• 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!

Barr, suspecially quick conclusion

Sand Castle said:
investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards regarding prosecution and conviction but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion — one way or the other — as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, 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
Click to expand...

That's not spin from Barr. That's what Mueller told Barr in his report.
 
Sand Castle said:
Following two years of investigations and indictments. Along with Trump's lies and appearance of obstruction,

Barr in 48 hours supposedly reads all documents and reviews all evidence and then exonerates Trump.

This has the appearance that Trump's appointee had made his conclusion in his job interview.

And Rosenstein made his when Trump allowed him to keep his job and pension.
Click to expand...

Ya know, I was willing to give Barr the benefit of the doubt during his confirmation hearing, in spite of reservations. Then a few days later, there he was in the Oval Office with a dozen or so others, all arrayed around Trump sitting at the desk (throne), and taking turns stroking Trump's extremely fragile ego. That did it for me. Anyone obsequious enough to participate in such a pathetic spectacle does not deserve to be taken seriously as anything other than a Trump toady.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Hmm... what of those who had neither documents nor evidence and yet reached the conclusion that there was both collusion and obstruction?
Click to expand...

There's no shortage of those, just as there is no shortage of Trumpsters for whom all the evidence in the universe wouldn't be enough to convince them that their hero is a crook.
 
Sand Castle said:
Very simple fact:
1. Meuller 2 years states he cannot discount Trump obstruction

2. Barr in 48 hours exonarates Trump.
No mud, these are the facts presented and the facts I'm presenting
Click to expand...

So you have no proof that: "Especially when Barr politically embellished Meuller's report."

Just stop it.... It's over!


Attorney General William Barr said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation did not find sufficient evidence to establish that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice, or that the president's campaign coordinated with Moscow's efforts to influence the 2016 election.


The attorney general says Mueller did not conclude whether Trump obstructed justice. He quotes the special counsel as stating, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” Barr concluded that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein “have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”

It's over!!

Attorney General Barr: Mueller finds no Trump collusion with Russia
 
Common Sense 1 said:
So you have no proof that: "Especially when Barr politically embellished Meuller's report."

Just stop it.... It's over!


Attorney General William Barr said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation did not find sufficient evidence to establish that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice, or that the president's campaign coordinated with Moscow's efforts to influence the 2016 election.


The attorney general says Mueller did not conclude whether Trump obstructed justice. He quotes the special counsel as stating, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” Barr concluded that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein “have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”

It's over!!

Attorney General Barr: Mueller finds no Trump collusion with Russia
Click to expand...

I agree and trust Meuller. There was no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.
Obstruction?

I do believe Meuller found a lot of misconduct with Trump and associates.

The misconduct, lying, corrupt appointees and poor decisions have been my issue with Trump.

I know the special council only dealt with Russia connection.

The problem is, what else was uncovered related to Trump and his associates' frequent suspicious behavior.
 
Sand Castle said:
Following two years of investigations and indictments. Along with Trump's lies and appearance of obstruction,

Barr in 48 hours supposedly reads all documents and reviews all evidence and then exonerates Trump.

This has the appearance that Trump's appointee had made his conclusion in his job interview.

And Rosenstein made his when Trump allowed him to keep his job and pension.
Click to expand...

So, you are deluding that Barr is incapable of reading 600 pages of a report, in A DAY and A HALF?


The DESPERATION/DENIAL of the left in the face of the CRASHED and BURNED "RUSSIA LIE" is hysterically funny to behold...
 
DxU5MR3U0AAzoxQ.jpg
 
Common Sense 1 said:
So you have no proof that: "Especially when Barr politically embellished Meuller's report."

Just stop it.... It's over!


Attorney General William Barr said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation did not find sufficient evidence to establish that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice, or that the president's campaign coordinated with Moscow's efforts to influence the 2016 election.


The attorney general says Mueller did not conclude whether Trump obstructed justice. He quotes the special counsel as stating, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” Barr concluded that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein “have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”

It's over!!

Attorney General Barr: Mueller finds no Trump collusion with Russia
Click to expand...

They can't help themselves, they are desperately grasping at whatever straws they can.


They CANNOT ANSWER THIS:






NONE of the DP LEFT can answer this: WHAT WILL THE "FULL REPORT" change?


DO you really think that the HACK of the House Politburo will be able to secure INDICTMENTS that Mueller DID NOT, with the SAME INFORMATION he had?


And yet they STILL DRONE the MANTRA they were SPOONFED:


zombies.jpg
 
Sand Castle said:
Following two years of investigations and indictments. Along with Trump's lies and appearance of obstruction,

Barr in 48 hours supposedly reads all documents and reviews all evidence and then exonerates Trump.

This has the appearance that Trump's appointee had made his conclusion in his job interview.

And Rosenstein made his when Trump allowed him to keep his job and pension.
Click to expand...

Here's my problem with that, Sand Castle.... Mueller had a Grand jury empanelled. If he had evidence enough to issue an indictment, he could have put that before the Grand Jury and let them decide for themselves. If he didn't feel that he could indict a sitting President, the Grand Jury could have issued a sealed indictment until President Trump left office. Given that simple fact, I'm willing to give Attorney General Barr the benefit of the doubt as to not following up any evidence that Mueller possessed.
 
Cordelier said:
Here's my problem with that, Sand Castle.... Mueller had a Grand jury empanelled. If he had evidence enough to issue an indictment, he could have put that before the Grand Jury and let them decide for themselves. If he didn't feel that he could indict a sitting President, the Grand Jury could have issued a sealed indictment until President Trump left office. Given that simple fact, I'm willing to give Attorney General Barr the benefit of the doubt as to not following up any evidence that Mueller possessed.
Click to expand...

My issue has nothing to do with Russia collusion. No evidence to connect Trump, I trust that decision.

My issue is with Barr's quick political propping of Trump, by using Trump's narrative that no collusion means Trump has done no wrong doing.

Too many dishonest people surrounding Trump. Too may lies from Trump. Too many public displays of obstruction.

Barr did not help the situation, he appears political
 
Sand Castle said:
My issue has nothing to do with Russia collusion. No evidence to connect Trump, I trust that decision.

My issue is with Barr's quick political propping of Trump, by using Trump's narrative that no collusion means Trump has done no wrong doing.

Too many dishonest people surrounding Trump. Too may lies from Trump. Too many public displays of obstruction.

Barr did not help the situation, he appears political
Click to expand...

I've got a lot of the same concerns... I'm also concerned that Mueller might have been pressured by the Administration to end his investigation prematurely. I'm not saying that did happen.... I just want to make sure it didn't.
 
Sand Castle said:
Following two years of investigations and indictments. Along with Trump's lies and appearance of obstruction,

Barr in 48 hours supposedly reads all documents and reviews all evidence and then exonerates Trump.

This has the appearance that Trump's appointee had made his conclusion in his job interview.

And Rosenstein made his when Trump allowed him to keep his job and pension.
Click to expand...

To believe that one has to assume Mueller did not keep Rosenstein, his boss, updated concerning his investigation. I find that highly unlikely.
 
As opposed to the previous administration reaching a 'conclusion' before the investigation had even been conducted.

:lamo

leftists...............
 
Sand Castle said:
Following two years of investigations and indictments. Along with Trump's lies and appearance of obstruction,

Barr in 48 hours supposedly reads all documents and reviews all evidence and then exonerates Trump.

This has the appearance that Trump's appointee had made his conclusion in his job interview.

And Rosenstein made his when Trump allowed him to keep his job and pension.
Click to expand...

"Suspiciously quick" looks more like protracted and delayed. This story took two years to write and I'm positive one of the first things Barr did was get more than just the cliff notes version. Are we really expected to believe Barr kept himself in the dark about THE highest profile case in his wheelhouse until the day the report was released?

With the exodus of Mueller's team without leaks, the lack of indictments for collusion before the report, and the lack of anything resembling a smoking gun being reported, it should be no surprise to anyone that the only indictments/convictions are for things unrelated to the campaign or the administration. The writing was on the wall and one doesn't need a Magic 8-Ball to see "All signs point to No".
 
Idiometer said:
There's no shortage of those, just as there is no shortage of Trumpsters for whom all the evidence in the universe wouldn't be enough to convince them that their hero is a crook.
Click to expand...

I think you ought to worry about why it is every liberal fell for the two year long collusion lie and people on the right didnt.
 
dorsai said:
"Suspiciously quick" looks more like protracted and delayed. This story took two years to write and I'm positive one of the first things Barr did was get more than just the cliff notes version. Are we really expected to believe Barr kept himself in the dark about THE highest profile case in his wheelhouse until the day the report was released?

With the exodus of Mueller's team without leaks, the lack of indictments for collusion before the report, and the lack of anything resembling a smoking gun being reported, it should be no surprise to anyone that the only indictments/convictions are for things unrelated to the campaign or the administration. The writing was on the wall and one doesn't need a Magic 8-Ball to see "All signs point to No".
Click to expand...

Plus, it seems he consulted closely with Rosenstein who oversaw the investigation from the start.
 
Fletch said:
I think you ought to worry about why it is every liberal fell for the two year long collusion lie and people on the right didnt.
Click to expand...

You should be careful of gross generalizations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom