Barr Releases the Mueller Report to Congress and the American People (legal, impeachment)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trump could have fired Mueller at any time he wanted to.
He could have stopped the entire investigation.
The whole investigation was under the jurisdiction of the Attorney General and Justice Department which is the Executive Branch under the jurisdiction of the Pres.
.
He would not have stopped the Investigation.
He would have fired Mueller and replaced him with someone who was not so Biased and hired such an anti-Trump team.
he should have replaced sessions from the very beginning.
All Barr did was deliver the message that Muller sent
No new indictments
No evidence of Collusion
Not enough evidence to warrant an obstruction charge.
I can't wait until Muller testifies to the Senate and Congress. The Dems will try to make him look stupid similar to how they treated Barr and he will smack them and their delusions down. Then, the Republicans get to ask him questions that Democrats don't want to be asked.
Especially on the Senate side. There are several Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee that are world class lawyers who are as sharp as they come. The questions that they ask are not going to conform or submit to the current 'narrative' of the Democrat left #Resistance. The answers by Mueller and also Barr to these questions by these people is likely to be very interesting indeed.
Possibly...…….Sessions should have resigned imo when he realized he had no choice but to recuse himself.
there was no basis for Sessions to recused himself. He let the media and the Democrats bully him to push a narrative. Sessions fed the fire by recusing himself and Trump should be upset with him. If Barr was there from day #1 none of this circus would have gone this far.
That's the difference between him and Barr. Barr won't let the media and Democrats push him around. You better bring solid and valid evidence and back it up with the law to make him recuse himself.
there was no basis for Sessions to recused himself. He let the media and the Democrats bully him to push a narrative. Sessions fed the fire by recusing himself and Trump should be upset with him. If Barr was there from day #1 none of this circus would have gone this far.
That's the difference between him and Barr. Barr won't let the media and Democrats push him around. You better bring solid and valid evidence and back it up with the law to make him recuse himself.
No, I disagree.
Sessions had no choice but to recuse himself, hence why he should have resigned.
The investigation was about the campaign and Sessions was part of the campaign. An obvious conflict of interest.
Yet, Barr's statement in his press conference that in face-to-face conversations and upon repeated query by Barr to Mueller, Mueller stated the OLC Memo did NOT prevent him from reaching a conclusion flies in the face of what is actually in the Mueller Report, to wit:Either (1) Mueller hadn't read his own report, (2) Mueller lied to Barr when they met, or (3) Barr is lying about what Mueller said.
I'm going with (3) - "BARR IS LYING."
Not new and never was new. It IS and has always been "tried." All that is needed is that "he tried." The operative word is ENDEAVOR. Per Mueller:Trump is guilty of obstruction just by ENDEAVORING (instructing another) to fire Mueller.
APPALLING. They just ran that awful clip again. Today is Easter Sunday. This guy ambushed Mueller approaching his car after Easter Sunday Services. Inappropriate, wrong, bad taste, terrible, awful, bad form, you name it. He should be fired.
Unfortunately, MSNBC continues to run this clip as a lead into their political discussion shows today - and in the process, imo, look very tabloid TV - diminishing its most credible legal analysts who generally provide reasoned commentary.
Over 100 contacts including meetings, phone calls, and correspondence. That's not enough for coordination/conspiracy? Trump campaign was COMPLICIT in Russian interference even though its behavior may not have met Mueller's definition of coordination which is:Not quite sure what "tacit or express" means, here. I've gotta admit - this appears to me to be a distinction without a difference.
Trump Campaign KNEW about Russian interference,
it took meetings on this issue because it had been told Russians had dirt on Hillary,
it was told ahead of time about the Wikileaks dump,
campaign emissaries met with Russians, passing on polling data, developing favorable actions towards Russia if elected.
Trump publicly called on Russians to hack Hillary's emails
Four hours later Russian (unsuccessful) attacks on her servers occurred
What are all these behaviors if not agreement tacit AND express??
Since you act like a law school professor here , you should know that the DOJ policy against filing charges against sitting presidents does not extend to the president's administration, staff and associates.
Since not a single person was charged for collusion or obstruction then the only possible conclusion any reasonable person can make is that there was no collusion and no obstruction. Trump could not have colluded or obstructed alone.
Sessions had no choice but to recuse himself, hence why he should have resigned.
The investigation was about the campaign and Sessions was part of the campaign. An obvious conflict of interest.
there was no evidence he had to recused himself. Trump was head of the campaign, should he have resign also or surrender his constitutional powers over the DOJ?
if we go by your logic, Trump had to surrender his constitutional powers over Comey and Mueller.
The probe of Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential campaign was not a criminal investigation or prosecution when Sessions was sworn in. In his written and oral testimony, former FBI director James Comey reiterated that the Russia probe is a counterintelligence investigation. As Comey said, a counterintelligence investigation is an effort “to understand the technical and human methods that hostile foreign powers are using to influence the United States or to steal our secrets,” in order to “disrupt” those activities. Again, the point is to gather intelligence about a foreign power, not investigate with an eye toward a prosecution of criminal suspects.
So the question now is when did it went from a counterintelligence investigation to a criminal one. Why and how?
Last edited by Hellion1999; 04-21-2019 at 10:09 PM..
there was no evidence he had to recused himself. Trump was head of the campaign, should he have resign also or surrender his constitutional powers over the DOJ?
if we go by your logic, Trump had to surrender his constitutional powers over Comey and Mueller.
Trump did not need to surrender his powers over the DOJ or the FBI...………..exercising them as in firing Comey,, Rosentstein , Mueller may have invited Congress to invoke their oversight...……….who knows.
In any case it is common sense, not to mention the collective decision of DOJ advisors that Sessions could not oversee an investigation of Trumps campaign when he was part of that same campaign.
Trump did not need to surrender his powers over the DOJ or the FBI...………..exercising them as in firing Comey,, Rosentstein , Mueller may have invited Congress to invoke their oversight...……….who knows.
In any case it is common sense, not to mention the collective decision of DOJ advisors that Sessions could not oversee an investigation of Trumps campaign when he was part of that same campaign.
How could he ever be or prove objectivity.
You aren't even making sense.
and neither Sessions needed to recused himself......Director Comey said this started as a counterintelligence investigation not a criminal one.
or somebody lied and they used the counterintelligence excuse to do the criminal one.
so many questions Barr has to investigate and get to the bottom.
A good piece on why the investigation ended so quickly - and with no conclusion on obstruction - the short answer Mueller knew he would be overruled by Barr:
If one takes the time to read the salient sections in Mueller's Report - which I have - Barr's argument on "document destruction" (put forth in his very flawed June 2018 Job Interview Memo and debunked by legal experts) being the limits of "obstruction" are laughable and in no way comport with the language in the statute.
See Vol. II, pp. 162-163, Mueller Report. You can download, here:
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trump clearly has his Roy Cohn
