• 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!

Bottom line-Barr told the truth

Casper said:
Yes, because to say he can obstruct an investigation is untrue due the fact that it is not Legal, as head of the DOJ he knows that. Oh and You know it also....
Click to expand...

Now you're lying.

He never said that.
He said this, according to you :i"f an investigation is based on false allegations, the president dies not have to sit there constitutionally and ALLOW it to run its course"

Are you saying that's a lie?
I'm sure you know, shutting down an investigation does not in and of itself make a legal case for obstruction of justice.

(And by the way- Trump never impeded Mueller's investigation. EVER.)
 
Idiometer said:
You do know that Mueller was under the impression that he could not indict a sitting president, right? You do understand that those were the special council rules as Mueller understood them, right? You have read Volume II of the report, right? You are aware that Mueller clearly detailed obstruction actions by Trump, but directed that evidence to congress for further action, right?

:thinking
Click to expand...

You do know that Mueller told Barr his decision had nothing to do with the OLC, right?
 
trixare4kids said:
Yeah, everyone knows she's an unbiased moderate Independent; a beacon of truth.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle! :lamo
Click to expand...

Certainly writes like one. I looked for the "Opinion" or even "Analysis" tag and didn't see one. Incredible what passes for journalism these days.
 
Lutherf said:
Their objective was to put Trump in jail or, failing that, put enough of his associates in jail that Trump would be totally hamstrung. They didn’t get what they wanted from Mueller. Because they didn’t get what they wanted they are now going to take out their frustration on Barr. Pelosi’s statement today is a damned good indication that they will be pursuing perjury charges against him.

Frankly, I find it a little disconcerting that the Democrats in power have decided to campaign in these hearings rather that legislate. That doesn’t bode well for what they would do if they had both hoes and the WH. What I find MORE concerning, however, is that so many Democrat citizens are cheering them on with this behavior. It’s really got that “Germany, 1938” kind of feel to it.
Click to expand...


Not to me. It’s got more like the feel of “USA, 1974.”
 
KLATTU said:
Now you're lying.

He never said that.
He said this, according to you :i"f an investigation is based on false allegations, the president dies not have to sit there constitutionally and ALLOW it to run its course"

Are you saying that's a lie?
I'm sure you know, shutting down an investigation does not in and of itself make a legal case for obstruction of justice.

(And by the way- Trump never impeded Mueller's investigation. EVER.)
Click to expand...


Only because McGahn didn’t follow his orders. It wasn’t for lack of trying. His handlers have a really tough time keeping him under control.
 
ataraxia said:
Only because McGahn didn’t follow his orders. l.
Click to expand...

So never impeded the investigation . Thanks for the confirmation.\

Boy that's going to look good at the impeachment.

"Mr Mueller, was there one time. ever. Where Trump interefered with your investigation?"
" No"

" Was there one instance where Trump didn't cooperate? "
"no"
 
Last edited:
Praxas said:
Obviously you haven't, because it was posted by others. you're not getting any more out of me so deal with it.
Click to expand...

We haven't gotten anything out of you, so that's no loss.
 
trixare4kids said:
Why would I care about crazy Pelosi's opinion?
She's now completely lost her mind and is invested in catering to the far lying left, who have hijacked the Democrat Party.
Click to expand...

you're certainly a fast reader. however, i bet that you read even less of the article than i read of your post. just as well; we both saved time.
 
tres borrachos said:
Um, yes. That's the way our legal system is set up. According to the Constitution. Why are you asking that? You didn't know it already?

You do realize that we aren't talking about a trial or indictments, right? This is about the Special Counsel's report.
Click to expand...

You are really untethered in effective ways to reality.
 
OscarLevant said:
An AG has only one obligation, the constitution and law, not opposing any party, the party has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

Anyone who opposes illegality opposes its allies and perpetrators as well.

The Democrats have been the prime movers of this sham since Hillary and her goons conspired with the Russians to create the Steele Dossier.

Everyone in the FBI, DOJ, NSC, DHS, SOTUS, COTUS, FISA or their attorneys who had any contact with this swindle over the last three years have got to be crapping their pants right now.

This is going to get real fun real fast.

Michael Horowitz will release his SECOND report in June. I wonder how many reports he'll be issuing over time...

You can bet there are a whole bunch of people wondering how many reports he'll be issuing.

If you think that Horowitz will issue nothing but lies, just check the coverage on CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and MSNBC, They won't cover it so you won't get upset. ;)
 
Crystal said:
If Mueller did not exonerate Trump from obstruction of justice then he must have charged him! Did he?
Click to expand...

No, but there is evidently enough room left for doubt. Hardly the 'total exoneration' claimed by Trump and his acolytes, wouldn't you agree?
 
KLATTU said:
(snip)

"Mr Mueller, was there one time. ever. Where Trump interefered with your investigation?"
" Yes, however we were unable to establish his specific actions"

" Was there one instance where Trump didn't cooperate? "
"Yes, he refused to meet with any members of the investigative team for a face to face interview."
Click to expand...

Obviously, the red letters are my version of Mr. Mueller's replies to a Congressional committee.

MY version of Mueller's future testimony is based on the following quote found on, pg 76-77, Vol II, which appears to indicate the Mueller team was unable to fully investigate certain actions by the Trump team.
As described in Volume I, the evidence uncovered in the investigation did not establish that the President or those close to him were involved in the charged Russian computer-hacking or active-measure conspiracies, or that the President otherwise had an unlawful relationship with any Russian official.

But the evidence does indicate that a thorough FBI investigation would uncover facts about the campaign and the President personally that the President could have understood to be crimes or that would give rise to personal and political concerns.
Click to expand...
 
snakestretcher said:
No, but there is evidently enough room left for doubt. Hardly the 'total exoneration' claimed by Trump and his acolytes, wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...

What is important to me is that Mueller seems to have left his job undone.
 
Crystal said:
If Mueller did not exonerate Trump from obstruction of justice then he must have charged him! Did he?
Click to expand...

Actually he very heavy handedly suggested that congress go after him through impeachment or wait until he's out of office to indict him for it as the justice department doesnt indict sitting presidents.

What you are saying is just spin designed in the hope it will convince independents that trump isn't crooked.

Maybe it will work.
 
What if...? said:
Actually he very heavy handedly suggested that congress go after him through impeachment or wait until he's out of office to indict him for it as the justice department doesnt indict sitting presidents.

What you are saying is just spin designed in the hope it will convince independents that trump isn't crooked.

Maybe it will work.
Click to expand...

So Barr was correct in saying it’s time to stop using the Justice Department as a political weapon. What a wasted 35 million dollars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom