The Mueller Report. BREAKING NEWS: AG’s Summary Report Released. NO COLLUSION!

[B-Man]

By the by, this "Trump loses Billions" story that is being fed to the liberal lemmings yesterday by the NYT is not even new..............it's just recycled BS

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/clinton-criticize-trump-taxes-229054

 

Clinton repeatedly seized on the bombshell New York Times report that revealed that the real estate mogul lost $916 million, according to portions of his 1995 tax returns, which may have allowed him to avoid paying personal income taxes for up to 18 years.

 

She brought it up in their last debate.

 

So, please save your fake outrage.

 

Those of us with working memories know better.

 

 

.

[Foxx]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

The report is now hidden

you mean the one that proven no collusion and no obstruction? they already have it.

[Bob in Mich]

3 minutes ago, Foxx said:

you mean the one that proven no collusion and no obstruction? they already have it.

 

Why is the President trying to obscure in any way a document that so clearly exonerates him of any wrongdoing?  If I had control over the release of an investigative document that stated that I had done nothing wrong, I know I would not try to block it.   No one would, unless the release creates even more problems for them.

 

I understand the offer to view the document but then not speak of it any more, and agree that it is rightfully unacceptable to the Dems.  I also know about the grand jury testimony but we all also know that is not insurmountable if transparency was the DOJ's goal.   The goal instead is to hold back as much as possible.  That is not the action that would be taken if all the information was exonerating, is it now?

[Foxx]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

This is desperation. They're trying to smear Barr before he can announce the results of the OIG and his own department's investigations into the origin of this scandal. 

 

The left has been projecting their own crimes and sins onto the other side for 3 years, and now the truth is going to be revealed and they're terrified. Every last one of them. 

 

And they should be. 

they are terrified that if they lose and if these investigations now under way bear fruit, the Democrat party may cease to exist. they really have no choice but to continue down the path that they set themselves upon. and they will have no one to blame but themselves for where they end up. 

[Foxx]

15 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Why is the President trying to obscure in any way a document that so clearly exonerates him of any wrongdoing?  If I had control over the release of an investigative document that stated that I had done nothing wrong, I know I would not try to block it.   No one would, unless the release creates even more problems for them.

 

I understand the offer to view the document but then not speak of it any more, and agree that it is rightfully unacceptable to the Dems.  I also know about the grand jury testimony but we all also know that is not insurmountable if transparency was the DOJ's goal.   The goal instead is to hold back as much as possible.  That is not the action that would be taken if all the information was exonerating, is it now?

the President is trying to obsure a report that he initially exerted no executive privilege over? one that was only redacted under 2% in total and redacted to exclude Grand jury testimony and ongoing investigations, at that. this is on par with existing precedent and in accordance with the law. it is the Dems unhinged insistence that Barr break the law. Congress made the law and if the Dems were serious, they could unmake the law but they are not really interested in that, only feigning outrage. 

 

why is the offer to view the less redacted report unacceptable to the Dems? because they might suspect that it is a trap to out them when they leak the contents?

 

if all the information was exonerating?? wtf are you on about. prosecution does not operate that way they only work to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. they do not set out to exonerate, that is Mueller's political bias being injected in the report that is shameful from a legal standpoint.

[B-Man]

35 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

I also know about the grand jury testimony but we all also know that is not insurmountable if transparency was the DOJ's goal.  

 

The goal instead is to hold back as much as possible.  That is not the action that would be taken if all the information was exonerating, is it now?

 

 

This is completely false.

 

 

No, its not insurmountable, if you want to ignore the rights of all the witnesses.

 

Who are they anyway ?  

 

Robert Mueller compiled the two year report and stated that there was NO COLLUSION, and the evidence did not reach the level of obstruction.

 

ALL the evidence.

 

That 2% law-protected testimony will not change a thing.

 

But keep clinging to that flotsam, 

 

and that "well, if they are innocent, what do they have to hide BS ?....................doesn't fly with adults.

 

 

 

 

.

Edited May 8, 2019 by B-Man

[keepthefaith]

52 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Why is the President trying to obscure in any way a document that so clearly exonerates him of any wrongdoing? 

 

IMO it's a big ***** You to the Dems.  Nadler and his crew are demonstrating that they can't/won't act responsibly with any information they get. 

