House Judiciary Committee Holds Barr in Contempt

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Fox is now hedging their bets on Trump. Hence the sudden friendliness with Bernie.
I think the Mueller Report didn't turn out quite the way Hannity had told them that it would.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JosephZ
Upvote 0

Catfisher

Active Member
Apr 29, 2019
349
190
47
Waco
✟11,319.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
I think the Mueller Report didn't turn out quite the way Hannity had told them that it would.

It certainly didn't turn out the way that Schiff, the NYT, the Washington Post, Vannity Fair, CNN, MSNBC, and the rest said it would, lol.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Gigimo
Upvote 0

jgarden

Senior Veteran
Jan 1, 2004
10,695
3,181
✟106,405.00
Faith
Methodist
That's not how our system works. Thank God.
Apparently our resident constitutional scholar has never heard of the separation of powers, whereby the Executive (President), Legislative (Congress) and Judicial Branches act as checks and balances.

The committee system in Congress performs an oversight function concerning the Administration - the President may not appreciate these intrusions but under the Constitution the Executive and Legislative Branches are co-equal

Not "allowed" but "required". It's the LAW. Look it up. I've already outlined how Congressional Democrats could have requested the remaining 6% of the Mueller report. But that's not how they went about it. Because they want to smear Barr.
Barr "smeared" his own reputation by introducing his biased interpretation o the Report and then waiting 3 weeks before releasing the public edition on the day before a long weekend!

If only 6% was deleted, why did it take 3 weeks unless he was attempting to manipulate public opinion?

The Star Report obtained a judicial review of the grand jury testimony before it was released - the Trump Administration wants to use this as the pretext to put a lid on further disclosures.

An appointed government official shouldn't be making up his own rules
as to which congressional committee invitations he'll accept and how much of the Report elected officials are permitted to see!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JosephZ
Upvote 0

JosephZ

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2017
2,992
2,859
Davao City
Visit site
✟226,464.00
Country
Philippines
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Catfisher

Active Member
Apr 29, 2019
349
190
47
Waco
✟11,319.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
Apparently our resident constitutional scholar has never heard of the separation of powers, whereby the Executive (President), Legislative (Congress) and Judicial Branches act as checks and balances.
The committee system in Congress performs an oversight function concerning the Administration - the President may not appreciate these intrusions but under the Constitution the Executive and Legislative Branches are co-equal
What's the specific complaint here?

Barr "smeared" his own reputation by introducing his biased interpretation o the Report and then waiting 3 weeks before releasing the public edition on the day before a long weekend!
His letter summarized Mueller's findings fairly succinctly. Not sure how he smeared himself. It's not like he said something contrary to what Mueller said.

If only 6% was deleted, why did it take 3 weeks unless he was attempting to manipulate public opinion?
Because lawyers have to comb through the report in order to make the proper determinations as to what is legally allowed to be released. Then, Barr made a less redacted report available to Congress which only omitted the 6e material. Apparently, Democrats didn't even go view it.

The Star Report obtained a judicial review of the grand jury testimony before it was released - the Trump Administration wants to use this as the pretext to put a lid on further disclosures.
And Congress could obtain a judicial review as well - had they bothered to seek one. Instead, they demanded Barr break the law.

An appointed government official shouldn't be making up his own rules
as to which congressional committee invitations he'll accept and how much of the Report elected officials are permitted to see!
Who made up their own rules here? Lots of people have refused to show for Congressional hearings.
 
Upvote 0

Catfisher

Active Member
Apr 29, 2019
349
190
47
Waco
✟11,319.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced

Really? Schiff famously claimed that he had substantial evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to effect the election. Apparently he failed to give that substantial evidence to Mueller.

It's funny to see people still clinging to this narrative despite the absolute absence of any substantiating evidence.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Gigimo
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
25,916
11,303
76
✟363,228.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Really? Schiff famously claimed that he had substantial evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to effect the election. Apparently he failed to give that substantial evidence to Mueller.

Mueller said there was evidence. He said that it wasn't enough to indict the president.

It's funny to see people still clinging to this narrative despite the absolute absence of any substantiating evidence.

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Donald Trump and Russia establishes a damning series of facts about the Trump campaign’s connections to the Kremlin.


We learned that two Trump campaign officials, campaign manager Paul Manafort and Manafort’s deputy Rick Gates, were regularly providing polling information to a Russian national whom Gates believed to be a “spy.”


We learned that, after Trump publicly called on Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s emails, he privately ordered future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn to find them. Flynn reached out to a man named Peter Smith who (apparently falsely) told a number of people that he was in contact with Russian agents.


We learned that Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos attempted to arrange meetings between Trump and Putin, and that Trump personally approved Papadopoulos’s work on this front.


The report is very clear that Mueller’s investigation did not establish that the Trump campaign criminally conspired on illegal Russian election interference, or that it coordinated with Russia through either an active or tacit agreement.


But the report, combined with other publicly known facts — that Donald Trump Jr. arranged a meeting with the express purpose of obtaining Russian “dirt” on Clinton, and that Papadopoulos was offered similar dirt from a Russian agent, among others — paints a damning picture of the campaign. It was both actively seeking to cultivate a relationship with the Russian government and willing to work with it to acquire damaging information about its political opponents. That willingness included explicitly sharing information with or soliciting information from Russian operatives.


As the report takes pains to point out, “collusion” has no legal definition and is not a federal crime. So while the report did not establish conspiracy or coordination, it does not make a determination on “collusion” — and in fact, it strongly suggests that there was at least an attempt to collude by Trump’s campaign and agents of the Russian government
.
https://www.vox.com/2019/4/18/18484965/mueller-report-trump-no-collusion
 
  • Like
Reactions: JosephZ
Upvote 0

Justified112

Well-Known Member
Jan 15, 2019
526
276
47
Midwest US
✟25,034.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Actually yes there are. There are specific exceptions in the Rules of Criminal Procedure and there is precedent that a court also has inherent authority to release grand jury testimony.
The 2nd volume, the "Obstruction" Volume, has 200 pages and there are only 6 lines redacted out of that 200 pages. There are 4 full lines and 2 partial lines redacted. That's the volume they are focused on. So this is ridiculous to hold Barr in contempt over this.

There is a special copy in a secret location that is available to Nadler some other ranking members of the House Jud. Comm. to read. They have not made any effort to read it. It has most of the redactions removed so they can see what is in it. So why have they not read it? Looks like this is not about redactions or some legitimate legislative purpose.

When they read the mostly unredacted version that is available, they can then make a special request to see the remaining material that is still redacted. If they can show why they MUST see this material, then it can be shown to them.

This is not about finding the truth or some necessary legislative purpose. They want to illegally hold Barr in contempt for not breaking the law. If Barr caves and hands over that unredacted report that will go public along with the underlying material, Nadler will accuse him of breaking the law. If Barr refuses to break the law by refusing to comply with an unlawful subpoena, then they hold him in contempt. This contempt charge is illegal and will not stand up in court.
 
Upvote 0

Catfisher

Active Member
Apr 29, 2019
349
190
47
Waco
✟11,319.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
Well said. You nailed it.

The more you read the Mueller report, the more you see that he just stuffs irrelevant factoids into the report to give the appearance that collusion took place, then comes to the conclusion that it didn't.

Mueller was not paid to get to the bottom of anything. He was paid to justify an impeachment attempt.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
25,916
11,303
76
✟363,228.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
The 2nd volume, the "Obstruction" Volume, has 200 pages and there are only 6 lines redacted out of that 200 pages. There are 4 full lines and 2 partial lines redacted. That's the volume they are focused on. So this is ridiculous to hold Barr in contempt over this.

It doesn't matter what part of the report the administration is trying to hide from Congress. It is still a crime to do so.

There is a special copy in a secret location that is available to Nadler some other ranking members of the House Jud. Comm. to read. They have not made any effort to read it. It has most of the redactions removed so they can see what is in it. So why have they not read it? Looks like this is not about redactions or some legitimate legislative purpose.

It doesn't matter if there's another copy with less of the report hidden. Still a crime to hide it from Congress.

When they read the mostly unredacted version that is available, they can then make a special request to see the remaining material that is still redacted. If they can show why they MUST see this material, then it can be shown to them.

No. Congress is not required to justify to the executive branch why they want the information.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: JosephZ
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gigimo

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2015
2,635
1,235
Ohio
✟96,387.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Actually I was expecting you to come up with more than that. The key is that many of the investigations are still on going.

I gave you a starting point so you can pursue them or ignore them the choice is yours.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
25,916
11,303
76
✟363,228.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Mueller was not paid to get to the bottom of anything. He was paid to justify an impeachment attempt.

So let's summarize; "a republican asst. AG picked a republican FBI agent to gin up an impeachment attempt on a republican president."

And the agent picked,Robert Mueller has a long history of putting his country ahead of his personal safety and welfare:

He volunteered for Vietnam.

Captain
Unit H Company, 2nd Battalion, 4th Marines, 3rd Marine Division
Commands Platoon commander
Wars Vietnam War
Awards
Compare to Cadet Bone Spurs.

Kinda says it all, doesn't it?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: JosephZ
Upvote 0