Attorney General William Barr Defends Handling Of Mueller Report

ZZ Top 2020

 

What are your expectations?

 

He doesn't know he's just snowflaking.

 

You seem to be unaware that the issue of impeachment has been off the table almost from the start. A few on the far left ranted about it. But for the last five months, the only people who have talked about impeachment are you Trumpsters.

I have been telling you for two and a half years that there was not going to be an impeachment. Democrats would not make the same political mistake the Republcans did in 1998, and would not bring action unless there were already the votes in the Senate to convict. I was right then, and Mrs Pelosi made it clear that I am right now. I have no idea why you Trumpsters are still dwelling on it.

Whether Trump behaves in illegal, anti American and highly unethical ways is not in doubt. He has all his life.

That the Trump campaign was eager to collude with the Russians is a matter of established fact.

You also seem to be functioning under the misconception that an indictment for a crime is required for an impeachment, or for the disgrace of a weak, corrupt and incompetent leader.

It never was

Barr has tried to walk back his story almost since he haded down that brief memo.

Nadler is extending him the profession courtesy of holding the Subpoena until his redacted version comes out.

Trump, of course, has flipped his script completely and is all but trying to keep it out of public view.

Congress will get the Mueller Report. And whether Barr is an honest broker or not, they will get all of it (at least in closed session).

Of this, I am in no doubt.

And if that doesn't happen, we will have a modern day Daniel Ellsberg, and you will see it on the front page of the New York Times.

Count on it.

 

I asked you for a link of any of this. And I still haven't gotten it. Short of that, I'm going to believe what Barr has said, over what the NYT has said. Because it is fake news. Even if Trump didn't call it fake news, we can observe with our own eyes it's fake news(of course, that doesn't change whether or not we want to consume said fake news.)

We will get the report in mid-April, with the necessary redactions according to law. Nadler's subponea threat is what a gangster would do. That, Comey, is how a mafia boss actually operates. Nadler's "generous cooperation" is corruption, as we can expect in the House of Representatives.

 

"Nadler is extending him the profession courtesy of holding the Subpoena until his redacted version comes out."

Is that "newspeak" for Nadler has backed off from his retarded threat?

 

Impeachment off the table since almost the start? That is a joke. Why attempt to suggest such an easily refuted claim.

There are critical safeguards in place to protect process and sources in matters like the exhaustive Mueller report. I'd love to read every word and every document, but I understand that isn't possible, given the nature of all the information. But then again, I haven't been indoctrinated by the alt-left Progressive Machine.

Every member of the corrupt New Democratic Party who is in power must know this, so they are just lying to their followers. What's remarkable is that what should be seen as an insult to the intelligence of any reasonable person, is actually cheered by these followers who clearly don't have a clue.

And Nadler hasn't extended anyone any courtesy. He knows a subpoena is bullshit.

 

You must not been paying attention last November. Given all his talk of being "proven" innocent, Trumps popularity is still spectacularly low.

 

Expectations? None. Hopes, many. What I THINK will happen is Mueller will be called to explain himself and will tell what he found troubling and then Barr will be called to do the same. Trumps taxes will be given to Congress in August of 2020 and that.will.be.the.end.of.that.

 

Really?

On May 11, 2017 you posted the following:

Replying too:
Shiva_TD said: ↑
Impeachment and removal from office does not require a criminal complaint. Any actions or attempted actions by Trump to delay, derail, or interfere with the investigation into possible connections between members of his campaign staff and the Russians that were involved with corrupting the 2016 US presidential election, provides grounds for impeachment and removal from office. For example the refusal to voluntarily turn over campaign documents that are requested, forcing the use of a subpoena to obtain the documents, while not illegal (unless he refuses to comply with the subpoena), is an act of intentionally delaying the investigation. Alone it wouldn't be grounds for impeachment and removal from office but combined with other technically legal actions to delay the investigation or withhold information could cumulatively be grounds for impeachment and removal from office.

If it's determined that it's "reasonable to assume" that Comey was fired because of his involvement in the Russian - Trump campaign investigation, and there's some evidence indicating this, then that's enough for impeachment and removal from office for "obstruction of justice" and "abuse of power" even though the "assumption" alone does not provide sufficient grounds for a criminal complaint.
===========================================================================================
You wouldn't be trying to change history would you?

http://politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/impeach-trump-wow-just-saw-this.504384/page-3

We certainly voiced those warnings, but I see no evidence that for the last two and half years that you weren't right in the middle of the pack of sheep running for the cliff edge with all the enthusiasum you could muster. In fact, you guys are now ina very similar position as you were after the DNA tests on Monica's dress confirmed that he had been lying the entire time and you folks had been played the fool by defending every lie that came out of his mouth.

Learning nothing you believe Rachel MadCow and the rest of the hoaxers.

You actually believed that Carter Page was a spy.
You actually believed that the FBI opened up an investigation into the Trump campaign because a drunken George Papadopoulos said he had Hillary Clinton’s missing emails.
You actually believed that Trump urinated on a Russian prostitute at a Moscow hotel.
You actually believed that a teeny tiny batch of Facebook memes and Twitter posts allegedly controlled by Moscow masterminds somehow convinced voters in Michigan and Wisconsin to vote for Donald Trump.

You believed that Michael Cohen went to Prague.
You believed that Russia hacked the DNC email system and fed those emails to Wikileaks.
You believed that Roger Stone orchestrated the release of those emails.
You believed that Sam Nunberg and Jerome Corsi and Konstantin Kilimnik had the goods on Trump.

