• 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!

Nadler, calling for full Mueller report had different view when Bill Clinton was investigated

nekrodev said:
wow, so it's not just the right-wingers on the other forums i'm on or the ones on tv. even the ones on supposedly serious political discussion forums are morons and liars.

the Starr report HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE SEXUAL MISCONDUCT ISSUE, it did not touch on any of the indictments related to White Water. the Democrats were opposed to releasing a bunch of **** detailing when and how Monika Lewinsky sucked someone's dick. omg, clinton lied about it, yeah, big ****ing whoop. that's literally his crime, lying about something. and yet, you clearly support Trump. who lies more in an hours than Bill Clinton did during that entire investigation.

i'm literally done engaging with you people.
Click to expand...

And that is IRRELEVANT to NADLER's HYPOCRISY....
 
americanwoman said:
You call Nadler a hypocrite but I have a hard time imagining a hyper partisan such as yourself also staying consistent in the two investigations. You will deny it but I have read enough of your posts to determine just where you stand.
Click to expand...

Feel free to makeup whatever bulll**** you need to believe.

I have "read enough of your posts" to know that that is your default response....
 
nekrodev said:
i wanted to give a dedicated political forum a shot. if the rules of this site were enforced, people like grok would be perma-ip-banned.

if i wanted to deal with trolls shouting nonsense and people completely disregarding reality, i can do that on any of the other websites i visit. was hoping this place would be better.
Click to expand...

We are so blessed to have your Strawman Building/Desperate Deflecting here.

Oh thank you, internet lords, for this honor.
 
Last edited:
snakestretcher said:
He's a quick learner, obviously. It doesn't take a genius long to figure out the hyper-partisan stupidity of Trump's denialist base.
Click to expand...

Yeah..NADLER'S DOCUMENTED HYPOCRISY is "denial" on my part. :lamo


See NONE OF THE DP LEFT can even acknowledge the DOCUMENTED DUPLICITY = why I posted this thread; I KNEW that would be the case.
 
Harshaw said:
But let's engage you on substance here:



Are the rules for protecting the innocent somehow different, or should not apply, based on the type of thing being investigated? Are you saying that because the subject of the investigations were different, there are no real "innocents"? If not, what specifically is the difference that would warrant release of confidential information regarding innocent people?

Also, if the crimes are more serious this time, doesn't that make even more of an argument for protecting the integrity of an ongoing grand jury process?
Click to expand...

AKA:"THE POINT". ^^^ The newb is trying to build a Strawman, and thinks that proved his Vast Superiority.
 
snakestretcher said:
If I were you I would avoid 'Political Forum'; it has become a reactionary cess-pit of racism and bigotry. I recognise several far-right posters here who also posted there, Grokmaster among them.
Click to expand...

GASP!! Conservatives are THERE!!


IOW… more threads that you cannot even ADDRESS, much less REFUTE, the OP point(s), instead REDUCED to SOPHOMORIC AD HOM NONSENSE.
 
Grokmaster said:
What "financial crimes" are part of "RUSSIAN COLLUSION"? They were THE POINT of the White Water probe.


Desperate attempt to RUN AWAY from Widdo Jewwey Nadwer's asinine bull****, duly noted.
Click to expand...

I guess you're unaware of the Southern District huh?

Trump's financial crimes are OK as long as...what again?

It gets so confusing trying to parse out your excuses...
 
nekrodev said:
wow, so it's not just the right-wingers on the other forums i'm on or the ones on tv. even the ones on supposedly serious political discussion forums are morons and liars.

the Starr report HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE SEXUAL MISCONDUCT ISSUE, it did not touch on any of the indictments related to White Water. the Democrats were opposed to releasing a bunch of **** detailing when and how Monika Lewinsky sucked someone's dick. omg, clinton lied about it, yeah, big ****ing whoop. that's literally his crime, lying about something. and yet, you clearly support Trump. who lies more in an hours than Bill Clinton did during that entire investigation.

i'm literally done engaging with you people.
Click to expand...

Your DESPERATE ATTEMPTED DEFLECTION is TYPICAL for the DP LEFT....you'll fit right in!

WHAT Starr's report was about is IRRELEVANT; the RIGHT RO PRIVACY does NOT CHANGE over "subject matter" in Rule 6e, etal.
 
Nadler wants the Mueller report, without redactions, to be released to Congress, or at least to his committee. Has he been one who has said it should be released publicly? Does anyone have a quote?
 
Grokmaster said:
Feel free to makeup whatever bulll**** you need to believe.

I have "read enough of your posts" to know that that is your default response....
Click to expand...

I just figure since you are so hyper partisan it's not a stretch to say you most likely are also a hypocrite when it comes to comparing the two investigations.

Of course I could be way off and just "making whatever bull**** up" but I doubt it. The only difference between you and the picture in your OP is that you don't know it or have the self awareness to admit it. :shrug:
 
americanwoman said:
I just figure since you are so hyper partisan it's not a stretch to say you most likely are also a hypocrite when it comes to comparing the two investigations.

Of course I could be way off and just "making whatever bull**** up" but I doubt it. The only difference between you and the picture in your OP is that you don't know it or have the self awareness to admit it. :shrug:
Click to expand...
More madeup BULL**** based on your "feelings".
 
Airyaman said:
Nadler wants the Mueller report, without redactions, to be released to Congress, or at least to his committee. Has he been one who has said it should be released publicly? Does anyone have a quote?
Click to expand...

Releasing it unredacted to the LEAK-O-CRATS IS "releasing to the public", for all intents and purposes.


DOUBLE TALKING NADLER was all about protecting the privacy of third party witnesses ..WHEN IT WAS ABOUT A DEM POTUS, and no amount of dancing/deflection/strawman building will CHANGE THAT GLARING HYPOCRISY...
 
Grokmaster said:
Releasing it unredacted to the LEAK-O-CRATS IS "releasing to the public", for all intents and purposes.


DOUBLE TALKING NADLER was all about protecting the privacy of third party witnesses ..WHEN IT WAS ABOUT A DEM POTUS, and no amount of dancing/deflection/strawman building will CHANGE THAT GLARING HYPOCRISY...
Click to expand...

So you don't have a quote?
 
americanwoman said:
Okay sure Grok, I am sure you had the exact same stance on Clinton's investigation report and Trump's investigation report.

The exact same.


:lamo
Click to expand...

And ANOTHER DP LEFITST unable to handle the EMBARRASSING POINT(s) of the thread OP. :lamo

SOP for the DP Left....as usual...let me know when you are ready to STEP UP TO BAT, and actually DEAL WITH THE ISSUES AT HAND....as IF....
 
Grokmaster said:
And ANOTHER DP LEFITST unable to handle the EMBARRASSING POINT(s) of the thread OP. :lamo

SOP for the DP Left....as usual...let me know when you are ready to STEP UP TO BAT, and actually DEAL WITH THE ISSUES AT HAND....as IF....
Click to expand...

Yeah sure, the guy is a hypocrite. :shrug:

Just funny to see a hypocrite partisan call out a hypocrite partisan like they above them.
 
Lesh said:
I guess you're unaware of the Southern District huh?

Trump's financial crimes are OK as long as...what again?

It gets so confusing trying to parse out your excuses...
Click to expand...

I guess you're grasping at straws. The prosecutors of the SDNY work for BARR...and there will be no "one ended investigations in search of a crime"...
 
Airyaman said:
So you don't have a quote?
Click to expand...

have Nadler speaking out of both sides of his mouth.


And I have the LAWS regarding the release of the Special Counsel report...that NADLER NOW WANTS INGNORED:


The DOJ’s regulations also dictate what happens at the conclusion of a special counsel investigation, which is where we are now. Pursuant to 28 CFR § 600.8: “At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.” The counsel’s report is to be “handled as a confidential document as are internal documents relating to any federal criminal investigation.”

