Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-27-2019 7:49 AM
29 online now:
caffeine, Faith, Pressie, Sarah Bellum, vimesey (5 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,111 Year: 7,147/19,786 Month: 1,688/1,581 Week: 67/443 Day: 7/60 Hour: 4/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
126127
128
129130
...
142NextFF
Author Topic:   The Right Side of the News (formerly In the News)
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6575
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


(1)
Message 1906 of 2127 (852660)
05-15-2019 9:03 AM


The Durham "Review"
The New York Times reported this morning that the "investigation" of the alleged spying on the Trump campaign will be a "review", not a criminal investigation.

Scrutiny of Russia Investigation Is Said to Be a Review, Not a Criminal Inquiry

The difference is that in a review, Durham won't have the authority to subpeona documents or compell witnesses to testisfy.

But the fact that Mr. Durham is conducting only a limited review, not a criminal investigation, also suggests the Justice Department has still not identified sufficient facts to open such an inquiry. The legal standard is whether facts exist that reasonably indicate that a specific crime has been committed.

The article points out that it is now possible that the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Lindsey Graham, will open its own inquiry. Graham has stated before that he didn't want to get in the way ofa Justice Dept. investigation, but that now the situation is different if Durham doesn't have the same authority that Mueller had.


If this was a witch hunt, it found a lot of witches. -- David Cole, writing about the Mueller investigation.

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 4748
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1907 of 2127 (852661)
05-15-2019 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 1898 by 14174dm
05-14-2019 10:21 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf is the official electronic copy.

They printed it, scanned it, and OCR"d it, so there are many OCR errors.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1898 by 14174dm, posted 05-14-2019 10:21 PM 14174dm has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 4748
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1908 of 2127 (852662)
05-15-2019 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 1898 by 14174dm
05-14-2019 10:21 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
Dupe. .

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1898 by 14174dm, posted 05-14-2019 10:21 PM 14174dm has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18431
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 1909 of 2127 (852664)
05-15-2019 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1898 by 14174dm
05-14-2019 10:21 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
14174dm writes:

A internet search for "Mueller report text" will pull up a large list of sites with the full report. I am trying to copy/paste quotes but can't get the software to cooperate.

Link to searchable/copyable Mueller report (loads fast).

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Add comment about loading fast.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1898 by 14174dm, posted 05-14-2019 10:21 PM 14174dm has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 16475
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 1910 of 2127 (852671)
05-15-2019 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1903 by JonF
05-15-2019 8:50 AM


Re: David Cole on the Mueller Report
It's against DOJ policy to indict a sitting President,no matter how criminal he is.

Democracy is kinda based on the idea that the people are smart enough not to elect Al Capone. Once in a while that idea fails.

Welcome back, Faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1903 by JonF, posted 05-15-2019 8:50 AM JonF has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7774
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 1911 of 2127 (852679)
05-15-2019 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1890 by Faith
05-14-2019 6:32 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
Faith writes:

The facts of the report exonerate him.

That's just your opinion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1890 by Faith, posted 05-14-2019 6:32 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1916 by JonF, posted 05-15-2019 5:00 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31333
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1912 of 2127 (852684)
05-15-2019 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 1901 by JonF
05-15-2019 8:43 AM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
It was clearly stated that the policy against indicting a sitting President had absolutely no part in the conclusions of the report. If there had been guilt the report would have reported it in any case. Instead it found that Trump and his campaign people did NOT do anything whatever to "collude" with Russians, and kept the question of obstruction of justice wide open since he had no cause to accuse Trump of that either. Everything else is empty threats, gossip, hot air.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1901 by JonF, posted 05-15-2019 8:43 AM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1913 by Taq, posted 05-15-2019 3:10 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1914 by JonF, posted 05-15-2019 4:45 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1917 by dwise1, posted 05-15-2019 5:23 PM Faith has responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7774
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 1913 of 2127 (852686)
05-15-2019 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1912 by Faith
05-15-2019 3:03 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
Faith writes:

It was clearly stated that the policy against indicting a sitting President had absolutely no part in the conclusions of the report.

Could you supply a quote from the report where this is stated?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1912 by Faith, posted 05-15-2019 3:03 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1915 by JonF, posted 05-15-2019 4:47 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 4748
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1914 of 2127 (852691)
05-15-2019 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1912 by Faith
05-15-2019 3:03 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
No, as the quote already posted showed, the report clearly stated that they didn't seek indictments because of the DOJ policy. When I get b to my computer I will dig out a quote if one isn't posted by then.

Meanwhile you will dig up a quote showing "It was clearly stated that the policy against indicting a sitting President had absolutely no part in the conclusions of the report", right?

Mueller found lots of evidence of collusion, just not enough to support criminal prosecution.

Mueller presented strong evidence of Trump’s obstructions and explicitly stated that he was following DOJ policy by not indicting him. Otherwise Trump would be indicted.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1912 by Faith, posted 05-15-2019 3:03 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 4748
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1915 of 2127 (852692)
05-15-2019 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1913 by Taq
05-15-2019 3:10 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
Of course she couldn't, and if she could she wouldn't. She cares not for trurh, just stoking her hate and rage.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1913 by Taq, posted 05-15-2019 3:10 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 4748
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1916 of 2127 (852694)
05-15-2019 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1911 by Taq
05-15-2019 12:47 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
Faith writes:

The facts of the report exonerate him.


That's just your opinion.

It's also the direct opposite of what the report says.

Faith thinks she knows more about the law and investigation than Mueller.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1911 by Taq, posted 05-15-2019 12:47 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3459
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 1917 of 2127 (852696)
05-15-2019 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1912 by Faith
05-15-2019 3:03 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
It was clearly stated that the policy against indicting a sitting President had absolutely no part in the conclusions of the report.

Where? Show us! Quote directly from Mueller's Report where he made any such statement! Only use primary sources (eg, Mueller's Report); do not use secondary sources (eg, Fakes and Friends, fake-news mongers like Hannity, Carlson, Limbaugh, Alex Jones)!

Show us the quote. We show you ours.

As for whether the OLC "cannot indict a sitting president" played any role in the report, from INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME II pages 1-2 (pp 213-214 in the searchable PDF):

quote:
We first describe the considerations that guided our obstruction-of-justice investigation, and then provide an overview of this Volume:

First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers." Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations , see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.

Second, while the OLC opinion concludes that a sitting President may not be prosecuted, it recognizes that a criminal investigation during the President's term is permissible. The OLC opinion also recognizes that a President does not have immunity after he leaves office. And if individuals other than the President committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system , we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available.

Third, we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes. The threshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person's conduct "constitutes a federal offense." U.S. Dep't of Justice, Justice Manual§ 9-27.220 (2018) (Justice Manual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought. The ordinary means for an individual to respond to an accusation is through a speedy and public trial, with all the procedural protections that surround a criminal case. An individual who believes he was wrongly accused can use that process to seek to clear his name. In contrast , a prosecutor's judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought , affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator.

The concerns about the fairness of such a determination would be heightened in the case of a sitting President, where a federal prosecutor's accusation of a crime, even in an internal report, could carry consequences that extend beyond the realm of criminal justice. OLC noted similar concerns about sealed indictments. Even if an indictment were sealed during the President's term, OLC reasoned, "it would be very difficult to preserve [an indictment 's] secrecy, " and if an indictment became public, "[t]he stigma and opprobrium" could imperil the President's ability to govern." Although a prosecutor's internal report would not represent a formal public accusation akin to an indictment, the possibility of the report 's public disclosure and the absence of a neutral adjudicatory forum to review its findings counseled against potentially determining "that the person's conduct constitutes a federal offense ." Justice Manual § 9-27.220.

Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice , we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards , however , we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President 's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.


So contrary to your false statement, Mueller clearly states that OLC policy played a direct role in determining how he would organize the investigation and what kinds of conclusions he could reach, namely actual defined crimes (for which collusion does not qualify nor is it defined) such as criminal conspiracy (which requires a provable explicit agreement between the conspirators).

If there had been guilt the report would have reported it in any case.

First, the OLC policy prevented Mueller from being able to indict a sitting President; rather that is the authority and duty of Congress.

Second, while Mueller could not indict Trump because of a purely internal policy
and would not accuse Trump (as per the considerations quoted above) because Trump would have no recourse available to him to clear himself (only a trial could do that), he still could have exonerated Trump. Mueller very explicitly did not exonerate Trump!

The conclusion of EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO VOLUME II, page 8 (page 220 in the PDF):

quote:
CONCLUSION

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment , we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President 's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.


That last sentence echos Mueller's fourth consideration back on page 3 (page 214 of the PDF):

quote:
Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice , we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards , however , we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President 's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

Instead it found that Trump and his campaign people did NOT do anything whatever to "collude" with Russians, ...

Completely and utterly false! Mueller's Report is filled with many detailed examples of collusion between Trump's people (including family members). For example, this list comes directly from the Table of Contents of Volume I (pp ii-iv; pp 4-6 in the PDF):

quote:
IV. RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT LINKS To AND CONTACTS WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN ................ 66
A. Campaign Period (September 2015 - November 8, 2016) ......................................... 66

1. Trump Tower Moscow Project .................................. ........................... ............ .... 67
a. Trump Tower Moscow Venture with the Crocus Group (2013 -2014) ............ 67
b. Communications with LC. Expert Investment Company and Giorgi
Rtskhiladze (Summer and Fall 2015) ............................................................ 69
c. Letter of Intent and Contacts to Russian Government (October 2015-
January 2016) ................................................................................................ 70
i. Trump Signs the Letter of Intent on behalf of the Trump Organization .... 70
ii. Post-LOI Contacts with Individuals in Russia ......................................... 72
d. Discussions about Russia Travel by Michael Cohen or Candidate Trump
(December 2015-June 2016) ........................ .............. ............. ...................... 76
i. Sater's Overtures to Cohen to Travel to Russia ........................................ 76
ii. Candidate Trump's Opportunities to Travel to Russia ............................ 78
2. George Papadopoulos ................................................................................ ........... 80
a. Origins of Campaign Work .............. ................................................................ 81
b. Initial Russia-Related Contacts ....................................... ................................. 82
c. March 31 Foreign Policy Team Meeting ......................................................... 85
d. George Papadopoulos Learns That Russia Has "Dirt" in the Form of
Clinton Emails ............. ................................... ........... ............ ........................ 86
e. Russia-Related Communications With The Campaign .................................... 89
f. Trump Campaign Knowledge of "Dirt" ........................................................... 93
g. Additional George Papadopoulos Contact.. .................... ................................. 94
3. Carter Page ........................................ ................................. ................................... 9 5
a. Background ...................................................................................................... 96
b. Origins of and Early Campaign Work ............................................................. 97
c. Carter Page's July 2016 Trip To Moscow ..................................................... ... 98
d. Later Campaign Work and Removal from the Campaign ............................ . 102
4. Dimitri Simes and the Center for the National Interest ...................................... 103
a. CNI and Dimitri Simes Connect with the Trump Campaign ................... ...... 103
b. National Interest Hosts a Foreign Policy Speech at the Mayflower Hotel
........... ..................................... ................................................. ................... . 105
c. Jeff Sessions's Post-Speech Interactions with CNI ....................................... 107
d. Jared Kushner' s Continuing Contacts with Simes ......................................... 108
5. June 9, 2016 Meeting at Trump Tower ........... .................... ...... , ......................... 110
a. Setting Up the June 9 Meeting ....................................................................... 110
i. Outreach to Donald Trump Jr .................................................................. 110
ii. Awareness of the Meeting Within the Campaign ........................ ........... 114
b. The Events of June 9 , 2016 ............................ .................... ................. ........... 116
i. Arrangements for the Meeting ................................................................ 116
ii. Conduct of the Meeting ............... ................................... ........................ 117
c. Post-June 9 Events ................................................................. ........................ 120
6. Events at the Republican National Convention .................................................. 123
a. Ambassador Kislyak's Encounters with Senator Sessions and J.D.
Gordon the Week of the RNC ..................................................................... 123
b. Change to Republican Party Platform ............................................................ 124
7. Post-Convention Contacts with Kislyak ................................ : .............. .............. 127
a. Ambassador Kislyak Invites J.D. Gordon to Breakfast at the
Ambassador's Residence ........................... ................ ......................... ......... 127
b. Senator Sessions's September 2016 Meeting with Ambassador Kislyak ...... 127
8. Paul Manafort .............. .................... ........................................................... ......... 129
a. Paul Manafort' s Ties to Russia and Ukraine .................................................. 131
1. Oleg Deripaska Consulting Work ......................................................... 131
11. Political Consulting Work ..................................................................... 132
iii. Konstantin Kilimnik ........................ ..................................................... . 132
b. Contacts during Paul Manafort's Time with the Trump Campaign .............. 134
i. Paul Manafort Joins the Campaign ......................................................... 134
ii. Paul Manafort's Campaign-Period Contacts .............................. ............ 135
iii. Paul Manafort's Two Campaign-Period Meetings with Konstantin
Kilimnik in the United States .............................. .................................. 138
c. Post-Resignation Activities ............................................................................ 141

B. Post-Election and Transition-Period Contacts .......................................................... 144
1. Immediate Post-Election Activity ....................................................................... 144
a. Outreach from the Russian Government.. ................................................... ... 145
b. High-Level Encouragement of Contacts through Alternative Channels ....... 146
2. Kirill Dmitriev's Transition-Era Outreach to the Incoming Administration ...... 147
a. Background .................... ................ ........................................ ........................ 14 7
b. Kirill Dmitriev's Post-Election Contacts With the Incoming
Administration .............. ............... .......................................... ...................... 149
c. Erik Prince and Kirill Dmitriev Meet in the Seychelles ................................ 151
i. George Nader and Erik Prince Arrange Seychelles Meeting with
Dmitriev .................................................. ................................ ............... 151
11. The Seychelles Meetings .............. ........................................... ............... 153
iii. Erik Prince's Meeting with Steve Bannon after the Seychelles Trip .... 155
d. Kirill Dmitriev's Post-Election Contact with Rick Gerson Regarding
U .S.-Russia Relations ...................... ............................................................ 156
3. Ambassador Kislyak's Meeting with Jared Kushner and Michael Flynn in
Trump Tower Following the Election ................................................................. 159
4. Jared Kushner' s Meeting with Sergey Gorkov ...................................... ............. 161
5. Petr Aven' s Outreach Efforts to the Transition Team ........................................ 163
6. Carter Page Contact with Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich ............. 166
7. Contacts With and Through Michael T. Flynn ....... .................... ................ ........ 167
a. United Nations Vote on Israeli Settlements .............................. ...... ............... 167
b. U.S. Sanctions Against Russia ............ ....................... .................................... 168


That is a helluva lot of collusion! Too bad it's not a crime, though it still is an impeachable offense, as is the cover-up of collusion with a hostile foreign power.

... , and kept the question of obstruction of justice wide open since he had no cause to accuse Trump of that either.

Again, Mueller lists many instances of obstruction committed by Trump. The only reasons for not officially accusing Trump are given in the four considerations in Volume II, quoted above. Mueller did not have the authority to indict Trump for obstruction, but Congress does have that authority as well as the Constitutional duty.

Extracting from EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO VOLUME II (pp 3-6; PDF pp 215-218) with the body of the paragraphs left out:

quote:
FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION

The key issues and events we examined include the following:

The Campaign's response to reports about Russian support for Trump. ...

