• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House expects to see Mueller findings before they go to Congress

Cardinal

Cardinal

Respected On All Sides
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
106,843
Reaction score
98,882
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
We can expect the White House to assert Executive Privilege over the contents of the Mueller Report before it's released to Congress, though ultimately it will be AG Barr's call whether the report goes through the White House first.

It all really depends on Barr's priorities. It's still not clear if he will be protecting the institution of the Department of Justice, protecting the institution of the White House, or acting as Trump's lawyer. Trump believed that Holder was acting as Obama's personal lawyer, and Trump has that exact same expectation of his AG.

If the public trust around the single most significant investigation since Watergate is first on his list, he will not allow the suspect to determine which evidence the jury may hear. But if the preservation of Donald Trump is first on his list (a duty that so many Republicans have adopted), then he will allow it. The consequence of the latter, of course, is that the public will conclude that the final report they are allowed to see is a sham and that a coverup has happened.

White House lawyers expect to have an opportunity to review whatever version of Robert Mueller's report Attorney General Bill Barr submits to Congress before it reaches lawmakers and the public, multiple sources familiar with the matter said, setting up a potential political battle over the hotly anticipated document.

The attorneys want the White House to have an opportunity to claim executive privilege over information drawn from documents and interviews with White House officials, the sources said.
Click to expand...

White House expects to see Mueller findings before they go to Congress - CNNPolitics
 
And if you're a trump supporter? What to make of a conclusion that the final released report is a sham? Well, the answer to that depends on what kind of trump supporter you are.

Are you the kind of trump supporter who takes glee in the fact that trump trolls the libs? Is the protection of Donald Trump more important than anything else? Then that suspicion obviously won't matter to you.

Are you the kind of trump supporter who really does find all these investigations a headache and a distraction, and would like for all this to go away so he can do his damn job? Then perhaps it's in your interest that the need of the public trust is met.
 
We really should get a special prosecutor involved to figure out if Trump is actually planning to obstruct justice by exerting executive privilege. Hell, for all we know he's already holding Mueller's family hostage in an effort to hide his crimes! Frankly, a special prosecutor and the FBI are the only way to handle this mess.

Maybe we can get Eric Swalwell to walk a request in to the FBI.
 
Lutherf said:
We really should get a special prosecutor involved to figure out if Trump is actually planning to obstruct justice by exerting executive privilege. Hell, for all we know he's already holding Mueller's family hostage in an effort to hide his crimes! Frankly, a special prosecutor and the FBI are the only way to handle this mess.

Maybe we can get Eric Swalwell to walk a request in to the FBI.
Click to expand...

I know you were just trying to be stupid, but your post does bring up kind of a funny scenario in which White House lawyers claim Executive Privilege on everything in the report related to obstruction of justice.

In any case, you're clearly the first type of trump supporter I mentioned in post #2.
 
Cardinal said:
I know you were just trying to be stupid, but your post does bring up kind of a funny scenario in which White House lawyers claim Executive Privilege on everything in the report related to obstruction of justice.

In any case, you're clearly the first type of trump supporter I mentioned in post #2.
Click to expand...

I'm more the third type of Trump supporter. I support policy rather than personality and I would like nothing better than to see the the federal government rip itself to shreds so we can start again from scratch...without the political class we let develop.
 
Cardinal said:
We can expect the White House to assert Executive Privilege over the contents of the Mueller Report before it's released to Congress, though ultimately it will be AG Barr's call whether the report goes through the White House first.

It all really depends on Barr's priorities. It's still not clear if he will be protecting the institution of the Department of Justice, protecting the institution of the White House, or acting as Trump's lawyer. Trump believed that Holder was acting as Obama's personal lawyer, and Trump has that exact same expectation of his AG.

If the public trust around the single most significant investigation since Watergate is first on his list, he will not allow the suspect to determine which evidence the jury may hear. But if the preservation of Donald Trump is first on his list (a duty that so many Republicans have adopted), then he will allow it. The consequence of the latter, of course, is that the public will conclude that the final report they are allowed to see is a sham and that a coverup has happened.



White House expects to see Mueller findings before they go to Congress - CNNPolitics
Click to expand...

1. There is no indication in that article that the White House expects to see the Mueller Report. The article...in fact, the part of the article you quoted...clearly states that the White House expects to review "whatever version of Robert Mueller's report Attorney General Bill Barr submits to Congress". It's not surprising that CNN would engage in their dishonest spin. It's also not surprising that you believe and repeat their spin.

2. As that article states, "The White House's review of executive privilege claims are within its legal purview...". I'm not sure why you, Cardinal, think that would be a problem...except for your irrational notion that you think YOU should be able to see everything in the report.

3. I'd like to see your evidence that Trump expects Barr to be his personal lawyer.

btw, Trump is not a "suspect" and there is no "jury". The public will conclude whatever their favorite flavor of anti-Trump media tell them to conclude.
 
I honestly can't predict if he will block it or not. I don't personally believe Trump colluded with Russia and I doubt Mueller found evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. But I think it is very possible, maybe even probable, that Mueller found evidence of other wrongdoing along the way. Or if not illegal, unflattering enough that Trump wouldn't want it out. Or maybe since everyone has made such a big deal about the collusion angle, he could see the report as a victory and allow it to be released even if it did show evidence of other shady dealings. I wouldn't even hazard a guess.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
I honestly can't predict if he will block it or not. I don't personally believe Trump colluded with Russia and I doubt Mueller found evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. But I think it is very possible, maybe even probable, that Mueller found evidence of other wrongdoing along the way. Or if not illegal, unflattering enough that Trump wouldn't want it out. Or maybe since everyone has made such a big deal about the collusion angle, he could see the report as a victory and allow it to be released even if it did show evidence of other shady dealings. I wouldn't even hazard a guess.
Click to expand...

The Trump haters, I think, are resigned to the fact that there will be nothing criminal in the report. I think their only motivation for seeing the whole thing is that "unflattering" stuff. They want to use it to influence the 2020 election.
 
Mycroft said:
1. There is no indication in that article that the White House expects to see the Mueller Report. The article...in fact, the part of the article you quoted...clearly states that the White House expects to review "whatever version of Robert Mueller's report Attorney General Bill Barr submits to Congress". It's not surprising that CNN would engage in their dishonest spin. It's also not surprising that you believe and repeat their spin.

2. As that article states, "The White House's review of executive privilege claims are within its legal purview...". I'm not sure why you, Cardinal, think that would be a problem...except for your irrational notion that you think YOU should be able to see everything in the report.

3. I'd like to see your evidence that Trump expects Barr to be his personal lawyer.

btw, Trump is not a "suspect" and there is no "jury". The public will conclude whatever their favorite flavor of anti-Trump media tell them to conclude.
Click to expand...

You mean the White House wants to review it while not seeing it? This is a most interesting interpretation, but it could work. We would need to convert the whole thing to braille, and then let blind people read it. That way, it won't be seen, but will be reviewed, and your assertion will be 100% correct. And, for heaven's sake, bring seeing eye dogs to the White House for that review. We don't want all those blind people toppling over statues of Lincoln, do we? :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
The Trump haters, I think, are resigned to the fact that there will be nothing criminal in the report. I think their only motivation for seeing the whole thing is that "unflattering" stuff. They want to use it to influence the 2020 election.
Click to expand...

There is certainly a good number of people, particularly among the actual politicians, that I think that accurately describes. But I think a significant number of anti-Trumpers outside the Beltway really think the Russian collusion will be proven in the report. I think they are in for a disappointment. Like I said almost two years ago:

Skeptic Bob said:
I don't think for a second Trump colluded with Russia to win. Hell, I'm not even convinced that Trump really wanted to win. As for members of his administration? I think there were some inappropriate communications and perhaps even some promises made to Russia of what they might do if elected, but I don't think they asked Russia to help them win.
Click to expand...
https://www.debatepolitics.com/gene...ryone-record-trumps-guilt.html#post1067182436

I haven't seen anything to change my mind on that yet. The one thing on this I think we disagree on is whether or not there will be ANY criminal activity by Trump in the report. First, I think virtually every billionaire real-estate tycoon has broken some laws. And I think there could be hard evidence of campaign finance violations. But that isn't all that uncommon. That would be a nothingburger to me, but would still be technically illegal.

The most serious crime that I would give even odds to being in the report would be obstruction of justice. I say that because Trump and his people haven't been all that careful about getting too close to crossing that line in public, so it is plausible they were even less careful in their nonpublic interactions. With Nixon and Clinton it was the coverups that hurt them legally, not the thing they were trying to cover up. So I am on the fence about whether THAT kind of crime will be on the report.
 
When is this stupid thing coming out? Either way this thing goes, one side will be rioting in the streets.
 
The OP sounds like all the talking heads in the anti-Trump media. AG Barr has made it well known that he will release all the report that the law will allow him to.

But here's the problem. The left has been pushing a narrative that Trump was basically a traitor to the U.S. That he colluded with Russians to win the presidency.. But if Mueller's report can't produce such "evidence" then they are setting the stage to doubt AG Barr producing all the report. Some of it actually can not be released following legal guidelines but the left is setting up those things that can't be released as being the very things that the left will declare would justify their feckless claims.
 
Cardinal said:
We can expect the White House to assert Executive Privilege over the contents of the Mueller Report before it's released to Congress, though ultimately it will be AG Barr's call whether the report goes through the White House first.

It all really depends on Barr's priorities. It's still not clear if he will be protecting the institution of the Department of Justice, protecting the institution of the White House, or acting as Trump's lawyer. Trump believed that Holder was acting as Obama's personal lawyer, and Trump has that exact same expectation of his AG.

If the public trust around the single most significant investigation since Watergate is first on his list, he will not allow the suspect to determine which evidence the jury may hear. But if the preservation of Donald Trump is first on his list (a duty that so many Republicans have adopted), then he will allow it. The consequence of the latter, of course, is that the public will conclude that the final report they are allowed to see is a sham and that a coverup has happened.



White House expects to see Mueller findings before they go to Congress - CNNPolitics
Click to expand...

Trump will do anything and everything to stay in power. Expect every possible thing to be done to prevent the public from seeing the report.

Obama’s Harvard Law Professor: ‘Dangerous’ Trump ‘May Fabricate’ Emergency To Stay In Power
 
ajn678 said:
When is this stupid thing coming out?
Click to expand...

Boy, I hope you weren't waiting in earnest over the Iran-Contra Investigation, which took nearly 3,000 days.
 
The people that still believe Trump colluded with Russia are the Democrat equivalent of Birthers. Russia Collusioners and Birthers both cling to a false hope that a lie will remove a President they dislike from office.
 
danarhea said:
You mean the White House wants to review it while not seeing it? This is a most interesting interpretation, but it could work. We would need to convert the whole thing to braille, and then let blind people read it. That way, it won't be seen, but will be reviewed, and your assertion will be 100% correct. And, for heaven's sake, bring seeing eye dogs to the White House for that review. We don't want all those blind people toppling over statues of Lincoln, do we? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

download.png
 
SLC said:
The people that still believe Trump colluded with Russia are the Democrat equivalent of Birthers. Russia Collusioners and Birthers both cling to a false hope that a lie will remove a President they dislike from office.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Collusion Truthers will claim that all the evidence of Trumps crimes will be in the redacted parts or the report. You will have these loons still fighting to see the blacked out sections of the report 50 years from now.
 
We all know that the White House will release anything they believe is favorable to Trump in the Mueller Report and attempt to cover up what is unfavorable. Why there is any mystery to this is beyond me.
 
Cardinal said:
We can expect the White House to assert Executive Privilege over the contents of the Mueller Report before it's released to Congress, though ultimately it will be AG Barr's call whether the report goes through the White House first.

It all really depends on Barr's priorities. It's still not clear if he will be protecting the institution of the Department of Justice, protecting the institution of the White House, or acting as Trump's lawyer. Trump believed that Holder was acting as Obama's personal lawyer, and Trump has that exact same expectation of his AG.

If the public trust around the single most significant investigation since Watergate is first on his list, he will not allow the suspect to determine which evidence the jury may hear. But if the preservation of Donald Trump is first on his list (a duty that so many Republicans have adopted), then he will allow it. The consequence of the latter, of course, is that the public will conclude that the final report they are allowed to see is a sham and that a coverup has happened.



White House expects to see Mueller findings before they go to Congress - CNNPolitics

And if you're a trump supporter? What to make of a conclusion that the final released report is a sham? Well, the answer to that depends on what kind of trump supporter you are.

Are you the kind of trump supporter who takes glee in the fact that trump trolls the libs? Is the protection of Donald Trump more important than anything else? Then that suspicion obviously won't matter to you.

Are you the kind of trump supporter who really does find all these investigations a headache and a distraction, and would like for all this to go away so he can do his damn job? Then perhaps it's in your interest that the need of the public trust is met.
Click to expand...

What a wonderful way to call the report a sham while setting up a catch 22 for every Trump supporter....Dishonest and sleazy as hell, but cleverly transparent.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
 
j-mac said:
What a wonderful way to call the report a sham while setting up a catch 22 for every Trump supporter....Dishonest and sleazy as hell, but cleverly transparent.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I enjoy how we've devolved it down to "Trump supporters" and "Trump Haters". More proof I was right, that Trump has slain conservatism and replaced it with his own swaggering brand of theocratic autocracy, and that the far left who oppose him has seized the initiative of his idiocracy to skew the conversation toward word policing and actual thought crime.

It makes me patently ill that this odious perspective is peddled here and everywhere else.

We can't be concerned that the president may have broken the law. We can't be concerned about states taking firearms. It's all trump supporters vs trump haters and we need to draw ideological lines in the sand to make sure we know who stands where.
 
Obscurity said:
I enjoy how we've devolved it down to "Trump supporters" and "Trump Haters". More proof I was right, that Trump has slain conservatism and replaced it with his own swaggering brand of theocratic autocracy, and that the far left who oppose him has seized the initiative of his idiocracy to skew the conversation toward word policing and actual thought crime.

It makes me patently ill that this odious perspective is peddled here and everywhere else.

We can't be concerned that the president may have broken the law. We can't be concerned about states taking firearms. It's all trump supporters vs trump haters and we need to draw ideological lines in the sand to make sure we know who stands where.
Click to expand...
You sure your responding to me? You may want to take your disgust to the OP...

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
 
j-mac said:
You sure your responding to me? You may want to take your disgust to the OP...

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Did you not use the term "Trump Supporters?"

I'm talking at both you and the op.
 
If they try to cover it up, I hope it leaks. Tweety's tax returns might be interesting.
 
This story about what the White House expects is all over the place, difficult to know what to trust about who sees this report first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom