Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 03-26-2019, 01:43 PM
Try2B Comprehensive's Avatar
Try2B Comprehensive is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
McConnell blocks resolution to release full Mueller report

If the report exonerates Trump, shouldn't everyone in the GOP be scrambling to make it public?

What the fuck is going on?
What I think is going on is a case of catch-and-kill. Like Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels, (I speculate) the Muller Report totally fucked Trump, and therefore needs to be muzzled.

It is the power of BS. The GOP is busy screaming "no collusion" from all the rooftops, pounding that message firmly into the rubes' heads. Hide the actual contents of the report. If details come out later, just paint it as some kind of Dem hit job, keeping Trump's support above a critical threshold to stave off impeachment.

Mueller could have attached a copy of the pee tape to the report. "No collusion" remains true, but obviously dodges the point in that case. Or maybe Mueller found the receipts for a billion of Putin's dollars that Trump laundered for him. Trump knows it is out there and knows to never say an unkind word about Putin to avoid being exposed.

Again, I am speculating, but there must be a reason Trump is so obsequious to Putin while being an asshole to just about everyone else. If Barr is not weasel wording his way around it and there was just no collusion, being a compromised Russian asset would explain a lot, and is probably also impeachable.

Bottom line: the report is soooo exonerating, not even a full sentence of it can be released! Nothing to see here, and I'm sure the GOP would never Dream of covering up crimes and dirt for political advantage

Last edited by Try2B Comprehensive; 03-26-2019 at 01:45 PM.
  #252  
Old 03-26-2019, 04:18 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,165
So there are plenty of news outlets treating the Barr report as thought it's... well, true.

I gotta ask - why? Why are we even giving it the time of day?

The running constant throughout the administration has been an endless stream of lies, big and small. Whether major lies about significant policy ("We do not have a family separation policy") or trivial to the point where you have to wonder why they lie about it ("Trump had the biggest inauguration ever"). This is quite literally a matter of Trump possibly being criminally culpable. The report is being handed in by someone hand-picked by Trump - someone we can only assume was hand-picked for the exact purpose of handing this issue.

Why are we even pretending this deserves to be taken seriously? Why isn't every single report on Barr's release prefaced by noting these facts? The Barr report could be completely fabricated, the Muller report could unambiguously state that Trump conspired with the Russians to steal the election, and it wouldn't even be surprising given what we know about this administration. It wouldn't even be the most brazen lie to come out of the administration (that one probably goes to the countless times he's claimed that he and congressional republicans are standing up for Americans with pre-existing conditions), and it certainly wouldn't be the only obviously bullshit lie striking at the core of the Muller investigation ("It's a witch hunt", which was bullshit when the investigation started and still ain't smelling like roses 34 indictions later ). And meanwhile, congressional republicans aren't releasing it. Look, this one isn't hard - if that report actually did exonerate Trump, we'd already have it in our hands. We wouldn't be hearing it from one of Trump's lackeys.

Any reporter who takes the Barr report at face value without first noting the inherently untrustworthy nature of this administration is doing their readers a disservice. "Trump administration claims Trump exonerated by report" is about as trustworthy as "Used car salesman assures you that car only looks like it has 200,000 miles because the odometer has a glitch".

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 03-26-2019 at 04:18 PM.
  #253  
Old 03-26-2019, 04:40 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
So there are plenty of news outlets treating the Barr report as thought it's... well, true.

I gotta ask - why? Why are we even giving it the time of day?

The running constant throughout the administration has been an endless stream of lies, big and small. Whether major lies about significant policy ("We do not have a family separation policy") or trivial to the point where you have to wonder why they lie about it ("Trump had the biggest inauguration ever"). This is quite literally a matter of Trump possibly being criminally culpable. The report is being handed in by someone hand-picked by Trump - someone we can only assume was hand-picked for the exact purpose of handing this issue.

Why are we even pretending this deserves to be taken seriously? Why isn't every single report on Barr's release prefaced by noting these facts? The Barr report could be completely fabricated, the Muller report could unambiguously state that Trump conspired with the Russians to steal the election, and it wouldn't even be surprising given what we know about this administration. It wouldn't even be the most brazen lie to come out of the administration (that one probably goes to the countless times he's claimed that he and congressional republicans are standing up for Americans with pre-existing conditions), and it certainly wouldn't be the only obviously bullshit lie striking at the core of the Muller investigation ("It's a witch hunt", which was bullshit when the investigation started and still ain't smelling like roses 34 indictions later ). And meanwhile, congressional republicans aren't releasing it. Look, this one isn't hard - if that report actually did exonerate Trump, we'd already have it in our hands. We wouldn't be hearing it from one of Trump's lackeys.

