NY Times: Mueller Report More Damaging Than Barr Let On

Ok, so where do those rules say this can't be seen by the public.

 

Sorry to tell you this, but Trump is a moron...and more likely than not, anything and everything he is doing is for HIMSELF...not for Americans, even by accident.

 

Um I just told you, Rule 6

 

Rule 6 only omits Grand Jury testimony, not the whole report.

 

I would certainly like to see all of the evidence produced by the investigation. Any attempt to hide the evidence by Barr or anyone else is obviously sinister. I am not interested how any political hack from either side of the aisle wants to characterize or summarize the report. I want to read the report and see public testimony from those who produced it under oath like Watergate, Iran Contra and Whitewater.

 

And what are the names of the persons speaking up? Eh?

 

I would like to see all the Smollett evidence but as is in this case, he was deemed a free man so we'll not see the evidence. Evidence becomes public in court, we don't show evidence of a crime for people not being charged. We don't change the rules because you lost the election period.

 

One problem, the laws that congress passed that the AG is supposed to follow. I know that is inconvenient for the laws democrats passed but hey, it's the law.

 

Then we need to see the names of these investigators so they can be held accountable if and when it is found they spoke in hyperbolic ways. Far too easy to run your mouth when you can do it in secrecy.

I have to assume this was in reference to obstruction of justice and not a conspiracy between trump and russia.

Too bad the NYT does not employ enough real journalists like Greenwald. If they did, they would have to leave the US too. ha ha

 

Everyone... if you believe the NYT without verification from the actual report, which they have not read, you are an idiot.

Let's wait and see. The NYT is total garbage anymore.

 

So let's see. Unnamed sources allegedly from the Mueller team leaking information to the press which is illegal.

 

I am not a righty, but if someone speaks out, we need to know their names, for it is too easy for people who were on the investigation, who worked for the dems or hillary to run their mouths, for partisan reasons. I am being reasonable here. If you make claims, then stand in the light and get out from behind the secrecy. Own up to your words, so their is accountability. Of course they seldom happens, except with real whistle blowers, the honest ones. ha ha

 

Non answer. Exactly what info?

 

We dont know that anyone spoke out. All we have is a completely unsourced story that provides no details.

 

Double sourced at that, associates of the team, not the team itself.

 

I think that is a misrepresentation of what the "righties" have said. All I have seen is the comment that MUELLER would speak up. If Mueller comes out and says Barr's summary was a misrepresentation, it would be creditable. A news article from NYT using "unnamed sources" is not very creditable....even if the sources are legit.

 

Barr issued a 4 page whitewash job, which was exactly what his appointee to the AG job expected of him.The members of Mueller team are now indicating that there is far more fire in the report in far less smoke which is not what Barr reported.He needs to release the entire unredacted report to congress and let them draw their own conclusions.They are our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES ,not the personally appointed hack of the president, the subject of the report.The TRUTH will out!!!

 

So we can put you down on the side that wants to conceal evidence from congress and the public.....Got it.

 

LOL! Classified material must be redacted and Grand Jury material cannot be released. Like it or lump it.

 

The results of the Mueller investigation are not known. All we have is the spin of Crooked Donnie's AG.

 

Why should we start believing The NY Times now? They’ve never been truthful in the past.

 

I agree. The entire report should be released to congress. Barr should petition the court to release all grand jury testimony just as Jaworski and Starr did and there should be public hearings with all witnesses and investigators testifying under oath regarding how the evidence was gathered. Strzok, Ohr, Comey, McCabe....all of them. Isn’t that what Sean Hannity, Jim Jordan and all of the Trumpsters have been clamoring for since the investigation started? Bring it ALL out in the open.

 

30% of the American people believe Elvis is still alive. 20% think the moon landings were a hoax. And 50% still accept Trump-Russia as real.

No amount of evidence will convince all of these loons to let go of their fairy tales.

 

lol... you don't drag Grand Jury witnesses into the day light. You allow Mueller to work with Barr to redact as needed and then release it. That is what is currently happening.

What you are looking to do could damage a lot of honest people that agreed to testify with the Grand Jury. That's too heavy handed.