 

I think we all expect and can handle a little political gamesmanship here and there but what's going on in Washington especially since 2016 is just over the top bad business. 

[Bob in Mich]

2 minutes ago, Foxx said:

the President is trying to obsure a report that he initially exerted no executive privilege over? one that was only redacted under 2% in total and redacted to exclude Grand jury testimony and ongoing investigations, at that. this is on par with existing precedent and in accordance with the law. it is the Dems unhinged insistence that Barr break the law. Congress made the law and if the Dems were serious, they could unmake the law but they are not really interested in that, only feigning outrage. 

 

why is the offer to view the less redacted report unacceptable to the Dems? because they might suspect that it is a trap to out them when they leak the contents?

 

if all the information was exonerating?? wtf are you on about. prosecution does not operate that way they only work to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. they do not set out to exonerate, that is Mueller's political bias being injected in the report that is shameful from a legal standpoint.

 

The post I replied to was yours in which you said that the released version of the report proved No collusion and no obstruction.  That was not true.  Oh, I understand that Mueller does not exonerate him, as do you.  Didn't Mueller say something though about exonerating if he could?  Seem to remember something about that. 

 

Similarly the President's narrative on the Mueller report after Barr's receipt but prior to it's redacted release was 'Complete exoneration, No Collusion, No Obstruction  It is over.  I won'.  That was very obviously untrue too.  Most Americans are tired of the whole investigation issue though so that false narrative has stuck with most.  Congrats, your boy has fooled a good bit of the population with this lie.  Barr has aided in that misdirection, if you want to talk about shameful actions.

 

Seriously?  The proposed solution is that you can view the documents but can never speak of them to anyone afterwards?  Give that five seconds of thought.  If you don't realize what a ridiculous option that is in five seconds, you may have larger problems.  Hint:  It has nothing to do with leaks.  Good luck.

[SoCal Deek]

Obscure the document? How so? Mr Nadler can walk into a room and read the whole thing today if he wants to! But he’s chosen not to. 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

59 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Why is the President trying to obscure in any way a document that so clearly exonerates him of any wrongdoing? 

 

He's not. You can read the report yourself today -- and for the past several weeks. 

 

You're beyond misinformed if you think that's what's happening. 

 

5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

The post I replied to was yours in which you said that the released version of the report proved No collusion and no obstruction.  That was not true. 

 

It is though. He was not charged for either, nor was anyone in the entire Mueller probe. Facts are your friends. Or can be if you put the joint down long enough to remember what you're reading. 

 

6 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 Similarly the President's narrative on the Mueller report after Barr's receipt but prior to it's redacted release was 'Complete exoneration, No Collusion, No Obstruction  It is over.  I won'.  That was very obviously untrue too. 

 

Was he charged? 

 

That's Mueller's job. He did not have enough evidence to bring charges (against Trump or anyone on the campaign). 

 

So again, you're wrong and pushing falsehoods because you WANT to believe that you haven't been lied to non stop for two plus years. But you have. By the same people pushing this nonsense. 

 

From a criminal and legal perspective it's over. All of it. 

 

From a political partisan perspective it's not. And won't be until the hammer falls. 

 

And that's coming Bob. Better get ready for it. You won't like what's about to happen. 

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Obscure the document? How so? Mr Nadler can walk into a room and read the whole thing today if he wants to! But he’s chosen not to. 

 

Bob's wrong. Very wrong. But that's not unusual. He refuses to reassess what he's been fed, so he's doubling down on untruths because he's been had. 

 

And he's too stubborn/partisan to admit it. 

 

His cognitive dissonance is off the charts. It would be amusing if it wasn't so sad.

[Bob in Mich]

29 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

This is completely false.

 

 

No, its not insurmountable, if you want to ignore the rights of all the witnesses.

 

Who are they anyway ?  

 

Robert Mueller compiled the two year report and stated that there was NO COLLUSION, and the evidence did not reach the level of obstruction.

 

ALL the evidence.

 

That 2% law-protected testimony will not change a thing.

 

But keep clinging to that flotsam, 

 

and that "well, if they are innocent, what do they have to hide BS ?....................doesn't fly with adults.

 

 

 

 

.

 

I have some things to get to and so I am out for a while    I hope everything is not over before I get back.