Any reporter who takes the Barr report at face value without first noting the inherently untrustworthy nature of this administration is doing their readers a disservice. "Trump administration claims Trump exonerated by report" is about as trustworthy as "Used car salesman assures you that car only looks like it has 200,000 miles because the odometer has a glitch".
Yep, the Barr letter is suppressing evidence of obstruction of justice, and has therefore itself become another piece of evidence in the obstruction of justice case that it's suppressing.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
  #254  
Old 03-26-2019, 05:14 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolHandCox View Post
So let me know when the Trump campaign violated the conspiracy statutes and how you came to that conclusion.
What on earth are you talking about?

Follow the chain of replies back and identify for us any post in which I claimed that 'the Trump campaign violated the conspiracy statutes.'
  #255  
Old 03-26-2019, 05:22 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
So there are plenty of news outlets treating the Barr report as thought it's... well, true.

I gotta ask - why? Why are we even giving it the time of day?
Because Barr might have some very unpleasant partisan leanings but by all accounts he's not an idiot. And he'd have to be an idiot to lie about what's in a report that's 100% going to be released to the public someday.

He could be lying, it's possible, it just doesn't seem very likely.
  #256  
Old 03-26-2019, 05:31 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Because Barr might have some very unpleasant partisan leanings but by all accounts he's not an idiot. And he'd have to be an idiot to lie about what's in a report that's 100% going to be released to the public someday.

He could be lying, it's possible, it just doesn't seem very likely.
You'd have to be an idiot to claim that Trump's inauguration was bigger than Obama's when the pictures are literally right there. Do we know Barr is less of an idiot than Sean Spicer? He was literally hired for this specific job.
  #257  
Old 03-26-2019, 05:36 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Because Barr might have some very unpleasant partisan leanings but by all accounts he's not an idiot. And he'd have to be an idiot to lie about what's in a report that's 100% going to be released to the public someday.

He could be lying, it's possible, it just doesn't seem very likely.
Barr could be quite confident that the report will be fully suppressed. Therefore he would be willing to misrepresent its contents.

I don't think it's reasonable to conclude that Barr must be being truthful 'because he knows the report will come out.'

On the contrary, all the Trump-enabling forces---from the Senate to the Supreme Court---are arrayed to keep the report from being seen by anyone but Barr, and of course, the White House. Trump will need the information on his vulnerabilities that he can glean from Mueller's findings. Who knows what? Who needs to be bought off?

Barr is probably quite safe in having misled the American public (not to mention Congress). What can anyone do to him? He's chosen the side that has no scruples in its choice of methods and means of holding onto power.
  #258  
Old 03-26-2019, 05:44 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akaj View Post
So no one's really addressed this, but it seems like a logical question to me, even if it's entirely speculative until the full report is released:

Someone will be running against Trump next year. Forget the value of Mueller's findings with regard to indictable crimes. What about their value with regard to incontrovertibly painting him (and his team) as corrupt, self-dealing and entirely too casual about dealings with a foreign, hostile power?

I mean, the GOP can't on one hand champion the report as clearing Trump of wrongdoing, and then condemn it when Democrats pin its legitimate findings all over him.

If there are undecided voters unsure if all the accusations about Trump are "fake news" or a "witch hunt," shouldn't this report be all the evidence they need to see he really is that sleazy?
You're quite right about all of this---and it's why Trump's enablers will make very certain that the Mueller report is seen by no one except Trump's lawyers and operatives.

The Congressional Intelligence Committee members are all at the security-clearance level for seeing the un-redacted report. There are no issues with showing it to them. But they won't get to see it. They may see a few pages of a mostly-blacked out document, some weeks or months from now.

The rest of us will see nothing.

The only way that changes: a massive public uproar. Protests (peaceful, or it won't work!) that happen day after day. Relentless phone calls and emails to Senators and Representatives. A popular song written about the cover-up. A hit movie that brings home to many who find the actual facts to be too complex, the reality that this is about a President who considers himself to be above the law.

Well, maybe not the movie. That would take too long. Perhaps a classic meme that gets shared a billion times. Or two.

Point is: the cover-up is underway. Only mass outrage can derail it.
  #259  
Old 03-26-2019, 05:54 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
You're quite right about all of this---and it's why Trump's enablers will make very certain that the Mueller report is seen by no one except Trump's lawyers and operatives.

The Congressional Intelligence Committee members are all at the security-clearance level for seeing the un-redacted report. There are no issues with showing it to them. But they won't get to see it. They may see a few pages of a mostly-blacked out document, some weeks or months from now.

The rest of us will see nothing.

The only way that changes: a massive public uproar. Protests (peaceful, or it won't work!) that happen day after day. Relentless phone calls and emails to Senators and Representatives. A popular song written about the cover-up. A hit movie that brings home to many who find the actual facts to be too complex, the reality that this is about a President who considers himself to be above the law.

Well, maybe not the movie. That would take too long. Perhaps a classic meme that gets shared a billion times. Or two.

Point is: the cover-up is underway. Only mass outrage can derail it.
Wow, I'm as paranoid as anyone, but I never considered the idea that the report might never be released -- even to the Congressional Intelligence Committee. Why isn't every Democrat in Congress screaming bloody murder? Why is Mueller staying silent?

If the AG and Senate conspire to make a 4-page letter (from Trump's handpicked AG) suffice to represent the findings of a 22-month investigation into Trump, that's a bigger scandal than anything that's happened since 2015.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #260  
Old 03-26-2019, 06:09 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akaj View Post
Wow, I'm as paranoid as anyone, but I never considered the idea that the report might never be released -- even to the Congressional Intelligence Committee. Why isn't every Democrat in Congress screaming bloody murder? Why is Mueller staying silent?

If the AG and Senate conspire to make a 4-page letter (from Trump's handpicked AG) suffice to represent the findings of a 22-month investigation into Trump, that's a bigger scandal than anything that's happened since 2015.
I agree, but with the help of CNN and MSNBC---reeling from two years of Trump's "work the refs" efforts---the cover-up seems to be working so far. I can't count how many times I've seen a host or reporter ask a legislator 'are you going to obsess over this Report or are you going to move on?' or variations thereof.

At this point I'm wondering if the corporate honchos have sent down the word to all the anchors and reporters: Trump is GREAT for business. Our position is "the Report is out and it fully exonerates Trump and anyone who still talks about it is to be shamed and ridiculed."

In other words, the media corps may have taken a position exactly in line with the Trump camp's position, due to bottom-line considerations. Or fear (what with Trump's rumblings about banning those who criticize him from the airwaves).

OR it could just be that the average on-air talent is unable to understand the difference between 'didn't find enough evidence to convict' and 'didn't find any evidence.' I guess there's a certain level of abstraction there, in seeing the distinction.

If that's the problem it would explain the fact that within five minutes (today, around 5:30pm) I heard two NPR reporters say some variation on "the Mueller report found no evidence of collusion," which of course is unfactual on several counts.

It's depressing. But I still think that the right meme, the right analogy, the right way of putting it could get through to people.

For example:

Quote:
Former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams (D) on Monday called for the release of special counsel Robert Muellerís full report, saying Attorney General William Barrís summary was ďlike having your brother summarize your report card to your parents.Ē
https://thehill.com/homenews/news/43...summarize-your

That will reach some people, I think. We need more of that.
  #261  
Old 03-26-2019, 06:16 PM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,673
It's like taking James Inhofe seriously when he presents a snowball as proof that global warming is a hoax.
  #262  
Old 03-26-2019, 07:21 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
You'd have to be an idiot to claim that Trump's inauguration was bigger than Obama's when the pictures are literally right there. Do we know Barr is less of an idiot than Sean Spicer? He was literally hired for this specific job.
He was hired for this job twice, the first time 28 years ago or something when he was only 41. His CV is impressive as hell and he's been around long enough and through enough administrations that he knows how politics work.

I'm not saying he's definitely not lying, or that I'd bet my life on it, but you asked why anyone's taking him at his word and I told you why I am. Take that for what it's worth. And yeah, I think he's less of an idiot tham Sean Spicer
  #263  
Old 03-26-2019, 07:25 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Barr could be quite confident that the report will be fully suppressed. Therefore he would be willing to misrepresent its contents.

I don't think it's reasonable to conclude that Barr must be being truthful 'because he knows the report will come out.'

On the contrary, all the Trump-enabling forces---from the Senate to the Supreme Court---are arrayed to keep the report from being seen by anyone but Barr, and of course, the White House. Trump will need the information on his vulnerabilities that he can glean from Mueller's findings. Who knows what? Who needs to be bought off?

Barr is probably quite safe in having misled the American public (not to mention Congress). What can anyone do to him? He's chosen the side that has no scruples in its choice of methods and means of holding onto power.
It's not just Barr's secret though, the contents of the report are known to many patriots at the FBI and those who worked for the special counsel. I just have a hard time believing that the report says "Collusion!" and Barr completely changed the narrative in his summary, because a discrepancy that big would have to slip out at some point. And Barr has to know that.
  #264  
Old 03-26-2019, 07:37 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
He was hired for this job twice, the first time 28 years ago or something when he was only 41. His CV is impressive as hell and he's been around long enough and through enough administrations that he knows how politics work.

I'm not saying he's definitely not lying, or that I'd bet my life on it, but you asked why anyone's taking him at his word and I told you why I am. Take that for what it's worth. And yeah, I think he's less of an idiot tham Sean Spicer
From summaries of what I've heard of the situation, he's been described as the guy they brought in to manage the Iran-Contra coverup. Is that accurate? Maybe he's not stupid, he's just an expert at coverups and has no convictions against lying or any other dirty work.

Last edited by SenorBeef; 03-26-2019 at 07:38 PM.
  #265  
Old 03-26-2019, 07:51 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
It's not just Barr's secret though, the contents of the report are known to many patriots at the FBI and those who worked for the special counsel.
Who would face legal penalties if they were to reveal any of their work product.



Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I just have a hard time believing that the report says "Collusion!" and Barr completely changed the narrative in his summary, because a discrepancy that big would have to slip out at some point. And Barr has to know that.
It doesn't need to say "Collusion!" to be damaging to Trump. As Akaj wrote:

Quote:
...Forget the value of Mueller's findings with regard to indictable crimes. What about their value with regard to incontrovertibly painting him (and his team) as corrupt, self-dealing and entirely too casual about dealings with a foreign, hostile power?

I mean, the GOP can't on one hand champion the report as clearing Trump of wrongdoing, and then condemn it when Democrats pin its legitimate findings all over him.

If there are undecided voters unsure if all the accusations about Trump are "fake news" or a "witch hunt," shouldn't this report be all the evidence they need to see he really is that sleazy?
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...8#post21558098

This is a real danger for Trump.
  #266  
Old 03-26-2019, 07:56 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,841
I just saw in the CNN crawl (I'm at the airport) that DOJ says "weeks, not months, to release full report to congress." All indicators point to this thing becoming public. Trump said he's OK with it, the house voted unanimously for it, McConnell's a dick but if they're trying to scuttle this they're going about it a strange way. I just think if you're looking forward to the full report differing in any substantive way from Barr's summary you're just prolonging the disappointment.
  #267  
Old 03-26-2019, 07:58 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tooth View Post
It's like taking James Inhofe seriously when he presents a snowball as proof that global warming is a hoax.
That's a good analogy. 'Poor reasoning' is certainly a part of the questionable position that the Barr Memo proves that the unseen Mueller Report is a 'total exoneration,' but that the report itself Must Not Be Viewed.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
From summaries of what I've heard of the situation, he's been described as the guy they brought in to manage the Iran-Contra coverup. Is that accurate? Maybe he's not stupid, he's just an expert at coverups and has no convictions against lying or any other dirty work.
Yes, and he's been on the record for years saying, in so many words, that the proper way to regard the office of the Presidency is that its occupants* are above the law (for reasons that no doubt seem respectable to him).


*The Republican occupants, anyway. Oddly enough, Barr never went on the record to say that either Clinton or Obama should be regarded as being above the law. A strange lapse.

Last edited by Sherrerd; 03-26-2019 at 07:59 PM.
  #268  
Old 03-26-2019, 09:29 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
So there are plenty of news outlets treating the Barr report as thought it's... well, true.

I gotta ask - why? Why are we even giving it the time of day?

The running constant throughout the administration has been an endless stream of lies, big and small. Whether major lies about significant policy ("We do not have a family separation policy") or trivial to the point where you have to wonder why they lie about it ("Trump had the biggest inauguration ever"). This is quite literally a matter of Trump possibly being criminally culpable. The report is being handed in by someone hand-picked by Trump - someone we can only assume was hand-picked for the exact purpose of handing this issue.

Why are we even pretending this deserves to be taken seriously? Why isn't every single report on Barr's release prefaced by noting these facts? The Barr report could be completely fabricated, the Muller report could unambiguously state that Trump conspired with the Russians to steal the election, and it wouldn't even be surprising given what we know about this administration. It wouldn't even be the most brazen lie to come out of the administration (that one probably goes to the countless times he's claimed that he and congressional republicans are standing up for Americans with pre-existing conditions), and it certainly wouldn't be the only obviously bullshit lie striking at the core of the Muller investigation ("It's a witch hunt", which was bullshit when the investigation started and still ain't smelling like roses 34 indictions later ). And meanwhile, congressional republicans aren't releasing it. Look, this one isn't hard - if that report actually did exonerate Trump, we'd already have it in our hands. We wouldn't be hearing it from one of Trump's lackeys.

Any reporter who takes the Barr report at face value without first noting the inherently untrustworthy nature of this administration is doing their readers a disservice. "Trump administration claims Trump exonerated by report" is about as trustworthy as "Used car salesman assures you that car only looks like it has 200,000 miles because the odometer has a glitch".
Do you seriously think Mueller would remain silent if his report was mischaracterized that badly?

No evidence of collusion was found. Get over it. Find something against Trump for which there is evidence.
  #269  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:01 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,772
Like "obstruction of justice"? OK, glad to oblige.
  #270  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:03 PM
crowmanyclouds's Avatar
crowmanyclouds is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 4,530
No evidence was found. Get over it. Find something against Someone for which there is evidence.

In other words don't act like the Republicans/conservatives have been acting for decades?

CMC fnord!
  #271  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:10 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,772
Quote:
...in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign,” Mr. Barr's summary said....
And were these multiple efforts reported to the proper authorities by such persons as received these offers? Or not?
  #272  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:19 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Because Barr might have some very unpleasant partisan leanings but by all accounts he's not an idiot. And he'd have to be an idiot to lie about what's in a report that's 100% going to be released to the public someday.

He could be lying, it's possible, it just doesn't seem very likely.
Barr does not need to lie, and I'm not sure whether, in a technical legal sense, he makes any lies in his letter. Instead, the issues are about misrepresented truths and his own particular interpretation of the law.

On collusion, the Barr letter says that Mueller's investigation "did not establish" (Mueller, quoted by Barr) and "did not find" (Barr) conspiracy. Since DoJ policy is to not reveal potentially incriminating details about someone unless they've been indicted, one would not be able to tell from the outside whether that meant there was no collusion at all, actual collusion that didn't reach the level of federal crime, or criminal collusion, but without enough evidence gathered to pass the high bar of proof beyond reasonable doubt needed to indict.

On conspiracy, Barr wrote a 19-page memo criticizing the Mueller probe, which is why many suspect he was appointed to the Attorney General position. In the memo, he argued that if a President is exercising his executive authority - such as, for example, by firing Comey, or telling Comey to "let go" the investigation on Flynn - then that cannot constitute obstruction of justice. He also argued that if there is no underlying crime of collusion, then Trump can't have committed obstruction of justice. These are Barr's own particular legal views, but they are not commonly-held legal views. For example, Martha Stewart and Scooter Libby were both convicted of obstruction of justice without an underlying crime having been committed.

Instead of following previous special counsel investigation precedent, and letting Congress pass judgement on the evidence (as had happened after the Nixon and Clinton special counsels), Barr instead inserted himself into the process and took the decision to make the conclusions based on the Mueller report himself. (Well, he says he did so with Rosenstein, and I would be interested to hear from Rosenstein himself, since Barr would surely have a deciding vote in any split decision between them due to seniority.)

Also bear in mind, that if Mueller had 100% stone cold proof of obstruction of justice, he would have presented his findings in the same way as he has done in the report he has actually presented. Quoting Barr:

..the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction.

The following is the entirety of what we get directly from Mueller, as quoted by Barr, on the subject of obstruction of justice - three partial sentences:

"...thorough factual investigation..."
"...difficult issues..."
"...while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."


Mueller knows its not within his remit to make a conclusion on criminal conduct since it's DoJ policy that a sitting President can't be indicted. His role as special counsel was to gather the facts for presentation to Congress, which he appears to have done in his report, for them to pass judgement on (as precedent holds with the Nixon and Clinton special counsels).

I expect the Barr version Mueller Report to be significantly different to the actual Mueller Report, and heavily redacted. Mueller will need to be subpoenaed to testify before a House committee in order that he can be heard from directly.
  #273  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:20 PM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,065
Do you guys seriously think Barr would grossly mischaractarize Meuller's report, and no one would say anything? Hey, remember that time BuzzFeed cooked up a bullshit story about Trump telling Cohen to lie to Congress and Meuller said so within 24 hours? Look I highly doubt this is going to be flattering to Trump, it was not Meuller's job to flatter and frankly Barr's summary wasn't actually flattering.

But if Barr says Meuller found no evidence of any conspiracy between any Americans and Russia to influence the election, and there are no further indictments, sealed or otherwise, and, in fact that is not true, we know there are at LEAST 20 people that know otherwise. You think that is just going to stay hidden? Get real.

Last edited by Ashtura; 03-26-2019 at 10:23 PM.
  #274  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:33 PM
CoolHandCox is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
What on earth are you talking about?

Follow the chain of replies back and identify for us any post in which I claimed that 'the Trump campaign violated the conspiracy statutes.'
Iím talking about how you know when anyone (i used Trump because thatís what this thread is about) violates a statute (your word). Itís my understanding you think people commit crimes without charges or convictions.

In the US, rightly or wrongly, I donít think a person can commit crimes without sufficient evidence that the person did it. Youíre saying they can (because youíre particular hypothetical says they did). I just donít think the US criminal justice system works that way (nor should it). Without sufficient evidence of a crime, it doesnít matter what actually, in fact, happened. Thatís not realistic.
  #275  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:50 PM
DWMarch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,077
Trump is a piece of garbage and deserves every single bad thing that happens to him. Having said that, I always thought collusion was a bit of a reach. Why? Because the Russians aren't dumb. You can't have Trump as an intelligence asset because he's too much of a loudmouth. Give him secret documents and he'll parade them in front of news cameras (in fact, I am pretty sure this has already happened). He's no good at keeping secrets and skeletons are regularly tumbling out of his closet. He was never a covert agent. He's what the intelligence community calls a Useful Idiot and what everyone else calls a bitch. What the Russians did with him isn't collusion at all. It's barely even social engineering. Making the other guy think that your idea is actually his great idea goes back to How to Win Friends and Influence People and I wouldn't be surprised if some variant of that idea goes all the way back to ancient philosophy.
  #276  
Old 03-26-2019, 11:04 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Do you guys seriously think Barr would grossly mischaractarize Meuller's report, and no one would say anything? Hey, remember that time BuzzFeed cooked up a bullshit story about Trump telling Cohen to lie to Congress and Meuller said so within 24 hours? Look I highly doubt this is going to be flattering to Trump, it was not Meuller's job to flatter and frankly Barr's summary wasn't actually flattering.

But if Barr says Meuller found no evidence of any conspiracy between any Americans and Russia to influence the election, and there are no further indictments, sealed or otherwise, and, in fact that is not true, we know there are at LEAST 20 people that know otherwise. You think that is just going to stay hidden? Get real.
I think Barr put some spin on the Mueller report and even when he did that he clearly states that there is evidence that Trump obstructed justice. I'm looking forward to reading that.
  #277  
Old 03-26-2019, 11:52 PM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
I think Barr put some spin on the Mueller report and even when he did that he clearly states that there is evidence that Trump obstructed justice. I'm looking forward to reading that.
You're right, the obstruction part is less clear cut, probably mostly already publicly known and I think Meuller just put the evidence out there and whatever happens, happens, but I'll wait for the report. Unfortunately for us I do not think a completely unredacted and declassified report will be available to us soon or maybe ever. I expect some members of Congress to have seen it early next month.

"Spin" is one thing, but Barr just making the whole thing up, as people here are suggesting he "could" have done? Yeah, he "could", and there would be 20 people that WOULD know that, immediately. How long do you think the lid would stay on that?

I' would point out that Barr and Meuller are good friends, but I'm afraid that would just rile up the conspiratorial types even more.
  #278  
Old 03-27-2019, 01:56 AM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,772
Many point to Trump leaning on Comey to "go easy" on Mike Flynn as something very similar to obstruction, since it at least implies an effort to affect a legal investigation and prosecution.

To Trump's mind, of course, it is only a friend trying help out a patriot accused of a relatively minor indiscretion. Well, several of them. But a good man deserves to have a good word said for him, an offering of wisdom. Why would anyone think there was anything wrong with that?

Helping a good and loyal friend in a time of need to get the leniency he deserves....why, that's not obstructing justice, that is encouraging it! Maybe technically illegal. Sorta kinda. But that's just the kind of man he is, simple, direct, and loyal!
__________________
Law above fear, justice above law, mercy above justice, love above all.
  #279  
Old 03-27-2019, 02:12 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,104

Stephen Colbert apologizes to Donald Trump


Stephen Colbert apologizes to Donald Trump. Fast-forward to the 14:00 mark for a summary.
  #280  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:04 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
I think Barr put some spin on the Mueller report and even when he did that he clearly states that there is evidence that Trump obstructed justice. I'm looking forward to reading that.
It's a summary, not a full report. There's nothing to 'spin' - either Mueller found enough evidence to recommend indictments, or he didn't. The fact that he didn't find enough evidence to recommend an indictment doesn't exonerate Trump, which is what he said in the letter. Barr might have partisan biases, but I don't think there's evidence that it played any role in Mueller's findings and his reporting of those findings. Having said that, there will probably be a lot more to debate in terms of what Barr does in terms of releasing information to Congress going forward.
  #281  
Old 03-27-2019, 07:46 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
It's a summary, not a full report. There's nothing to 'spin' - either Mueller found enough evidence to recommend indictments, or he didn't.
False dilemma.
  #282  
Old 03-27-2019, 07:53 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Do you guys seriously think Barr would grossly mischaractarize Meuller's report, and no one would say anything?
I don't know how serious they are being. The point is, they don't have to be. When the report comes out and it turns out that the summary says what the report says, no one will admit they were wrong.

This is politics - the truth doesn't matter.

Regards,
Shodan
  #283  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:00 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
I don't know how serious they are being. The point is, they don't have to be. When the report comes out and it turns out that the summary says what the report says, no one will admit they were wrong.

This is politics - the truth doesn't matter.

Regards,
Shodan
It must be nice to be able to predict the future and call those predictions "truth"! Do you have any lotto numbers?

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 03-27-2019 at 08:00 AM.
  #284  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:02 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
I don't know how serious they are being. The point is, they don't have to be. When the report comes out and it turns out that the summary says what the report says, no one will admit they were wrong.

This is politics - the truth doesn't matter.

Regards,
Shodan
The summary says that there were multiple offers to help with the election from Russian-linked individuals to people in the Trump campaign. The summary also says that there is evidence that Trump obstructed justice.

I wasn't wrong about those things but I'll admit I was if it turns out that Barr made those things up.
  #285  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:15 AM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Do you guys seriously think Barr would grossly mischaractarize Meuller's report, and no one would say anything? Hey, remember that time BuzzFeed cooked up a bullshit story about Trump telling Cohen to lie to Congress and Meuller said so within 24 hours?
Sure do. Remember when Republicans claimed Iraq posed a threat to the US? Remember when Trump said asylum-seekers were carrying smallpox and leprosy? Remember when McConnell said his goal was not to govern but to obstruct Obama's governance? Remember when a Republican used a snowball to bolster his argument that the world's climatologists were full of beans? Remember when Obama told McConnell Russians were playing silly buggers and McConnell was fine with that because it benefited his party? Remember when Sessions, with his keen legal mind, couldn't remember if he met any Russians while he was sucking up to Trump? Remember when Barr wrote a 20 page essay arguing that Trump couldn't possibly be committing an obstruction of justice in the hopes of getting a job defending Trump's behaviour?

Republicans, in case you haven't got the picture yet, are not honest. They are immoral and have no intellectual integrity. As James Kirk said in the future, don't believe them; don't trust them.

Quote:
But if Barr says Meuller found no evidence of any conspiracy between any Americans and Russia to influence the election, and there are no further indictments, sealed or otherwise, and, in fact that is not true, we know there are at LEAST 20 people that know otherwise. You think that is just going to stay hidden? Get real.
The night is young.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #286  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:21 AM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 29,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tooth View Post
Remember when McConnell said his goal was not to govern but to obstruct Obama's governance?
He wasn't lying about that.
  #287  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:36 AM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,673
That gets filed under "proof of a lack of intellectual integrity". Either that or a subheading titled "And they're also worthless shits".
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #288  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:36 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
The summary says that there were multiple offers to help with the election from Russian-linked individuals to people in the Trump campaign.
Which were all declined by the Trump campaign.
Quote:
The summary also says that there is evidence that Trump obstructed justice.
The summary says that there is insufficient evidence that Trump obstructed justice.
Quote:
I wasn't wrong about those things but I'll admit I was if it turns out that Barr made those things up.
You were wrong about both those things.

Regards,
Shodan
  #289  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:38 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Which were all declined by the Trump campaign.The summary says that there is insufficient evidence that Trump obstructed justice.

You were wrong about both those things.



Regards,

Shodan
Both of the statements Lance said about the Barr letter are entirely factually accurate.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #290  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:43 AM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 534
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I just saw in the CNN crawl (I'm at the airport) that DOJ says "weeks, not months, to release full report to congress." All indicators point to this thing becoming public. Trump said he's OK with it, the house voted unanimously for it, McConnell's a dick but if they're trying to scuttle this they're going about it a strange way. I just think if you're looking forward to the full report differing in any substantive way from Barr's summary you're just prolonging the disappointment.
My hope is not that the full report will differ from Barr's summary. My hope is that it will reveal enough credible evidence of sleazebag activity to reverse this week's chorus of "Mueller found nothing against Trump," which as dozens of posters have pointed out is not even close to true.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #291  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:48 AM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,673
I'm curious to see all the cases farmed out to other legal bodies because they didn't fall within Mueller's bailiwick.
  #292  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:49 AM
Grrr!'s Avatar
Grrr! is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 16,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Which were all declined by the Trump campaign.
Lol, yeah, only after they went through the trouble of scheduling a meeting and hearing what they had to offer.