The President's reaction to the continuing Russia investigation. ...

The President's termination of Comey. ...

The appointment of a Special Counsel and efforts to remove him. ...

Efforts to curtail the Special Counsel's investigation. ...

Efforts to prevent public disclosure of evidence. ...

Further efforts to have the Attorney General take control of the investigation. ...

Efforts to have McGahn deny that the President had ordered him to have the Special
Counsel removed.
...

Conduct towards Flynn, Manafort, {name or names redacted, HARM TO ONGOING MATTER} ...

Conduct involving Michael Cohen. ...


That's a helluva lot of very specific "no causes".

Again, Mueller did not have the authority to indict or accuse Trump of obstruction of justice. All he could (and did) do is to list Trump's acts and leave it to Congress to act upon it.

Everything else is empty threats, gossip, hot air.

Yes, that is all that you and your Fake News pocket universe have.

Edited by dwise1, : corrected PDF page number

Edited by dwise1, : Removed duplicate qs block
Replaced "right" with "authority"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1912 by Faith, posted 05-15-2019 3:03 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1918 by Faith, posted 05-16-2019 2:31 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 31333
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1918 of 2127 (852703)
05-16-2019 2:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1917 by dwise1
05-15-2019 5:23 PM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
It's something I've heard more than once and if I hear it again i'll track down the source.

The quote you give is convincing, however, but it gives me a completely different view of things: how cleverly devious of them to imply there are causes for criminal indictment but they aren't going to pursue them because of that sitting President policy. Yuck.

Your lists I'm going to ignore because I know there are other interpretations of all that which of course doesn't interest you. I'll wait and see what happens in the next few weeks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1917 by dwise1, posted 05-15-2019 5:23 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1919 by PaulK, posted 05-16-2019 2:54 AM Faith has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14961
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 1919 of 2127 (852704)
05-16-2019 2:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1918 by Faith
05-16-2019 2:31 AM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
quote:

It's something I've heard more than once and if I hear it again i'll track down the source

In the presence of a long standing policy of not indicting a sitting president you are going to need really good sources to show that Mueller really did intend to indict.

quote:

The quote you give is convincing, however, but it gives me a completely different view of things: how cleverly devious of them to imply there are causes for criminal indictment but they aren't going to pursue them because of that sitting President policy. Yuck.

I am sure you think that is a “deviously clever” smear, Faith. It’s one of your standard tricks. But it’s hardly convincing. In fact they did exactly what they should in the case of the existing policy given the fact that there is evidence supporting obstruction.

quote:

Your lists I'm going to ignore because I know there are other interpretations of all that which of course doesn't interest you.

Contacts with the Russians are still contacts with the Russians no matter how you “interpret” them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1918 by Faith, posted 05-16-2019 2:31 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1920 by Faith, posted 05-16-2019 3:17 AM PaulK has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 31333
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1920 of 2127 (852705)
05-16-2019 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1919 by PaulK
05-16-2019 2:54 AM


Re: Calumniating Barr: the latest tactic
There is no evidence supporting obstruction. It's all things that didn't happen, it's stuff Trump said but didn't do. And the things he did do didn't obstruct anything. It's all the usual phony stuff designed to whip up negative opinion against Trump.

You say I have to prove Mueller did intend to indict but I don't believe he intended to indict, I don't think he found anything criminal so there was nothing to indict Trump for. The bulk of the second part of his report is all the usual innuendo intended to feed the ravenous Trump maligners, not even anything that should have been in such a report.

I hope Barr's investigation of the investigation finally gets at the truth in all this phony stuff aimed at bringing down Trump.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1919 by PaulK, posted 05-16-2019 2:54 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1921 by PaulK, posted 05-16-2019 3:42 AM Faith has responded
 Message 1930 by JonF, posted 05-16-2019 9:32 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
126127
128
129130
...
142NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019