The Mueller Report

The Firestarter said:
Some folks are in similar denial as on election night 2016. Mueller was their hope, and now that hope is lost. But the whole thing appears to have been doomed from the beginning, since it was not an independent prosecutor conducting the investigation.
Click to expand...
Best to wait until you’ve seen the Mueller report don’t you think. A 4 page Barr Coverup letter is not a report.
 
Fox's Chris Wallace Sets Record Straight: Russia Investigation Did Not Start With Dossier

 


Grassley leaning on Graham, about as genuine as the GOP Representatives voting unanimously for the release.
 
Maddow seems unable to understand the phrase "principal conclusions"

 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
This may annoy the leftists who think she’s MSM establishment.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is many of them left on here.

In the very early days of the whole Trump ordeal, a number of journalists gained exposure through appealing to liberals with outright hyperbole. I think it's fair to credit most in this echo chamber with enough critical thinking to eventually recognise and call out the likes of Maddow, Mensch, Abramson, Krassenstein Brothers ect ect for what they are.

I think a lot of the people gloating in this thread are being disingenuous in their framing of those of us who have followed this story and hoped it would end with consequences for Trump as being gullible enough to take everything those lot said as gospel which hasn't really been the case for a long time. Most of us have built our understanding of what has happened through actual indictments and reports which are based on actual court documents and the like.


I'm actually surprised how many people in this thread are of the view point "See we told you that the idea that Trump colluded with Russia is ridiculous" off the basis of a four page summary released by an astronomically partisan attorney general who auditioned for the job with an unsolicited op-ed memo which called for the investigation to be stopped and argued Trump could not be found guilty of anything as sitting President.

In his poxy four page summary, the best he could find to back up his conclusion was two partial quotes from the entire 400 page report. A report that, despite apparently exonerating the President of collusion, is being closely guarded and heavily redacted before it's release to Congress.


The only person gloating that I can have any level of agreement with here is @Eboue who is laughing at us for thinking there might be consequences for this powerful, rich, white, male, Republican politician.

Trump is corrupt as feck, we're already aware of a lot of his crimes because a lot of the evidence is already public knowledge and yet the results of the investigation have, to anyone who has been following this and has at least half a brain, been obviously white washed and yet apparently we're the dumb libtards living in an echo chamber who have eaten up everything the lying liberal MSM have told us.


The scary thing is that Trump and the Republicans have spent the last 3 years at war with the media hoping for exactly this outcome (absolute distrust in the media when it comes to reporting on Trump) and it's now been framed as the new WMD saga, despite the WMD saga also being invented by and propagated by a Republican government and the majority of the stories based on lies and false reports from intelligence fed to them by Cheney and co.

I'm absolutely certain that, just as the truth came out about the WMD years later once the Republicans lost power, we will also get the full picture of just how much evidence Mueller had collected against Trump and just how much of a cover up has happened here. I still maintain that if by some miracle the Democrats in the House manage to get the full, non-redacted Mueller report out in the open, it will vindicate our suspicions on just how corrupt and compromised Trump has been, sadly I still don't see that resulting in any consequences because it's clear as day now just how fecked up and unethical the GOP really is.
 
Pexbo said:
I don't think there is many of them left on here.

In the very early days of the whole Trump ordeal, a number of journalists gained exposure through appealing to liberals with outright hyperbole. I think it's fair to credit most in this echo chamber with enough critical thinking to eventually recognise and call out the likes of Maddow, Mensch, Abramson, Krassenstein Brothers ect ect for what they are.

I think a lot of the people gloating in this thread are being disingenuous in their framing of those of us who have followed this story and hoped it would end with consequences for Trump as being gullible enough to take everything those lot said as gospel which hasn't really been the case for a long time. Most of us have built our understanding of what has happened through actual indictments and reports which are based on actual court documents and the like.


I'm actually surprised how many people in this thread are of the view point "See we told you that the idea that Trump colluded with Russia is ridiculous" off the basis of a four page summary released by an astronomically partisan attorney general who auditioned for the job with an unsolicited op-ed memo which called for the investigation to be stopped and argued Trump could not be found guilty of anything as sitting President.

In his poxy four page summary, the best he could find to back up his conclusion was two partial quotes from the entire 400 page report. A report that, despite apparently exonerating the President of collusion, is being closely guarded and heavily redacted before it's release to Congress.


The only person gloating that I can have any level of agreement with here is @Eboue who is laughing at us for thinking there might be consequences for this powerful, rich, white, male, Republican politician.

Trump is corrupt as feck, we're already aware of a lot of his crimes because a lot of the evidence is already public knowledge and yet the results of the investigation have, to anyone who has been following this and has at least half a brain, been obviously white washed and yet apparently we're the dumb libtards living in an echo chamber who have eaten up everything the lying liberal MSM have told us.


The scary thing is that Trump and the Republicans have spent the last 3 years at war with the media hoping for exactly this outcome (absolute distrust in the media when it comes to reporting on Trump) and it's now been framed as the new WMD saga, despite the WMD saga also being invented by and propagated by a Republican government and the majority of the stories based on lies and false reports from intelligence fed to them by Cheney and co.

I'm absolutely certain that, just as the truth came out about the WMD years later once the Republicans lost power, we will also get the full picture of just how much evidence Mueller had collected against Trump and just how much of a cover up has happened here. I still maintain that if by some miracle the Democrats in the House manage to get the full, non-redacted Mueller report out in the open, it will vindicate our suspicions on just how corrupt and compromised Trump has been, sadly I still don't see that resulting in any consequences because it's clear as day now just how fecked up and unethical the GOP really is.
Click to expand...
Did you miss the letter from Barr above , stating that the report will be released (with redactions) , or you don't think it will happen?
 
Pexbo said:
I think a lot of the people gloating in this thread are being disingenuous in their framing of those of us who have followed this story and hoped it would end with consequences for Trump as being gullible enough to take everything those lot said as gospel which hasn't really been the case for a long time. Most of us have built our understanding of what has happened through actual indictments and reports which are based on actual court documents and the like.
Click to expand...

I think the main factor for me has been Trump and his team’s behavior. I understand he’s an unconventional guy but the way he’s acted throughout all this is inexplicable to me unless he’s guilty of something.
 
Pexbo said:
I don't think there is many of them left on here.

In the very early days of the whole Trump ordeal, a number of journalists gained exposure through appealing to liberals with outright hyperbole. I think it's fair to credit most in this echo chamber with enough critical thinking to eventually recognise and call out the likes of Maddow, Mensch, Abramson, Krassenstein Brothers ect ect for what they are.

I think a lot of the people gloating in this thread are being disingenuous in their framing of those of us who have followed this story and hoped it would end with consequences for Trump as being gullible enough to take everything those lot said as gospel which hasn't really been the case for a long time. Most of us have built our understanding of what has happened through actual indictments and reports which are based on actual court documents and the like.


I'm actually surprised how many people in this thread are of the view point "See we told you that the idea that Trump colluded with Russia is ridiculous" off the basis of a four page summary released by an astronomically partisan attorney general who auditioned for the job with an unsolicited op-ed memo which called for the investigation to be stopped and argued Trump could not be found guilty of anything as sitting President.

In his poxy four page summary, the best he could find to back up his conclusion was two partial quotes from the entire 400 page report. A report that, despite apparently exonerating the President of collusion, is being closely guarded and heavily redacted before it's release to Congress.


The only person gloating that I can have any level of agreement with here is @Eboue who is laughing at us for thinking there might be consequences for this powerful, rich, white, male, Republican politician.

Trump is corrupt as feck, we're already aware of a lot of his crimes because a lot of the evidence is already public knowledge and yet the results of the investigation have, to anyone who has been following this and has at least half a brain, been obviously white washed and yet apparently we're the dumb libtards living in an echo chamber who have eaten up everything the lying liberal MSM have told us.


The scary thing is that Trump and the Republicans have spent the last 3 years at war with the media hoping for exactly this outcome (absolute distrust in the media when it comes to reporting on Trump) and it's now been framed as the new WMD saga, despite the WMD saga also being invented by and propagated by a Republican government and the majority of the stories based on lies and false reports from intelligence fed to them by Cheney and co.

I'm absolutely certain that, just as the truth came out about the WMD years later once the Republicans lost power, we will also get the full picture of just how much evidence Mueller had collected against Trump and just how much of a cover up has happened here. I still maintain that if by some miracle the Democrats in the House manage to get the full, non-redacted Mueller report out in the open, it will vindicate our suspicions on just how corrupt and compromised Trump has been, sadly I still don't see that resulting in any consequences because it's clear as day now just how fecked up and unethical the GOP really is.
Click to expand...

The gleeful triumphalism that the Russia investigation was much adu about nothing seems to have subsided substantially in the past few days since it’s become fairly obvious that Mueller not being able to clear Trump on obstruction is pretty serious and once the entire 400 page report comes out it will likely set off a shitstrorm about what Barr May have omitted from his four page summary.
 
The Firestarter said:
Did you miss the letter from Barr above , stating that the report will be released (with redactions) , or you don't think it will happen?
Click to expand...

Did you miss the four reasons why there would be redactions?

  1. material subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) that by law cannot be made public;
  2. material the intelligence community identifies as potentially compromising sensitive sources and methods;
  3. material that could affect other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other Department offices; and
  4. information that would unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties.

1,2 and 3 are irrelevant as the House and Senate Intelligence Committees both have the highest level security clearance. It's also their job to provide oversight for the executive branch and as Barr believes that Trump is immune from criminal charges and therefore the executive branch has no jurisdiction over him. If Barr believes that's the interpretation of the constitution then he should also understand that the House should not be obstructed in providing that oversight.

4 is a huge cop out and provides him with the broadest of brushes to redact basically anything he likes.

He's also said that he would consider executive privilege when redacting information, although he's "not going to seek Trump's advice on that". That is basically giving him more room to blot out any incriminating evidence on Trump. The idea that that is in anyway legal has already been debated because the simple fact that Mueller has collated the evidence and put it on record in a legal document means that executive privilege has already been forfeited. Trump's answers to Mueller questions are a prime example of that. They were not a confidential, private conversation between Trump and Mueller, they were testimony submitted to the SCO by Trump's lawyers.
 
Pexbo said:
Did you miss the four reasons why there would be redactions?

  1. material subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) that by law cannot be made public;
  2. material the intelligence community identifies as potentially compromising sensitive sources and methods;
  3. material that could affect other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other Department offices; and
  4. information that would unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties.

1,2 and 3 are irrelevant as the House and Senate Intelligence Committees both have the highest level security clearance. It's also their job to provide oversight for the executive branch and as Barr believes that Trump is immune from criminal charges and therefore the executive branch has no jurisdiction over him. If Barr believes that's the interpretation of the constitution then he should also understand that the House should not be obstructed in providing that oversight.

4 is a huge cop out and provides him with the broadest of brushes to redact basically anything he likes.

He's also said that he would consider executive privilege when redacting information, although he's "not going to seek Trump's advice on that". That is basically giving him more room to blot out any incriminating evidence on Trump. The idea that that is in anyway legal has already been debated because the simple fact that Mueller has collated the evidence and put it on record in a legal document means that executive privilege has already been forfeited. Trump's answers to Mueller questions are a prime example of that. They were not a confidential, private conversation between Trump and Mueller, they were testimony submitted to the SCO by Trump's lawyers.
Click to expand...
Sorey, but you are clutching at straws here.The statement said the report will be made public, not only provided to Congress. The cleared parties from the latter will most likely get it in full anyway.
Now, for a publicly released report wouldn't you agree that the reactions are necessary?
 
The Firestarter said:
Sorey, but you are clutching at straws here.The statement said the report will be made public, not only provided to Congress. The cleared parties from the latter will most likely get it in full anyway.
Now, for a publicly released report wouldn't you agree that the reactions are necessary?
Click to expand...

I would absolutely agree that the public should only receive a redacted version of the report, that goes without saying.

Barr has been clear that he only intends to provide congress with the redacted version and there is absolutely no justification for this as they have the same level of security clearance as he does. He has no legal authority to decide what classified information they are privy to. That has already been established.
 
Pexbo said:
I would absolutely agree that the public should only receive a redacted version of the report, that goes without saying.

Barr has been clear that he only intends to provide congress with the redacted version and there is absolutely no justification for this as they have the same level of security clearance as he does. He has no legal authority to decide what classified information they are privy to. That has already been established.
Click to expand...

in a nutshell.

The tug of war merely says Trump is guilty as hell.
 
Pexbo said:
I would absolutely agree that the public should only receive a redacted version of the report, that goes without saying.

Barr has been clear that he only intends to provide congress with the redacted version and there is absolutely no justification for this as they have the same level of security clearance as he does. He has no legal authority to decide what classified information they are privy to. That has already been established.
Click to expand...
Not every member of Congress has the same level of clearance, or level of "need to know".
 
The Firestarter said:
Not every member of Congress has the same level of clearance, or level of "need to know".
Click to expand...

Which is why I have been referring to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, the post you are quoting there was the first time I'd lazily contracted that to "Congress" as I thought we'd already established that's who we are discussing.
 
Pexbo said:
Barr has been clear that he only intends to provide congress with the redacted version and there is absolutely no justification for this as they have the same level of security clearance as he does. He has no legal authority to decide what classified information they are privy to. That has already been established.
Click to expand...

If that were to be true then what makes you think Congress is just going to accept receiving a redacted version? Makes no sense to me from a game theory perspective.
 
Yessssssssss
civ7hlqdjsp21.png

@2cents or ... is it.... Qcents? :eek:
 
Pexbo said:
Click to expand...


This is absurd. He said in the 4-page letter, in the very first sentence, "I am writing today to advise you of the principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III". Anyone who read the letter knew that he wasn't summarising the report, but was instead outlining the big decisions. He barely referenced anything else. You can question whether his interpretation of the principal conclusions is aligned with the general public, but given it details the most essential part of the probe - crime, or no crime - you can't claim that it is an unreasonable interpretation. The media just got carried away, again, to generate more outrage and get those eyeballs.
 
He is right most of the time, but posting something from Greenwald on here is always followed by an attack of his character not of the points he is making.
 


Step 1 towards a Supreme Court argument.
 
Issue them fast so the SC can decide quickly. Up to you Mr Roberts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.