There will be different versions of Mueller report for different people...

By_This_Sign☧ · Apr 19, 2019

Yarddog said:
Yes.

Then why was the Hillary investigation dropped so quietly? I don't hear many democrats complaining.

redleghunter · Apr 19, 2019

Yarddog said:
Who cares? It makes no difference.

Hillary actually said that in her Benghazi testimony.

redleghunter · Apr 19, 2019

Yarddog said:
What they did wasn't illegal.

Yet they hired Russians to do their dirty work. They actually did what Trump was falsely accused of. And our FBI and intelligence agencies used a politically motivated dossier obtained from Russians through a foreign retired spy to apply for FISA warrants.

That is actually collusion to influence an election.

redleghunter · Apr 19, 2019

By_This_Sign☧ said:
Sure Russia leaked out information on Hillary and the DNC. Illegal yes, but would you be perusing such a passionate investigation if they had done something similar to Trump and the RNC?

They actually did. It’s called the Trump dossier.

Yarddog · Apr 19, 2019

redleghunter said:
Hillary actually said that in her Benghazi testimony.

And?

Yarddog · Apr 19, 2019

redleghunter said:
Yet they hired Russians to do their dirty work.

No they didn't. They hired a firm which hired Christopher Steele who made contacts in Russia which provided him with information. Nothing illegal has been shown in what they did.

They actually did what Trump was falsely accused of.

Incorrect. Trump was investigated for possible conspiring with Russia to hack into the DNC data base which is illegal. Fortunately, no evidence was found which could show Mueller's team that Trump was in any way connected to the hack.

And our FBI and intelligence agencies used a politically motivated dossier obtained from Russians through a foreign retired spy to apply for FISA warrants.

Okay, they informed the FISA judge of where the dossier came from.

That is actually collusion to influence an election.

Any layer worth his weight would laugh at your conclusion.

The Barbarian · Apr 19, 2019

By_This_Sign☧ said:
es, you also have to note that President Trump doesn't actually need to be exonerated as our system is INNOCENT until proven GUILTY not the other way around

That's not the way it was being presented when republicans were "investigating" democrats. But then we knew why it was so.

As for Trump and Barr colluding...

We expected that, too. Trump removed his last AG because Trump expected the nation's highest law enforcement officer to be his personal attorney. So no one was surprised to learn that he was warning Trump about what was in the report before he let anyone else see it.

Is this going to be the next conspiracy narrative?

Behavior has consequences, doesn't it?

Is there any circumstance under which the Democrat party will accept that Donald Trump won the election legally

The election is over. Learn to live with that. Whether or not Trump sought or collaborated with our enemies in that election, the evidence is not sufficient for an indictment, according to Mueller. Mueller has found that the evidence for obstruction may be sufficient for an indictment against Trump, but chose to leave that to Barr. Or Congress, as the case may be.

Sure Russia leaked out information on Hillary and the DNC. Illegal yes, but would you be perusing such a passionate investigation if they had done something similar to Trump and the RNC?

I notice that the republicans went on a multi-year jihad against Hillary Clinton on far less, and I don't remember you objecting.

The Barbarian · Apr 19, 2019

By_This_Sign☧ said:
Then why was the Hillary investigation dropped so quietly? I don't hear many democrats complaining.

Dropped quietly? I remember much shrieking and rending of garments over Hillary Clinton, after which the chief inquisitor very quietly admitted that he could find nothing deserving of legal action.

He "dropped it quietly", precisely because it was very clear that there was no way to gin it up into anything remotely like Trump ordering his underlings to obstruct justice, as Mueller noted that he did repeatedly.

The Barbarian · Apr 19, 2019

Barbarian observes:
Well, that's not the case, it seems...
White House and Justice Dept. Officials Discussed Mueller Report Before Release

I don't think that's going to work for you. Barr and Trump were colluding over report.

redleghunter said:
So Mueller is now complicit in the conspiracy to cover for Trump?

Since he found (and reported) that Trump repeatedly (albeit unsuccessfully) ordered his people to obstruct justice, I'd say that wasn't true.

The Barbarian · Apr 19, 2019

redleghunter said:
Nixon did not get hammered for claiming executive privilege.

