lawgator1
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2005
- Messages
- 72,596
- Likes
- 42,848
Not surpised you arent smart enough to understand the summation of the report and I will also not be suprised when you dont understand the released report and create your own conclusions, aka whatever cnn tells you, and foamy mouth rage about Russia for another 5 years..
That's just a lie by you (again). The Dems say they know that GJ is withheld. That's why they want to go to the judge on it and ask for it to be released.
Barr and the GOP are refusing to join in that.
So much for wanting to release and see the full report, right?
That once again makes no sense. Not trusting Barr simply does not mean not trusting Mueller.
As to whether Mueller agrees with the way Barr has portrayed the report, or with Barr's proposed redactions I cannot say. But even if he disagrees I am not surprised that he would not complain about it, at least while the process is unfolding. If he has shown anything, it is a remarkable ability to stay quiet on things.
Your assumption that Mueller would be publicly disagreeing with Barr, especially at this early stage, is completely unfounded.
You asked why they lied - who knows; just pointing out that people lie when confronted with something they think might shed negative light on them. That's a helluva long way from a crime.
The commentary from Barr on obstruction leads me to believe there will never be obstruction charges. " most was out in the open" = already known publicly with nothing charged means it is a legally dead issue.1. Not everyone did lie about Russia. For example I haven't seen anywhere that Carter Page (the lynch pin for the FISA warrant) lied. Other than that I can't tell you other than when people feel it might look bad to be connected to something (even if it isn't) lying isn't uncommon. Might as well ask why did Hillary repeatedly lie about her server and continue to do so each time she was shown to be lying?
2. He hasn't "injected himself" into obstructing justice. He took actions that are open to interpretation (firing Comey, calling it a witch hunt, asking Comey if he could cut Flynn a break). There are as many legal people that would argue those are not obstruction as would argue other wise.
3. As already noted; Barr is preparing to do so. Just because it doesn't fit the Dem's timeline doesn't mean he isn't in process.
What was my lie?@PointGuard
Ok, you aren't embellishing (I was giving you the benefit of the doubt). You are flat out lying.
But absolutely every one of them lied about the same subject. RUSSIA. Given your suspicion of everything Hillary i’mwondering Why this does not justify a need to know from you?
No they didn't. Try again.
The commentary from Barr on obstruction leads me to believe there will never be obstruction charges. " most was out in the open" = already known publicly with nothing charged means it is a legally dead issue.
The discrepancies between agents testimony and redated 302s makes me wonder.Manafort supposedly lied about contacts with Ukrainians not Russians.
This is another reason I would like to see EVERYTHING associated with The Muells report. I'd like to know the specific questions and answers that Flynn lied about.
Ever written a college paper? You seem befuddled as to what a summary is, or an abstract for that matter.You mean the 74 word excerpt from a reported 388 page report?
Mueller left obstruction open ended as a subtle jab at Trump. Thats all. If it existed beyond doubt he would have said so.There will never be charges from Barr. The House may try to use obstruction as basis for impeachment but it will backfire. There are plausible explanations for those out in the open actions that our lefty friends have concluded are slam dunk proof of obstruction.
Then why the cry for the full report and why imply Barr is being shady with it at this early stage?