You tuned into Joe Scarborough each morning and Rachel Maddow each night, desperate to gratify your collusion urges with their passionate rants about Trump and Putin. Ditto for Anderson Cooper and Jake Tapper and Chris Cuomo. The pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post read like collusion porn every morning, teasing you and titillating you with erotic tales about secret phone calls and mysterious interpreters and raven-haired Russian lawyers.

Actually, Trump just went through a witch hunt like few others have endured and Dirty Bob and his Crooked Hillary Attorneys, Donors and Democrats came up with nothing, and Senator Grassley publicly rebuked Dirty Bob for using parts of emails to create the fiction that Trump was eager to meet with the Russians when the full emails showed just the opposite, that the Trump campaign refused the meetings. If there was truth to your claim, Dirty Bob wouldn't have had to lie and misrepresent evidence.

What a statement. In one sentence your undermine your claim that you weren't cheer-leading for impeachment AND conceded that there is no evidence ot charge Trump with a crime.

Speaking of weak-minded and incompetent, he's not the one who fell for a hoax, hook, line and sinker, and then tried to rewrite recent, and easily checked history.

You swooned over Adam Schiff.
You worried that Russian bot accounts were trying to mess with Mueller.

Utter horseshit, completely untrue.

Tell "No-Nads" to subpoena him already. We dare him.

The Pentagon Papers, what rubbish.

“The walls are closing in!”
“Trump’s days are numbered!”
“It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when!”
“His cabinet is turning on him, ready to invoke the 25th Amendment!”
“He’s brooding and angry and lashing out at staff as Mueller gets closer to finding out the truth!”
“Trump won’t survive the week/month/year/term!”

Details and evidence were of no concern to you.

 

Barr has an easy defense. All he has to do is follow the law, which he has done so far.

 

Exactly. If Congress wants the law to differ, they can pass new laws, it is Congress that passes laws after all! It's all a dog and pony show. Not one of these Democrats has even drafted a bill to change the law to allow Barr to legally give them what they demand. They are putting on a show for the hoax believers, while trying not to piss off Barr enough that he supports a Special Counsel to look further into the crimes of the Obama White House.

 

After two years and 30 million dollars they got nothing, zilch, and for political survival have to try to make it look like something.

But it's nothing, and nothing from nothing is still nothing.

 

You didn’t get the short TDS version wrong.

Sure you can. You pivot to over charging, swat team arrests on old men with CNN along and hope Trump oversteps. Didn’t happen. Sucks to be a sufferer.

 

It's like a perjury trap. It's used for guilty people who are pathological liars and egomaniacs like trump.

 

Oversteps? Bwaaa! A new RW code word for telling lies.

 

It will be a piece of cake when the dems take over the WH in 2020 with no one to pardon the sob.

 

you people are riding your horse story to death.

 

In nearly two years, Mueller did not charge one person with so-called “collusion.” Not one associate tied to the Trump campaign was indicted or convicted of any crime related to the election.

 

Almost as good as "alternative facts".

 

Have you heard of trump's new history professors? They call themselves, Future Historians.

 

I think a few of trump's former convicted friends would disagree with you.

 

Well the stable genius whose father was born in Germany but wasn't and who claims that wind turbines cause cancer while cheating at golf would know the most fascinating unbelievable people.

 

To comply with the law, Barr Must Redact Grand-Jury Info from Mueller Report.

The attorney general can’t be faulted for following the law.​

When disclosing the Mueller report, Attorney General William P. Barr will have to redact grand-jury information. That is the takeaway from the ruling today by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

McKeever v. Barr did not arise out of the Mueller investigation, but it applies to the Mueller report — and how much of it we will get to see.

The question before the Court was: Does a federal court have the authority to order disclosure of grand-jury materials if the judge decides that the interests of justice warrant doing so; or is the judge limited to the exceptions to grand-jury secrecy that are spelled out in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure? The D.C. Circuit’s McKeever ruling holds that the text of Rule 6(e) controls. Consequently, judges have no authority to authorize disclosure outside the rule.

I've seen several PF posts that Congress deals with secret information all the time, therefore, the Grand Jury information on un-indicted persons can be released to them in confidence, but, and this is significant for the Mueller report, Rule 6(e) does not contain an exception to secrecy that would permit disclosure to Congress.

The panel emphasized the rule’s sweeping language: Officials must refrain from disclosure “unless these rules provide otherwise.” The rule takes pains to spell out the situations in which a judge may authorize disclosure. Plainly, the intent of the rule was to limit disclosure; were an unwritten judicial power to ignore the limitations recognized, the rule would be pointless.
The Supreme Court has stressed that “not every beneficial purpose, or even every valid governmental purpose, is an appropriate reason for breaching grand jury secrecy.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/mueller-report-attorney-general-grand-jury-information/

Congress has the power to legislate an amendment to Rule 6(e) that would permit disclosure of grand-jury materials from a special counsel investigation to appropriate congressional committees, but so far, they haven't seen to even introduce a bill to do so.

 

One would have expected the new Attorney General to reach out to Congressional leadership, and to the Gang of Eight, and brief them on the general contents of the redacted sessions, in order to reassure everyone of the good faith intentions of his office.

Particularly, given the way his initial (non) "summary" blew up in the administration's face (especially after Trump went out and bragged about it).

That does not appear to have happened.