The attorney general also has an obligation to share the special counsel’s findings with Congress, although there is no duty to disclose the full report. Under 28 CFR § 600.9(a)(3), the attorney general must provide to the chairs and ranking minority members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, “to the extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.” According to Barr, “There were no such instances during the Special Counsel’s investigation.”


Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Report: What Does the Law Say? | Observer




Rule 6e



Grand Jury Secrecy Rules, Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure



Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Report: What Does the Law Say? | Observer
 
There’s s good argument that the “law” is on Nadler’s side.
 
Grokmaster said:
I guess you're grasping at straws. The prosecutors of the SDNY work for BARR...and there will be no "one ended investigations in search of a crime"...
Click to expand...

I don't know how that responds to my post.

Are you claiming that Barr will attempt to shut down THAT investigation now?

Because the SD IS investigating Trump's financial crimes ...among other things
 
Irwin Corey said:
There’s s good argument that the “law” is on Nadler’s side.
Click to expand...

Horse****. There is NO ARGUMENT "that the law is on Nadler's side".



The DOJ’s regulations also dictate what happens at the conclusion of a special counsel investigation, which is where we are now. Pursuant to 28 CFR § 600.8: “At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.” The counsel’s report is to be “handled as a confidential document as are internal documents relating to any federal criminal investigation.”


The attorney general also has an obligation to share the special counsel’s findings with Congress, although there is no duty to disclose the full report. Under 28 CFR § 600.9(a)(3), the attorney general must provide to the chairs and ranking minority members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, “to the extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.” According to Barr, “There were no such instances during the Special Counsel’s investigation.”



Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Report: What Does the Law Say? | Observer
 
Grokmaster said:
Horse****. There is NO ARGUMENT "that the law is on Nadler's side".



The DOJ’s regulations also dictate what happens at the conclusion of a special counsel investigation, which is where we are now. Pursuant to 28 CFR § 600.8: “At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.” The counsel’s report is to be “handled as a confidential document as are internal documents relating to any federal criminal investigation.”


The attorney general also has an obligation to share the special counsel’s findings with Congress, although there is no duty to disclose the full report. Under 28 CFR § 600.9(a)(3), the attorney general must provide to the chairs and ranking minority members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, “to the extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.” According to Barr, “There were no such instances during the Special Counsel’s investigation.”



Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Report: What Does the Law Say? | Observer
Click to expand...

Then you, Barr and tRump have nothing to worry about; I’m not buying your right wing rag.
 
Grokmaster said:
The glaring duplicitous hypocrisy of the Hypo-Crats has been elevated to a ARTFORM , with Widdo Jerry Nadwer's DEMAND that the ENTIRE , UNREDACTED Mueller Report be handed to him, regardless of what the LAW SAYS about it....especially in light of his TOTAL CONTRADICTION of HIS OWN VIEWS...when it was a DEMOCRAT POTUS BEING INVESTIGATED.

And, even after the LAWS WERE CHANGED PER DEMOCRAT DEMANDS...he now wants those same laws IGNORED.

FLAMING HYOCRISY...thy name is DEMCORAT...again.





Top Democrat calling for full Mueller report had different view when Bill Clinton was investigated

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is the leading Democrat demanding the release of the Mueller Report “in its entirety” without redactions. His committee is planning to subpoena the Justice Department for the full report.

But back in 1998, as a member of the same committee, he vociferously opposed the release of the full Starr Report, saying that “as a matter of decency and protecting people’s privacy rights, people who may be totally innocent third parties, what must not be released at all.” Then, the president was Bill Clinton. Now, it is a Republican, Donald Trump. Ken Starr, the independent counsel investigating then-President Bill Clinton, delivered his report to Congress on Sept. 9, 1998. That night, Nadler went on Charlie Rose's show to push back against the Republican demand that the voluminous report should be made public. “It’s grand jury material. It represents statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses," Nadler said. "Salacious material. All kinds of material that it would be unfair to release,”




Top Democrat calling for full Mueller report had different view when Bill Clinton was investigated


View attachment 67253988
Click to expand...

Nadler is a partisan hack. Nothing more need be said, and his pronouncements should be viewed in that light.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom