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

[Foxx]

22 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

No surprise. 

And since Lindsay Graham said, "We are done" that means, we are done. And now, it is the Trump-side's turn. It ain't gonna be pretty. 

 

22 hours ago, Foxx said:

i would think that whether or not they're done will depend largely upon how the Mueller testimony in the House Judiciary goes.

 

22 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Cruz: Wow. He's masterful. Truly.
 

Ooooh, he touched on the wire, but it wasn't expounded upon.

 

I don't know about that. It would have to be egregious and completely refute everything Barr has said to this point. Graham was pretty much tough-titty-said-the-kitty-when-the-milk-ran-dry when asked about calling Mueller and continuing on with this farce. 

https://twitter.com/Jamierodr14/status/1123700235287650304

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

 

[Foxx]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

i gotta say Lindsey... when your right, your right. what is now going on is not oversight.

[snafu]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Remember, this is the same asshat who said he'd give Pete Strzok (a seditious traitor) a purple heart. 

 

***** him.

 

 

I bet if they took a photo of Cohen's nameplate, it would have figurines of a dog and a pony on it.

 

 

 

[GG]

2 hours ago, plenzmd1 said:

uhmm, why is so hard to understand that the lying the Dems , and in particular Sen Hirono is based on Barr's testimony on ...

and we now know that was BS..

 

It is not saying he lied to cover up crimes etc...

 

If you insist on their literal interpretation that Barr lied in April 8, then there's no case, because the questions were in relation to "members of Mueller's team" which is not the same as Mueller.  If Dems were smart enough to ask the right questions in April, then maybe they would have an eyehole opening as opposed to being the whiny second raters.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Foxx]

Alan Dershowitz: Barr is right, Mueller is wrong

[GG]

Wonder if the chicken bucket made it past Nadler's desk. 

[row_33]

18 minutes ago, GG said:

Wonder if the chicken bucket made it past Nadler's desk. 

 

careful.......    :/

 

 

[plenzmd1]

4 hours ago, GG said:

 

If you insist on their literal interpretation that Barr lied in April 8, then there's no case, because the questions were in relation to "members of Mueller's team" which is not the same as Mueller.  If Dems were smart enough to ask the right questions in April, then maybe they would have an eyehole opening as opposed to being the whiny second raters.

so when he said " the letter is snitty, i think someone on his team prolly wrote it" ...was he lying then?

 

Has to be one or the other

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

22 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

so when he said " the letter is snitty, i think someone on his team prolly wrote it" ...was he lying then?

 

Has to be one or the other

Barr said the letter is "snitty"?  I admit to not knowing that reference, it was during testimony on 4/8? I'd like to cue it up...who was he responding to? 

 

I think I give him a pass for using a word like snitty in that sort of setting.  It sounds dirty. 

 

But to be clear, you see Barr's answer, taken in the context of an interrogation by his political enemies on April 8, to be an outright lie that should result in his immediate dismissal from office and which created a permanent stain on his reputation? I'm sort of summarizing the senator from hawaii's 7 minute diatribe as I understood it. 

[plenzmd1]

8 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Barr said the letter is "snitty"?  I admit to not knowing that reference, it was during testimony on 4/8? I'd like to cue it up...who was he responding to? 

 

I think I give him a pass for using a word like snitty in that sort of setting.  It sounds dirty. 

 

But to be clear, you see Barr's answer, taken in the context of an interrogation by his political enemies on April 8, to be an outright lie that should result in his immediate dismissal from office and which created a permanent stain on his reputation? I'm sort of summarizing the senator from hawaii's 7 minute diatribe as I understood it. 

to be clear..   @GG contention is that when asked on 04/09 whether he knew how Muellars team felt about his summary,  , Barr answered "NO' as he believed the question was asked about how Muellars team viewed his summary..hence the letter Mueller sent him on 03/27 did not quality, as it was penned by Mueller, not his team.

 

Then yesterday he said the letter was "snitty and i believe was written by his team, not Mueller"

 

Plain and simple the dude the lied under oath one way or the other...not even questionable.

 

[GG]

50 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

so when he said " the letter is snitty, i think someone on his team prolly wrote it" ...was he lying then?

 

Has to be one or the other

 

If the Dems are trying to hang a perjury trap on him, they need to be better questioners.  The questions have to be very specific to catch him in the act, because the trap they've set so far is full of holes.   Asking him about some staffers' commentary and then trying to link that to a specific letter from Mueller will not fly in any courtroom, other than the commentators on CNN & MSNBC.   

 

And of course Barr knew exactly what they were trying to ask him and that's why he gave the specific response to a badly framed question.   Doesn't make what he said a lie, though.

 

If they asked him if he was aware of a letter from Mueller, then his response would be different.  Of course if they asked him that question, then someone on Mueller's team and in Congress would also be charged with peddling confidential information. 

 

That's what makes this comical.  The Dems also knew about the Mueller letter, and they still couldn't set a proper perjury trap for Barr.   

 

Now, their only option is to throw the empty gun at the tanks.  Have fun.

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said:

to be clear..   @GG contention is that when asked on 04/09 whether he knew how Muellars team felt about his summary,  , Barr answered "NO' as he believed the question was asked about how Muellars team viewed his summary..hence the letter Mueller sent him on 03/27 did not quality, as it was penned by Mueller, not his team.

 

Then yesterday he said the letter was "snitty and i believe was written by his team, not Mueller"

 

Plain and simple the dude the lied under oath one way or the other...not even questionable.

 

As always thanks for replying.  

 

I was sincere in asking if you knew who asked the question under oath on 4/9 (I said 4/8 earlier) so I could understand what it is that was so clear to you.  I'm not interested in some writers recap, or schumer pelosi or graham telling me what they think, I wanted to hear the question as asked, the context and his reply.  

 

as I was typing, I read GGs reply and he succinctly summarized the challenge with your position.

 

, I find the entirety of those hearings grotesque regardless of the person being interrogated.  The truth is generally irrelevant, it's a carefully choreographed freak show with one group of losers trying to professionally kneecap someone who often does not deserve it.  To hear these bottom feeders reference their "colleague" or "my friend from California" makes it seedier still. In this particular case, seeing the pack of scumbags who missed wildly on the collusion issue when the entire weight of the doj was brought down on trump try to catch the ag in some bullsh3t perjury trap is pathetic.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[plenzmd1]

 

 

 

2

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

If the Dems are trying to hang a perjury trap on him, they need to be better questioners.  The questions have to be very specific to catch him in the act, because the trap they've set so far is full of holes.   Asking him about some staffers' commentary and then trying to link that to a specific letter from Mueller will not fly in any courtroom, other than the commentators on CNN & MSNBC.   

 

And of course Barr knew exactly what they were trying to ask him and that's why he gave the specific response to a badly framed question.   Doesn't make what he said a lie, though.

 

If they asked him if he was aware of a letter from Mueller, then his response would be different.  Of course if they asked him that question, then someone on Mueller's team and in Congress would also be charged with peddling confidential information. 

 

That's what makes this comical.  The Dems also knew about the Mueller letter, and they still couldn't set a proper perjury trap for Barr.   

 

Now, their only option is to throw the empty gun at the tanks.  Have fun.

 

 

i am totally lost on your argument..and i do want to understand what you believe.Transcript below from04/09

 

Crist: "Reports have emerged recently, general, that members of the special counsel’s team are frustrated at some level with the limited information included in your March 24 letter, that it does not adequately or accurately, necessarily, portray the report’s findings. Do you know what they’re referencing with that?"

Barr: "No, I don’t. I think, I suspect that they probably wanted more put out. But in my view, I was not interested in putting out summaries or trying to summarize because I think any summary — regardless of who prepares it — not only runs the risk of being underinclusive or overinclusive but also would trigger a lot of discussion and analysis that really should await everything coming out at once."

The Democratic senators quoted that exchange at several points in the May 1 hearing. Barr’s explanation for not disclosing the letter was artful — he pointed out that Crist asked him about Mueller’s team, not Mueller himself.

"

 

 

I mean it is black and white no? what is there to argue?

 

 

It may be technical, but on 04/09, he claims to not know if Muellars team has issues, and on 05/01, he claims he believes letter on 03/27 was snitty and penned by Muellars team.. I just truly don't understand where the argument is

 

dude lied at some point..take your pick where

 

 

 

[GG]

Of course his response was technical because he knew they were setting up a trap.  That's why their argument is hollow.  They asked the wrong question and are now trying to hang him for an answer to a totally unrelated question (as far as the law goes)

 

This is not about a semantics debate on a message board.  It's about whether he lied under the legal code.  It's clear that he did not because they can't even frame him properly.  

 

Now that Dems are out of bullets do you think that Barr or Trump will be benevolent when it's their turn in 2 weeks?

 

PS - what do you think is way worse - Barr slipping away with a technicality on an improperly worded question or the Dems intentionally  setting up a perjury trap on something that’s totally inconsequential to a 2 year investigation that yielded nothing?

Edited May 3, 2019 by GG

[row_33]

Letter from Barr doesn’t matter at all

 

no Santa Claus

no Easter Bunny

no collusion

 

grow up

 

 

[reddogblitz]

I have now watched some of the testimony and questions, or lack thereof and reminds me of something I heard Molly Ivins say in a speech on the North Texas State University campus in the early 2000s.  "When it comes to government and the legislature you are paying for it, so you might as well watch it and enjoy it." Truer words could not be expressed in regards to this hearing.

 

Some of my favorite parts so far:

 

1. Senator Hirono railed onto Barr and insulted him for 5 1/2 minutes and then says "I have a few questions."  What a way to set up a witness to get truthful answers form them.  Ted Cruz' butter up technique probably would have worked better if she really had any questions to ask.
2. Senator Fienstien not asking a single question but instead gave a 10 and a half minute speech culminating in trying to get Mueller to testify. On a side note, she is really old school.  Her name plate reads "Mrs. Fienstien".
3. Senator Klobuchar using the first 4 1/2 minutes making a campaign speech about all the good work she has done in congress.  Then doing her "preponderance of the evidence" routine.
4. Senator Cruz buttering up General Barr and then only asking a yes/no question or two and the rest of the time just making a speech.
5. Senator Harris castigating Barr for not reading all the underlying evidence before writing his report.  Is he supposed to re investigate the whole investigation to make sure an honorable man like Mueller didn't hoodwink us?

 

It always kills me in these things where Congress needs to bring these people in and have to ask them all these important questions that the American People have a right to know and then when they get in there. the Congress people just make speeches primarily.  They collude on what questions are best to ask and all ask the same thing.   This time it was "The Letter".  The last one I watched was for Brett to ask for an investigation.

 

Again, we're paying handsomely for it, might as well enjoy it.  I know I got a few LOLs in.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2019 by reddogblitz

[njbuff]

The Dumbs are tripling down on their hate for the AG because they know Barr is a no nonsense guy and he is going to lay the hammer down on these criminals.

 

I find ig quite laughable that these Democrats tell the American people that Barr is a hack for President Trump when Barr was AG under the President that hates Trump more than anybody.

 

As a poster mentioned earlier.................. what a shytshow. 

[row_33]

This is why people have total contempt for politicians. A woman reading a cue card for the first time and pretending to care about the contents is a poor display for government.