 

I just had to reply to B-Man's post though.  I don't think I ever saw any of your actual words.  Was always only cut and paste. 

 

Oh, certainly I completely disagree with the post but am happy for you.  Congrats!!  Baby steps man, baby steps.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Bob in Mich said:

 

I have some things to get to and so I am out for a while ....

 

He's off to get more bad information and reinforce his opinions. Because when people show you they're liars, Bob doesn't take action, he just continues to believe them full stop. 

 

TDS is a degenerative disease. 

11 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

IMO it's a big ***** You to the Dems.  Nadler and his crew are demonstrating that they can't/won't act responsibly with any information they get. 

 

I think we all expect and can handle a little political gamesmanship here and there but what's going on in Washington especially since 2016 is just over the top bad business. 

 

(it was always a coup)

 

But don't tell Bob about that. He doesn't care about facts because "ORANGE MAN BAD!!!!!!!!!!!!"

[Deranged Rhino]

What a difference five months make. 

 

 

[Foxx]

1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

The post I replied to was yours in which you said that the released version of the report proved No collusion and no obstruction.  That was not true.  Oh, I understand that Mueller does not exonerate him, as do you.  Didn't Mueller say something though about exonerating if he could?  Seem to remember something about that. 

 

Similarly the President's narrative on the Mueller report after Barr's receipt but prior to it's redacted release was 'Complete exoneration, No Collusion, No Obstruction  It is over.  I won'.  That was very obviously untrue too.  Most Americans are tired of the whole investigation issue though so that false narrative has stuck with most.  Congrats, your boy has fooled a good bit of the population with this lie.  Barr has aided in that misdirection, if you want to talk about shameful actions.

 

Seriously?  The proposed solution is that you can view the documents but can never speak of them to anyone afterwards?  Give that five seconds of thought.  If you don't realize what a ridiculous option that is in five seconds, you may have larger problems.  Hint:  It has nothing to do with leaks.  Good luck.

right, it proved no collusion and no obstruction because no charges have been filed due to it's conclusions. this is very plain and evident. also, though you may argue that part two (the portion that dwells on obstruction) lays out ten or eleven instances of potential obstruction, the fact remains that Mueller choose to not indict the President. additionally it is very arguable that an innocent man obstructing justice is a hard case to prove and may be why Mueller punted.

 

just so we are clear here, i am not sure Trump is 'my boy'. a better more accurate descriptor of my position may be had by saving that i am anti-insanity and anti-corruption. both of which it seems the Donner Party has cornered the market on. that and i am particularly anti-main stream media. they are the worst and should be strung up by their balls.

 

Barr did not misdirect. he could not, with the demeanor of the Donner Party, go three/four weeks with no word on the report. they would have go completely over the edge. the faux outrage being displayed over Barr and his summary by the Donners and the main stream propagandists, as being that of misleading the public, is disingenuous at best and criminal at worst. nothing Barr said in that summary is untrue, or as the Donners have said, a lie. it was a summation of the principal conclusions and as explained, it had to be issued.

 

you know why they can't speak of what they see in the lesser redacted report, is because it is about ongoing investigations. you do understand how talking about ongoing investigations could potentially injure them, right? come on Bob, you know this.

 

oh, before i forget, you also understand that the rules are the House rules and not Barr's rules, right? 

Edited May 8, 2019 by Foxx

[Tiberius]

Just now, Foxx said:

right, it proved no collusion and no obstruction because no charges have been filed due to it's conclusions. this is very plain and evident. also, though you may argue that part two (the portion that dwells on obstruction) lays out ten or eleven instances of potential obstruction, the fact remains that Mueller choose to not indict the President. additionally it is very arguable that an innocent man obstructing justice is a hard case to prove and may be why Mueller punted.

 

just so we are clear here, i am not sure Trump is 'my boy'. a better more accurate descriptor of my position may be had by saving that i am anti-insanity and anti-corruption. both of which it seems the Donner Party has cornered the market on. that and i am particularly anti-main stream media. they are the worst and should be strung up by their balls.

 

Barr did not misdirect. he could not, with the demeanor of the Donner Party, go three/four weeks with no word on the report. they would have go completely over the edge. the faux outrage being displayed over Barr and his summary by the Donners and the main stream propagandists, as being that of misleading the public, is disingenuous at best and criminal at worst. nothing Barr said in that summary is untrue, or as the Donners have said, a lie. it was a summation of the principal conclusions and as explained, it had to be issued.