They didn't decline on principle, they declined because the deal wasn't sweet enough.
  #293  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:50 AM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,673
Funny they didn't go public and say "Hey, look at what these silly Russians are doing. Trying to corrupt the Trump family! The nerve!" or some such.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #294  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:53 AM
Gyrate is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 23,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Which were all declined by the Trump campaign.
Were they? You sure about that?
  #295  
Old 03-27-2019, 09:09 AM
Try2B Comprehensive's Avatar
Try2B Comprehensive is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
The summary says that there is insufficient evidence that Trump obstructed justice.
It doesn't really say that, though. Mueller did not reach a "traditional" conclusion. A lot of observers, including my cheap opinion, say he Did find evidence of obstruction but did not see it as his place to make the charge, indicating sitting presidents yada yada.

Also, Schiff is saying there is "undoubtedly collusion", of the kind I was speculating about, namely that Team Trump is compromised.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...acy/ar-BBVgBOx

I will admit if I am shown wrong by the full report, promise.
  #296  
Old 03-27-2019, 09:32 AM
Chisquirrel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolHandCox View Post
Iím talking about how you know when anyone (i used Trump because thatís what this thread is about) violates a statute (your word). Itís my understanding you think people commit crimes without charges or convictions.

In the US, rightly or wrongly, I donít think a person can commit crimes without sufficient evidence that the person did it. Youíre saying they can (because youíre particular hypothetical says they did). I just donít think the US criminal justice system works that way (nor should it). Without sufficient evidence of a crime, it doesnít matter what actually, in fact, happened. Thatís not realistic.
So it's not a crime if you don't get caught? That's a rather interesting worldview.
  #297  
Old 03-27-2019, 09:34 AM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Try2B Comprehensive View Post
It doesn't really say that, though. Mueller did not reach a "traditional" conclusion. A lot of observers, including my cheap opinion, say he Did find evidence of obstruction but did not see it as his place to make the charge, indicating sitting presidents yada yada.

Also, Schiff is saying there is "undoubtedly collusion", of the kind I was speculating about, namely that Team Trump is compromised.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...acy/ar-BBVgBOx

I will admit if I am shown wrong by the full report, promise.
Adam Schiff has zero credibility right now and should crawl into a hole. Again, if Donald Trump is a "Russian Asset", and the Meuller report found that, and Barr (who is buddies with Mueller) made everything up, there are 20+ people that know that for a fact and it would have gotten out by now. Mueller isn't going to allow anyone to lie about his findings. He didn't do it with Buzzfeed and he isn't going to do it now.
  #298  
Old 03-27-2019, 09:57 AM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Which were all declined by the Trump campaign.
Yeah, I'm sure that this was a group of patriots who declined the much-needed help to win a presidential election, and of course, they promptly informed the FBI...

Because of course, Manafort, Gates and Cohen are certainly fine upstanding citizens who would never commit a crime...

Libations,
CaptMurdock
__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #299  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:01 AM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Adam Schiff has zero credibility right now and should crawl into a hole. Again, if Donald Trump is a "Russian Asset", and the Meuller report found that, and Barr (who is buddies with Mueller) made everything up, there are 20+ people that know that for a fact and it would have gotten out by now. Mueller isn't going to allow anyone to lie about his findings. He didn't do it with Buzzfeed and he isn't going to do it now.
"Guys, if we say Saddam Hussein has WMDs when he clearly doesn't, isn't that going to bite us on the ass later?"

"Nahhh. It's like Saint Ronnie said, 'Facts are stupid things.'"

-- White House/Pentagon/CIA Headquarters/Spook Central, sometime in 2002.
__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #300  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:02 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Again, if Donald Trump is a "Russian Asset", and the Meuller report found that, and Barr (who is buddies with Mueller) made everything up, there are 20+ people that know that for a fact and it would have gotten out by now. Mueller isn't going to allow anyone to lie about his findings. He didn't do it with Buzzfeed and he isn't going to do it now.
Barr's letter did not state directly whether or not Trump is a "Russian asset" (which actually doesn't even require Trump to be aware of it, depending on how we define "asset" in this sense). And Barr's letter doesn't have to lie to be misleading.

We'll see. I don't know why so many are determined to make conclusions about a report we haven't seen, that's only been summarized by a political appointee who was already critical of the legitimacy of Mueller's probe. We'll find out what Mueller found when his report is released.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 03-27-2019 at 10:02 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017