So is Barr the Attorney General or Trumps personal lawyer?

[KCfromNC]

No crime to investigate.

I imagine all of Trumps employees who are sitting in jail now would disagree. But don't let facts get in the way.

 

[whatbogsends]

Barr did not lie when he properly understood the question to pertain to members of Mueller’s team and answered the question. He did not lie by providing an answer pertaining to Mueller’s team and only about Mueller’s team.

It's strange how he carefully parses his words in this context, yet uses the words "no collusion" in his summary of principle conclusions of the Mueller Report, as the Mueller Report specifically said in the introduction that it didn't speak to "collusion".

As far as his answer regarding "Mueller's team", his answer certainly isn't "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". It may be "the technical truth", but his answer is dishonest, at best. Especially, in light of the fact that he later states that he believed the Mueller letter was" probably written by someone on Mueller's team". It's an excuse one way when he wants to frame an answer to one question, and an excuse the other way when he wants to frame an answer to a different question.

Personally, I've led many teams. On each and every team I would classify myself as a member of the team as well as the leader of the team. It seems absurd to claim otherwise.

 

[whatbogsends]

That's because in your perspective everyone involved with bringing the truth forward regarding the whole Russia hoax are from the Trump team, therefore they are all liars, cowards and criminals etc.

Whereas from my perspective...the democrats making all the noise...they are willing to destroy anyone from getting to the truth as it will be a disaster for the democrats. They do not want Barr to investigate the genesis of the Mueller investigation at all. So right on schedule, Barr becomes the target to be stopped now.

It amazes me that the democrats don't give any credit to their nation for voting in Trump as their duly elected POTUS...and they will again in 2020.

It amazes me that Trump supporters don't seem to comprehend that while Trump won the election by the rules of the Electoral College, that the citizens of the US voted for a different candidate, by a 3 million person margin.

 

[Speedwell]

It amazes me that Trump supporters don't seem to comprehend that while Trump won the election by the rules of the Electoral College, that the citizens of the US voted for a different candidate, by a 3 million person margin.

They comprehend it full well. That is why the simple-minded amongst them (Including the Great One himself) can so readily believe that there is a plot afoot to pull their savior from office and replace him with Hillary.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

They comprehend it full well. That is why the simple-minded amongst them (Including the Great One himself) can so readily believe that there is a plot afoot to pull their savior from office and replace him with Hillary.

This is why I fully believe I'm going to be accused next year of participating in an illegal coup when I vote for someone other than him.

 

[NotreDame]

I'm not sure why anyone would believe this, given that Barr also said he thought a member of Mueller's team wrote the memo rather the Mueller himself.

If you believe Barr’s remark, ”I think it was written by one of his staff people,” supports the notion Barr lied, you are very mistaken.

First, the obvious. Barr said he “thinks” he knows who wrote it, he isn’t stating or asserting such a thought as a fact. Neither is he expressing that he believes what he is “thinking” is factual. Hence, his remark about the letter is entirely consistent with his prior commentary, since he isn’t claiming to “know” or claiming as a fact that members of Mueller’s team wrote the letter.

Second, the letter is signed by Mueller. The letter is not signed by a staff person. Hence, Barr carefully phrased his remark as to what he “thinks,” since, after all, Mueller signed the letter and since the letter bares his (Mueller’s) signature, Mueller may have in fact composed the letter.

Or maybe Mueller made a draft of points he wanted made in a letter and provided his draft to a staff person to compose a letter incorporating the points Mueller wanted. Mueller then reviewed the letter for approval and signed it.

Either way, you’ve cited to nothing that demonstrates Barr lied.

 

[NotreDame]

A special counsel investigation for one....

Wrong again. How many times will you repeat the same incorrect statement. Even Mueller's Report does not agree with what you have said.

What is your point? This is a legitimate question. Why repeatedly make the same erroneous remark? Why continue to do so after being told the remark is not supported by the Report? Why continue to do so when you have provided nothing from the Report or the relevant law to support your claim?

You are espousing unsubstantiated and irrational partisan talking points disconnected from the facts and reality.

 

[NotreDame]

Personally, I've led many teams. On each and every team I would classify myself as a member of the team as well as the leader of the team. It seems absurd to claim otherwise.

So what? None of that directs or guides how to properly and rationally understand the question posed to Barr. The question was about member's of Mueller's team and not about Mueller. Nothing you have said above changes this fact about the phrase.

As far as his answer regarding "Mueller's team", his answer certainly isn't "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". It may be "the technical truth", but his answer is dishonest, at best. Especially, in light of the fact that he later states that he believed the Mueller letter was" probably written by someone on Mueller's team". It's an excuse one way when he wants to frame an answer to one question, and an excuse the other way when he wants to frame an answer to a different question.

If you believe Barr’s remark, ”I think it was written by one of his staff people,” supports the notion Barr lied, you are very mistaken.

First, the obvious. Barr said he “thinks” he knows who wrote it, he isn’t stating or asserting such a thought as a fact. Neither is he expressing that he believes what he is “thinking” is factual. Hence, his remark about the letter is entirely consistent with his prior commentary, since he isn’t claiming to “know” or claiming as a fact that members of Mueller’s team wrote the letter.

Second, the letter is signed by Mueller. The letter is not signed by a staff person. Hence, Barr carefully phrased his remark as to what he “thinks,” since, after all, Mueller signed the letter and since the letter bares his (Mueller’s) signature, Mueller may have in fact composed the letter.

Or maybe Mueller made a draft of points he wanted made in a letter and provided his draft to a staff person to compose a letter incorporating the points Mueller wanted. Mueller then reviewed the letter for approval and signed it.

Either way, you’ve cited to nothing that demonstrates Barr lied.

 

[whatbogsends]

So what? None of that directs or guides how to properly and rationally understand the question posed to Barr. The question was about member's of Mueller's team and not about Mueller. Nothing you have said above changes this fact about the phrase.

If you believe Barr’s remark, ”I think it was written by one of his staff people,” supports the notion Barr lied, you are very mistaken.

First, the obvious. Barr said he “thinks” he knows who wrote it, he isn’t stating or asserting such a thought as a fact. Neither is he expressing that he believes what he is “thinking” is factual. Hence, his remark about the letter is entirely consistent with his prior commentary, since he isn’t claiming to “know” or claiming as a fact that members of Mueller’s team wrote the letter.

Second, the letter is signed by Mueller. The letter is not signed by a staff person. Hence, Barr carefully phrased his remark as to what he “thinks,” since, after all, Mueller signed the letter and since the letter bares his (Mueller’s) signature, Mueller may have in fact composed the letter.

Or maybe Mueller made a draft of points he wanted made in a letter and provided his draft to a staff person to compose a letter incorporating the points Mueller wanted. Mueller then reviewed the letter for approval and signed it.

Either way, you’ve cited to nothing that demonstrates Barr lied.

Barr received a letter from the head of the Mueller's team (Mueller) which expresses concerns about his summary letter. When asked if you "Reports have emerged recently … that members of the special counsel’s team are frustrated at some level with the limited information included in your March 24th letter, that it does not adequately or accurately, necessarily, portray the report’s findings. Do you know what they’re referencing with that?" about potential concerns by the team you answer "No, I don’t. I think, I think, I suspect that they probably wanted, you know, 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, you know, being under-inclusive or over-inclusive but also, you know, would trigger a lot of discussion and analysis that really should await everything coming out at once.". I think the obvious, honest answer would be "i'm not sure if this is what you're referring to, but I did receive a letter from Mueller indicating... "and cite what Mueller had communicated. Indicating that he has no idea as to what they're referencing is either dishonest or idiotic.

You can defend it all you want, but his answer certainly is not "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".

 

[TLK Valentine]

“Nexus to a pending or contemplated official proceeding.” Some obstruction statutes require a grand jury or judicial proceeding.

I'm sure it varies from state to state... How about federal?
Also, Mueller's grand jury was still in session even after he submitted his report. AFAIK, they're still at work.

 

[NotreDame]

I'm sure it varies from state to state... How about federal?
Also, Mueller's grand jury was still in session even after he submitted his report. AFAIK, they're still at work.

My reply was speaking exclusively about federal law and some federal obstruction of justice statutes, specifically those referenced by Mueller in his report.

 

[TLK Valentine]

My reply was speaking exclusively about federal law and some federal obstruction of justice statutes, specifically those referenced by Mueller in his report.

Ah. Then the fact that a grand jury was in session at the time the alleged obstruction took place should cover things.

 

[whatbogsends]

Barr releases a non-summary summary (he uses the word "summarize" in his letter, but repeatedly insists it's not a "summary) of the Muller Report. When testifying under oath about the Report and his summary, he fails to disclose that within 24 hours of the report the author of the report wrote a letter expressing concerns about Barr's summary. His excuse is that no one asked a specifically worded question (Mueller's team vs. Mueller) so he didn't need to disclose it. Does that sound like someone telling "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"?

 

[USincognito]

It amazes me that Trump supporters don't seem to comprehend that while Trump won the election by the rules of the Electoral College, that the citizens of the US voted for a different candidate, by a 3 million person margin.

As I point out, including major 3rd party candidates, it's 10,000,000, but somehow Trump supporters have convinced themselves that "the American people gave Trump a mandate".

 

[bhsmte]

It amazes me that Trump supporters don't seem to comprehend that while Trump won the election by the rules of the Electoral College, that the citizens of the US voted for a different candidate, by a 3 million person margin.

I didnt vote for donny and i understand the fact you state.

With that said, both candidates knew the election would come down to a half dozen states (as it typically does) and both campaigned accordingly. Trump beat clinton in the key states and that is why he won.

In the future, i would like to see a hybrid between electoral college and then being divided in each state, based on the percentage of votes each candidate gets.

Until the rules are changed and candidates campaign based on the rules, the whole popular vote thing rings hollow with me.

 

[whatbogsends]

I didnt vote for donny and i understand the fact you state.

With that said, both candidates knew the election would come down to a half dozen states (as it typically does) and both campaigned accordingly. Trump beat clinton in the key states and that is why he won.

In the future, i would like to see a hybrid between electoral college and then being divided in each state, based on the percentage of votes each candidate gets.

Until the rules are changed and candidates campaign based on the rules, the whole popular vote thing rings hollow with me.

Understood. Trump ran a better campaign based on the rules of the election.

That being said, when his supporters talk about "how the American people chose Trump", it's a more than a bit disingenuous.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Understood. Trump ran a better campaign based on the rules of the election.

That being said, when his supporters talk about "how the American people chose Trump", it's a more than a bit disingenuous.

It’s not because people who didn’t vote for Trump aren’t Americans. I figure my citizenship will start to be threatened next year if I don’t vote for Trump.

 

[bhsmte]

Understood. Trump ran a better campaign based on the rules of the election.

That being said, when his supporters talk about "how the American people chose Trump", it's a more than a bit disingenuous.

He was selected based on how the people voted, where each candidate spent the most money and time, to get votes. The same way it has been in the past.

 

[NotreDame]

Ah. Then the fact that a grand jury was in session at the time the alleged obstruction took place should cover things.

Some of the conduct Mueller scrutinized, for purposes of investigating possible obstruction justice, preceded the existence of the grand jury.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Some of the conduct Mueller scrutinized, for purposes of investigating possible obstruction justice, preceded the existence of the grand jury.

Unless all of the conduct preceded the existence of the grand jury, I don't see why that matters.