 

you know why they can't speak of what they see in the lesser redacted report, is because it is about ongoing investigations. you do understand how talking about ongoing investigations could potentially injure them, right? come on Bob, you know this.

Mueller couldn't indict because of DOJ policy. He laid out a road map for the crime. Burr came along and just lied about it. Just like Trump wanted him to 

[3rdnlng]

From what I understand Volume 11 of the Mueller Report is 180 odd pages. 6 lines have been redacted. Nadler and gang's whole purpose here is to not get what they claim they want. That's usually the dems MO. They love to have issues that they can blame on the republicans.

[DC Tom]

2 hours ago, B-Man said:

POINTS AND FIGURES: 

 

“I saw the NYT spread on Trump’s taxes. They are trying to turn it into a scandal. It’s not a scandal. Trump is a real estate developer and real estate developers can almost always show losses. This is a total disinformation campaign that takes advantage of people not knowing the tax code.” 

 

 

So, fairly typical NY Times product, then.

 

 

 

.

 

It's worse that that: it's something everyone knew.  Trump went bankrupt running casinos in Atlantic City.  

 

The NYT is "breaking" news that's a quarter-century old.  What's next, an in-depth investigation into Whitewater?  

[Foxx]

16 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Mueller couldn't indict because of DOJ policy. He laid out a road map for the crime. Burr came along and just lied about it. Just like Trump wanted him to 

i believe there is no consensus on that. Barr clearly disagreed with several of Mueller's legal reasoning's. additionally, Mueller was given a mandate that specifically allowed him to make a decision and the Justice Department clearly indicated he could make a decision. quite telling that he chose not to.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Foxx

[Deranged Rhino]

They're finally voting -- and of course they screwed it up because Nadler is a clown so they have to revote. Which is happening now.

 

Annnnnd

 

 Good luck.

Two more votes to come... 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

24 to 16, party line vote.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

Nadler's post hearing press conference begins with him saying Barr mislead the public twice about the report. 

 

Question: how does he know this considering he has refused to read the full report? 

 

And how does one mislead the public about a report which has been made public for three weeks? 

 

Nadler is a clown. 

 

 

Nadler says it'll be a civil contempt, not criminal. 

 

(so it'll never be taken seriously, this is all a show before the IG report. nothing more)

 

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

Shhh: (The real constitutional crisis at play here is how one administration weaponized the vast powers of our surveillance state to spy on its political opposition... but Nadler doesn't want to talk about that. He wants to PROJECT and LIE about this issue instead.)

 

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Tiberius]

2 hours ago, Foxx said:

i believe there is no consensus on that. Barr clearly disagreed with several of Mueller's legal reasoning's. additionally, Mueller was given a mandate that specifically allowed him to make a decision and the Justice Department clearly indicated he could make a decision. quite telling that he chose not to.

No, the reason he didn't indict is because of DOJ policy. You wouldn't have known that listening to Barr or Trump lie about the report 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

No, the reason he didn't indict is because of DOJ policy. You wouldn't have known that listening to Barr or Trump lie about the report 

 

Incorrect.

[Deranged Rhino]

Thread for laughs: 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

4 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Why is the President trying to obscure in any way a document that so clearly exonerates him of any wrongdoing?  If I had control over the release of an investigative document that stated that I had done nothing wrong, I know I would not try to block it.  

 

 

I understand the offer to view the document but then not speak of it any more, and agree that it is rightfully unacceptable to the Dems.  I also know about the grand jury testimony but we all also know that is not insurmountable if transparency was the DOJ's goal.   The goal instead is to hold back as much as possible.  That is not the action that would be taken if all the information was exonerating, is it now?

Bob, it's  the old adage "It's not your innocence, it's that you had the audacity to fight back"  that comes to mind here. 

 

I think most observers who follow this sort of thing would say you never, ever volunteer anything, and you never assume that just because you're innocent that  your political enemies won't try to gut you like a fish.   The reality is that that no one would cooperate, innocent or guilty.  You don't prove your innocence by being submissive to your enemy.  

 

I am 100% on board with executive privilege and declining to voluntarily assist the jackals withh anything. F 'em. 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[row_33]

So stomping around and holding their breath and eating a bucket of chicken still hasn’t produced any evidence?

 

 

[DC Tom]

5 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Why is the President trying to obscure in any way a document

 

Just to be clear: the document was released to the public with redactions such as required by law, and that's "obscuration?"

 

Someone tell me again pot is harmless... 

[B-Man]

Your daily VDH.......................

 

 

Progressives Face a Bleak Post-Mueller Landscape by Victor Davis Hanson

Original Article     Democrats have grown infuriated by Attorney General William Barr's indifference to their hysteria over the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.   Barr recently released a brief summary of special counsel Robert Mueller's conclusions that Donald Trump did not collude with the Russians to warp the 2016 election. Barr added that Mueller had not found enough evidence to recommend that Trump be indicted for obstruction of justice for the non-crime of collusion.   Progressives, who for 22 months had insisted that Trump was a Russian asset, were stunned. But only for a few hours.   Almost immediately, they redirected their fury toward Barr's summation of the Mueller report. Yet few rational people contested Barr's synopses about collusion and obstruction. {snip}   So what really explains the furor now directed at Barr?   One, progressives are terrified that a number of Trump's critics -- Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe -- may soon be indicted. They apparently seek to preempt such indictments by attacking Barr, a seemingly no-nonsense prosecutor who will likely follow up on any criminal referrals from any inspector general that reach his desk.   Two, the 2020 progressive agenda -- whether defined as the Green New Deal, a wealth tax, Medicare for All or open borders -- will not compete well with Trump's currently booming economy. Impeaching Trump for collusion and obstruction is seen by progressives as the best (or perhaps only) way to return to power. That effort so far is failing, causing even more hysteria.   Three, the Mueller investigation is over, finished after 22 months, $34 million and a 448-page, two-volume report.   There will be no indictments of Trump for either collusion or the obstruction of justice during the investigation of that non-crime. So now what?   Since late 2015, Trump, as the supposed Russian puppet or the Machiavellian obstructer of justice, was nightly cable-TV news fare. Now, such fantasies are shattered. But progressives are not willing to let the Mueller investigation rest in peace and move on with their lives.   Perhaps they feel in the political sense that there is nothing to move on to. And they are probably right.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[row_33]

funny how the diversity of the internet has made the mainstream media way more rabid and partisan than when they held a monopoly on TV and radio and print.

 

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

22 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Why is the President trying to obscure in any way a document that so clearly exonerates him of any wrongdoing?  If I had control over the release of an investigative document that stated that I had done nothing wrong, I know I would not try to block it.   No one would, unless the release creates even more problems for them.

 

I understand the offer to view the document but then not speak of it any more, and agree that it is rightfully unacceptable to the Dems.  I also know about the grand jury testimony but we all also know that is not insurmountable if transparency was the DOJ's goal.   The goal instead is to hold back as much as possible.  That is not the action that would be taken if all the information was exonerating, is it now?

 

This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read.

 

The redactions in place are required by law.

 

You are, quite literally, asking the President to break the law, committing an actual impeachable offense; which, if not impeached for would actually create a Constitutional crisis.

 

This is ######ed.  Stop doing that.

[B-Man]

Top Dems Now Have Access to All But Two Full, Seven Partial Lines of Mueller’s Obstruction Report ...

 

but it's never been about access; it's about projecting illusion of cover-up -

 

 

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/mueller-report-volume-ii-available-top-congressional-democrats/

[row_33]

[Nanker]

On 5/8/2019 at 12:18 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

DR,  this happens to me a lot. I don’t see anything except space in some posts. Did you post a graphic? Looking on the iOS and Mac platforms. 

 

Sarcastic commenters and comments not appreciated.

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

38 minutes ago, Nanker said:

DR,  this happens to me a lot. I don’t see anything except space in some posts. Did you post a graphic? Looking on the iOS and Mac platforms. 

 

Sarcastic commenters and comments not appreciated.

 

 

 

Hmm... 

 

I think I know what happened. (I had to go back and look, it's gone on my feed now too). I don't remember what specifically I put there yesterday but I think it was from a Twitter feed which got banned yesterday. When that happens the embedded tweets disappear. Will take more care to label these in the future. 

:beer: