Do you believe Mueller's findings about the Trump admin/Russia?

[haymarket]

No. It doesn't say he, you , I, or anyone else is innocent either. That doesn't make us guilty, does it? The object of the exercise was to prove the guilt of the President. That didn't happen. We should be thankful that it turned out that way and stop straining to justify our poor placement of belief in guilt by accusation.
Regards,
CP

It is guilt by evidence. Actually, all of Volume II pretty much shows the President committed the crime of obstruction of justice and hundreds and hundreds of federal prosecutors agree with that assessment.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

I have watched AG Barr's testimony, start to finish. He did or said nothing that was incorrect. Only a made up, and as such, useless mind would suggest otherwise. The whole Anti-President and stilted posturing that anyone not savvy enough to get that is an -ist of some sort has been overplayed and finally borders on being ignored by thinking peoples. It is amazing just how much attention has been paid to that freakish departure from American sense and sensibility.
Regards,
CP

I never mentioned Barr's testimony. What are you ranting about???

 

[antiquity]

Barr spent 48 hours with a 448 page document. He quoted 4 partial sentences from that document, and added 4 pages of his own to provide the best possible spin from the perspective of Trump. That was all Barr released for a month.

Not true, Barr and Rosestein were Mueller boss though the entire investigation and both had access to the report for months if not the entire time Mueller and his team was investigating for Russian collusion.
Mueller left it up to Barr (because Barr is Mueller's boss) to release a summary and never once did Mueller dispute anything in Barr's summary report. Mueller only said he didn't like the way it was presented.

Even in redacted form, the full doc makes Barr look like the pathetic partisan suck up only a Trump would stand for. Nonsense is a relative compliment.

You spent too much time watching CNN or MSNBC and their democratic talking points.

Yeah, Right....Barr summary of the Mueller report made him look like a partisan? Your post makes you look like an extreme partisan that can't accept reality.
Democrats had resisted any attempt by Trump to fire Mueller and wanted the report released...now they got their wish and do nothing but trash the report because it didn't find any evidence of Russian collusion....

 

[<alt>doxygen]

--- Deleted BS.

Democrats had resisted any attempt by Trump to fire Mueller and wanted the report released...now they got their wish and do nothing but trash the report because it didn't find any evidence of Russian collusion....

I'm quite happy with the report. I had issues with Barr's spin-summary, nothing else. It would be cool to have the redacted portions, but I'll be fine with that being kept in closed congressional session.

 

[concernedpuma]

I never mentioned Barr's testimony. What are you ranting about???

No? I thought you wrote:"Even in redacted form, the full doc makes Barr look like the pathetic partisan suck up only a Trump would stand for. Nonsense is a relative compliment" If not, I am sorry to have replied to you in that manner.
Regards,
CP

 

[<alt>doxygen]

No? I thought you wrote:"Even in redacted form, the full doc makes Barr look like the pathetic partisan suck up only a Trump would stand for. Nonsense is a relative compliment" If not, I am sorry to have replied to you in that manner.
Regards,
CP

I wrote that, but it pertains to the Barr summary and the Mueller Report, not Barr's testimony.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Mueller Finds No Trump-Russia Conspiracy but Stops Short of Exonerating President on Obstruction of Justice - The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The investigation led by Robert S. Mueller III found that neither President Trump nor any of his aides conspired or coordinated with the Russian government’s 2016 election interference, according to a summary of the special counsel’s findings made public on Sunday by Attorney General William P. Barr.

Are you surprised that no evidence was found that the Trump administration conspired with the Russians to interfere with the 2016 election? Do you believe it?

Here is what is important in the Mueller investigation.
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's action and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolve if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

So did Mueller do his job? He was empowered to investigate collusion, he said they did not find that Trump or his campaign colluded dispite attempts by Russians to entice them. He did not charge obstruction, which was a process crime based on the underlying collusion search. Yet, he says this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime. That was his one an only job, determine if a crime was committed. He did not conclude that the President committed a crime. Case closed.
But, democrats are so Trump crazy and scared to death that they cannot beat Trump in 2020 they are desperate for either impeachment or at least to smear him and his people that they might win.

 

[concernedpuma]

I wrote that, but it pertains to the Barr summary and the Mueller Report, not Barr's testimony.

So you take a shotgun approach to the points you try to make? A reasonable person would conclude from just the portion I copied, that you intended to besmirch the AG. If your point was not intended as a broadside, unsubstantiated rebuke to AG Barr, what in heavens name was it?
Can you at last; tell what makes you so Anti-Barr? There were no lies during his testimony. The only false narrative, and dismissible extrapolation is coming as unfounded blasts at the President Trump Administration. Do you not feel the mud sinking under your feet? What would it take to make you calm down and go forward?
Regards,
CP

 

[Miss Kitty]

We need the full report.... or at the very least Congress does.

Who be "we", are you in a position where your reading the report would make a difference?

 

[haymarket]

Who be "we", are you in a position where your reading the report would make a difference?

WE are The American people - of course.

 

[concernedpuma]

NO -what you did was trot out one of the right wings favorite monsters in a plant exercise of whataboutsim.

I understand that labeling, as in whataboutism, make facts disappear to those say it, but comparable performance characteristic is a valid argument.

Regards,
CP

 

[akyron]

It is fascinating to see the calls for illegal untested 6e material to be sprayed all over the media.


It is likely these same people would scream as loud as anyone else when they are tied to the stake and set on fire with no defense.


So why does does congress not engage the federal district court judge and request the proper process to receive this material?

Critical thinkers can figure it out.

 

[haymarket]

I understand that labeling, as in whataboutism, make facts disappear to those say it, but comparable performance characteristic is a valid argument.

Regards,
CP

What comparable performance characteristic are you talking about?

 

[concernedpuma]

What comparable performance characteristic are you talking about?

Broadly and for example, the performance of the Democrats in 2016 and the performance of President Trump. Each time someone says that the Dem's committed criminal acts, it becomes a whataboutism. That jumbled word is so often used by those who don't want to see the attributes of their favorite flavor compared, even when they are appropriate. You may not do that, but many do.
Regards,
CP