The Supreme Court addressed "executive privilege" in United States v. Nixon, the 1974 case involving the demand by Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox that President Richard Nixon produce the audiotapes of conversations he and his colleagues had in the Oval Office of the White House in connection with criminal charges being brought against members of the Nixon Administration. Nixon invoked the privilege and refused to produce any records.
Executive privilege - Wikipedia

Guess how that turned out.

The Barbarian · Apr 19, 2019

redleghunter said:
When I connect the dots I see an embarrassing display of so called news outlets and journalists snookered by extreme leftists who wished their own press were true.

But as you realize. It is true...

The Barbarian · Apr 19, 2019

Barbarian observes:
Well, that's not the case, it seems...
White House and Justice Dept. Officials Discussed Mueller Report Before Release

redleghunter said:
Yes of course. As explained by multiple posters, Trump did not have to release certain information given executive privilege. He waved the privilege.

I don't see what that has to do with the AG discussing the report of a criminal investigation with the target of that investigation before sharing it with Congress.

So what’s the point again?

The Barbarian · Apr 19, 2019

HTacianas said:
So Mueller's report says Trump is neck deep in collusion with the Russians but Barr is publicly lying about it?

If the shoe fits, why wear sneakers?

Justified112 · Apr 19, 2019

The Barbarian said:
So far, we know that Trump and Barr really, really don't want us to see what's in it.

Why that is, we can only speculate. It's a sure thing that any attempt to keep Congress in the dark will be a disaster for the Trump WH.

If that were true, Trump would exerted executive privilege, but he didn't. Your speculation is just nonsense.

Barr has no incentive to dishonest about what the report says because now that it is released, his words and the report can be viewed side by side. If he was lying, it would be made clear.

Rod Rosenstein and Mueller lawyers had a hand in the redactions and White House made no redactions at all. So, you really have no basis for your claims. It's just wishful thinking on your part.

The fact is that Trump didn't collude and didn't obstruct justice at all. None of that is true. While there may be some things that are politically embarrassing to the White House and the president, the accusations of collusion and obstruction are not simply not supported by the report.

It is important to note that since the report is viewable by everyone, it is also viewable by the entire Mueller team. So if Barr didn't put out the same report the Mueller team sent to him, they would call him out on it. But they didn't.

All redactions are according to existing law that Barr had to follow and he is willing to allow private viewing of the redacted portions by members of the Judiciary Committees.

com7fy8 · Apr 19, 2019

jgarden said:
the Mueller Report needed to find compelling evidence that the Trump Campaign not only entered into a formal agreement with the Russian government, but engaged in an illegal act to illegal hack the DNC emails!

Yarddog said:
The thing is that "intent" is hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt

Thank you; I actually somewhat figured this out! lololol

HTacianas · Apr 19, 2019

The Barbarian said:
If the shoe fits, why wear sneakers?

Well, as of right now there is nothing in the Mueller report that contradicts anything Barr has had to say. The thing is over.

Gigimo · Apr 19, 2019

redleghunter said:
Trump could have claimed executive privilege for some of the more embarrassing portions that the press is now reporting. But he did not.

Seems this release is quite transparent.

Speaking of releases I'm wondering when Pencilneck plans on releasing all the "evidence" he has on Trump colluding with Russia? I can just imagine that would be another very amusing moment in this saga of "Trump is guilty of something we just know it (but can't prove it) so we'll just keep on insinuating it even though nobody is believing us".... :doh:

Gigimo · Apr 19, 2019

redleghunter said:
Again. It’s Mueller's report and Barr and Trump did none of the redacting.

You're wasting your breath you do know that? Just look upwards one post and you'll see the reason why.

Gigimo · Apr 19, 2019

Justified112 said:
Your speculation is just nonsense.

Justified112 said:
So, you really have no basis for your claims. It's just wishful thinking on your part.

You're absolutely correct and those actions have been going on for quite sometime on multiple websites/forums. :oldthumbsup:

It utterly amazing that some folks would waste so much of their day posting that kind of baseless information, so you really have to wonder what their motivation is? :scratch:

Zanting · Apr 19, 2019

One version, different security clearances for viewing the redactions...Barr has been very clear there were very few made and all are explained as necessary by law...so what is wrong with that exactly??? It's still the same report...not versions of it.

There will be different versions of Mueller report for different people...

Member

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Senior Contributor

Senior Contributor

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

not so new

Similar threads