal counsel concluded that you cannot indict a sitting president, and this became DOJ policy. Maybe at least read the summaries before jumping in with both feet with your hot takes.
 

Attachments

  • 7B5FBDA4-E093-45A5-B9ED-F01814142948.jpeg
    7B5FBDA4-E093-45A5-B9ED-F01814142948.jpeg
    811.5 KB · Views: 2
#5,024
#5,024
RockyTop85 said:
You’ve yet to explain why that means anything.

Weren’t you literally just saying “don’t trust the government or media” in another thread a few days ago?

There’s a report. It recites the evidence. It provides the applicable law. It’s publicly available. You can read it.

Why do you need it to have a two sentence conclusion from some government lawyer to puzzle out what it means?
Click to expand...

I plan on finishing it this weekend.

The premise of my argument is that the Muell intentionally worded his report pertaining to the question of obstruction to incite what we are seeing today. He had zero problem being definitive in his language on collusion so why not on the question of obstruction? He knew what would happen and it was intentional.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL69 and AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top