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.
I'm still no fan of The Donald, but I'm not so thoroughly blinded by partisan politics that I can't smell a load of BS when it's right in front of me. The whole Russian collusion thing always smelled like BS.
Partisan politics makes you stupid. Want to not be stupid? Stop being blindly partisan. I find it incredibly liberating.
Since you failed to point out 1 conspiracy theory I posted (since I posted a link to the actual Barr Summary), I'll chalk your rhetoric up to another radical supporter. Radical supporters post no facts just their baseless noncredible opinion.
Mueller wrote lengthy summaries of his own for public viewing that Barr didn't release. Why would Barr need Mueller to confirm/review another summary? It doesn't make sense for Barr to come to his own conclusion.
Normal People can READ the LAW
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999
What have you been smoking? You don't know what or if Mueller wrote for the public viewing. Barr won't release any report until 1 more week. So you can wait 1 more week without throwing silly allegations and conspiracy theories.
Mueller was hired by the DOJ. Not Congress or the public. Mueller reports to the DOJ and DOJ only. Mueller reports to Barr. He is 1 of many prosecutors in the DOJ that reports to Barr. Mueller and his team are not above the DOJ. There are laws and DOJ guidelines they have to follow and that's what Barr is there that the law and DOJ guidelines are followed.
I know that Normal People understand this - Leftists don't seem to have any comprehension skills at all.
For the comprehension challenged - Federal Code is the LAW that we must all follow and that certainly includes both the US Attorney General and the Special Counsel.
§ 600.7 Conduct and accountability (a) A Special Counsel shall comply with the rules, regulations, procedures, practices and policies of the Department of Justice. He or she shall consult with appropriate offices within the Department for guidance with respect to established practices, policies and procedures of the Department, including ethics and security regulations and procedures. Should the Special Counsel conclude that the extraordinary circumstances of any particular decision would render compliance with required review and approval procedures by the designated Departmental component inappropriate, he or she may consult directly with the Attorney General.
We have no idea what Special Counsel Mueller wanted to do re:President Trump - BUT, we do know he is forced to follow US LAW.
28 CFR § 600.8 - Notification and reports by the Special Counsel. (c)Closing documentation. At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.
This is very straight forward -- the Special Counsel is require by LAW to give his confidential report ONLY to the US Attorney General.
28 CFR § 600.9 - Notification and reports by the Attorney General. § 600.9 Notification and reports by the Attorney General.
(a) The Attorney General will notify the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for each action -
(1) Upon appointing a Special Counsel;
(2) Upon removing any Special Counsel; and
(3) Upon conclusion of the Special Counsels investigation, including, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.
(b) The notification requirement in paragraph (a)(1) of this section may be tolled by the Attorney General upon a finding that legitimate investigative or privacy concerns require confidentiality. At such time as confidentiality is no longer needed, the notification will be provided.
(c) The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions. All other releases of information by any Department of Justice employee, including the Special Counsel and staff, concerning matters handled by Special Counsels shall be governed by the generally applicable Departmental guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal investigation, and relevant law.
A brief Timeline and history on how we got to here - it all began right after Watergate.
First we had The Ethics in Government Act which expired in 1999. After the expiration of the Ethics in Government Act in 1999, the Office of Independent Counsel was replaced with the office of Special Counsel, defined by regulation 28 CFR 600, which in turn is based on Congressional statute 28 USC 510.
In 1978, a Democratic Party-majority Congress was determined to curb the powers of the President and other senior executive branch officials due in part to the Watergate scandal and related events such as the Saturday Night Massacre. They drafted and passed the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, creating a special prosecutor (later changed to Independent Counsel) position, which could be used by Congress or the Attorney General to investigate individuals holding or formerly holding certain high positions in the federal government and in national Presidential election campaign organizations.
I would point out that the Democrats created the Special Prosecutor who reported directly to Congress -- and then the Democrats got rid of the Special Prosecutor after the Bill/Hillary Clinton investigations and changed the LAW so that we NOW have a Special Counsel that reports ONLY to the US Attorney General. Special Counsel Legal Authority and Regulations
NOW they want it all ways -- when Democrats are investigated, the Leftists wanted it held Secret. When a Republican is investigated -- they want Congress to have the information.
IF it were not for Double Standards - the Left would have no standards at all.
It's should embarrass each and every one of the Leftists to see that a Ways and Means BUDGET Hearing was turned into a total Circus today .... and even worse - the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, including the Chairman are so totally clueless about the very LAWS they passed.
Attorney General Barr will NOT break US Law because clueless Democrats and Media are having a tantrum. You can take that to the bank. Barr is strictly by the Book
To add insult to the Democrats .... AG Barr is going to "color code" (with explanations) any/all redactions. They have absolutely proved to him that they are Stupid and so he will color code like you would to a 4 year old.
I don't think you are following along well. We both agree it is a Barr summary yet the original poster skeddy disputes it's a summary!!!! Are you following now?
Not happening. Mueller will only testify as to what is in redacted report. He will never throw Barr, a personal family friend, under the bus nor create a political food fight.
"Justice served" - what is that? Impeachment? That will never occur unless by a fluke the Senate goes Dem in 2020. Trump is winning in 2020 because the Dems are too fragmented - that left wing scares a lot of people. He's gonna keep that border issue alive come hell or high water. Barr will carry his water no matter what.
We have no tools to combat stupidity as is so eloquently stated, here:
And, the American people will reelect this fool.
If we had a 'do-over' election tomorrow, I'd have to agree here.
Fortunately, that's not the case.
As much as I appreciate Mr. Cipolla's wisdom (& wit), I tend to think he would agree the equally wise (& witty) proverb, 'It ain't over until the fat lady sings' is relevant in these circumstances.
Additionally, according to Professor Cipolla's brilliant treatise, Mr. Trump would be categorized as a 'bandit' rather than 'stupid'.
Quote:
Essentially stupid people are dangerous and damaging because reasonable people find it difficult to imagine and understand unreasonable behaviour. An intelligent person may understand the logic of a bandit. The bandit's actions follow a pattern of rationality: nasty rationality, if you like, but still rationality. The bandit wants a plus on his account. Since he is not intelligent enough to devise ways of obtaining the plus as well as providing you with a plus, he will produce his plus by causing a minus to appear on your account. All this is bad, but it is rational and if you are rational you can predict it. You can foresee a bandit's actions, his nasty manoeuvres and ugly aspirations and often can build up your defenses.
Even a nearly perfect 'bandit' like Mr. Trump cannot predict the power of stupidity. Granted, he acknowledges the power of stupidity, let's face it, it's the principal reason how he even got to be president in the first place. To be fair here, it was a narrow victory & he knows it, & all he has to do is keep up the con game. On the other hand ... he cannot predict where the power to damage inherent in stupidity will take him (or the entire Country of course but this matters little to a 'bandit' ~ it's all about him).
Quote:
That helpless people, namely those who in our accounting system fall into the H area, do not normally recognize how dangerous stupid people are, is not at all surprising. Their failure is just another expression of their helplessness. The truly amazing fact, however, is that also intelligent people and bandits often fail to recognize the power to damage inherent in stupidity. It is extremely difficult to explain why this should happen and one can only remark that when confronted with stupid individuals often intelligent men as well as bandits make the mistake of indulging in feelings of self-complacency and contemptuousness instead of immediately secreting adequate quantities of adrenaline and building up defenses.
I know that Normal People understand this - Leftists don't seem to have any comprehension skills at all.
For the comprehension challenged - Federal Code is the LAW that we must all follow and that certainly includes both the US Attorney General and the Special Counsel.
§ 600.7 Conduct and accountability (a) A Special Counsel shall comply with the rules, regulations, procedures, practices and policies of the Department of Justice. He or she shall consult with appropriate offices within the Department for guidance with respect to established practices, policies and procedures of the Department, including ethics and security regulations and procedures. Should the Special Counsel conclude that the extraordinary circumstances of any particular decision would render compliance with required review and approval procedures by the designated Departmental component inappropriate, he or she may consult directly with the Attorney General.
We have no idea what Special Counsel Mueller wanted to do re:President Trump - BUT, we do know he is forced to follow US LAW.
28 CFR § 600.8 - Notification and reports by the Special Counsel. (c)Closing documentation. At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.
This is very straight forward -- the Special Counsel is require by LAW to give his confidential report ONLY to the US Attorney General.
28 CFR § 600.9 - Notification and reports by the Attorney General. § 600.9 Notification and reports by the Attorney General.
(a) The Attorney General will notify the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for each action -
(1) Upon appointing a Special Counsel;
(2) Upon removing any Special Counsel; and
(3) Upon conclusion of the Special Counsels investigation, including, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.
(b) The notification requirement in paragraph (a)(1) of this section may be tolled by the Attorney General upon a finding that legitimate investigative or privacy concerns require confidentiality. At such time as confidentiality is no longer needed, the notification will be provided.
(c) The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions. All other releases of information by any Department of Justice employee, including the Special Counsel and staff, concerning matters handled by Special Counsels shall be governed by the generally applicable Departmental guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal investigation, and relevant law.
A brief Timeline and history on how we got to here - it all began right after Watergate.
First we had The Ethics in Government Act which expired in 1999. After the expiration of the Ethics in Government Act in 1999, the Office of Independent Counsel was replaced with the office of Special Counsel, defined by regulation 28 CFR 600, which in turn is based on Congressional statute 28 USC 510.
In 1978, a Democratic Party-majority Congress was determined to curb the powers of the President and other senior executive branch officials due in part to the Watergate scandal and related events such as the Saturday Night Massacre. They drafted and passed the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, creating a special prosecutor (later changed to Independent Counsel) position, which could be used by Congress or the Attorney General to investigate individuals holding or formerly holding certain high positions in the federal government and in national Presidential election campaign organizations.
I would point out that the Democrats created the Special Prosecutor who reported directly to Congress -- and then the Democrats got rid of the Special Prosecutor after the Bill/Hillary Clinton investigations and changed the LAW so that we NOW have a Special Counsel that reports ONLY to the US Attorney General. Special Counsel Legal Authority and Regulations
NOW they want it all ways -- when Democrats are investigated, the Leftists wanted it held Secret. When a Republican is investigated -- they want Congress to have the information.
IF it were not for Double Standards - the Left would have no standards at all.
It's should embarrass each and every one of the Leftists to see that a Ways and Means BUDGET Hearing was turned into a total Circus today .... and even worse - the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, including the Chairman are so totally clueless about the very LAWS they passed.
Attorney General Barr will NOT break US Law because clueless Democrats and Media are having a tantrum. You can take that to the bank. Barr is strictly by the Book
To add insult to the Democrats .... AG Barr is going to "color code" (with explanations) any/all redactions. They have absolutely proved to him that they are Stupid and so he will color code like you would to a 4 year old.
Normal people can determine when information is relevant to the conversation. No one (at least not me) is disputing that Mueller should give the report to the AG to review and redact on and on. The simple fact is Barr is another corrupt Individual 1 appointee that auditioned for the job in the president's favor, a Roy Cohn.
Again, Nixon had supporters when he resigned. Most Americans do not believe the president is exonerated. Your citing of the law doesn't make you sane at all.
Normal people can determine when information is relevant to the conversation. No one (at least not me) is disputing that Mueller should give the report to the AG to review and redact on and on. The simple fact is Barr is another corrupt Individual 1 appointee that auditioned for the job in the president's favor, a Roy Cohn.
Again, Nixon had supporters when he resigned. Most Americans do not beleive the president is exonerated. Your citing of the law doesn't make you sane at all.
When you can't point out 1 specific issue, I think your comment speaks for itself. The insults are a clear radical tactic to divert from posting any facts.
When you can't point out 1 specific issue, I think your comment speaks for itself. The insults are a clear radical tactic to divert from posting any facts.
And that’s the same argument the left gives for anyone who doesn’t agree with them... your turn.
And that’s the same argument the left gives for anyone who doesn’t agree with them... your turn.
Still not 1 specific issue or fact? That was my initial thought. Nothing.
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.
The easier to con them is my guess. 
