Some of the conduct Mueller scrutinized, for purposes of investigating possible obstruction justice, preceded the existence of the grand jury.
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.
I think that the popular vote total of the 2016 election is not seriously contested by anyone. Even Republicans agree that Hillary got a majority of the popular vote.where did you get your stats from?
What is?
?????
where did you get your stats from?
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.
Says who?
The polls.
Did they count 10 Million unregistered voters?
LOL!!!
Trump 2020.
MAGA!!!
JLB
Your refusal to accept even the most basic of facts is noted. Given this perspective, it is unsurprising that you've thrown your lot in with Trump.
Your refusal to accept even the most basic of facts is noted. Given this perspective, it is unsurprising that you've thrown your lot in with Trump.
The basic of facts is there is no crime that our President committed.
JLB
You’re not using facts.....that’s wishful thinking...
Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky would be proud!
“Accuse Your Enemy Of What You Are Doing, As You Are Doing It To Create Confusion”
They are very afraid of Barr, because he WILL be looking into everything from the Steele dossier, how Obama and the Clintons used this false, unsubstantiated and paid for report to secure a FISA court order to illegally SPY, that's right; SPY on their opposition campaign, their involvement with Fusion GPS, and the Clinton Foundation. If there was any collusion/coordination with Russia, let's look at the REAL culprits.
Oh yeah, baby. It's all coming out.
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".
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...
Needing 5 paragraphs to try and explain away the obvious holes in Barr's story tells me all I need to know about how forthright he's being. The only question is why someone would feel the need to write them rather than just accept the obvious.
This may be of assistance to you...
“Nexus to an official proceeding: United States v. Aguilar (1995);Arthur Andersen v. United States (2005). Obstruction of justice law, Mueller’s report said, generally requires a nexus or connection to an official proceeding. Mueller cited Aguilar for the requirement that the nexus must be to pending “judicial or grand jury proceedings.” The nexus also can include a connection to a “pending” federal agency proceeding, or a congressional inquiry or investigation.”
(my bold and underline)
Three Supreme Court Obstruction Rulings Guided Mueller's Team | National Law Journal
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?