• 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!

Some on Mueller’s Team See Their Findings as More Damaging for Trump Than Barr Revealed

Sorry it is not up to mueller or barr to prove anything it is up to the times to support their argument.
since they can't support their argument then well there you have it.
They have already done that by meeting journalistic standards (e.g. getting a number of persons involved to corroborate.) It's not the responsibility of a newspaper to convince naysayers and those that are invested in not believing.
 
Some expect if you sail west far enough you'll fall off the edge of the earth - they're probably closer to fact than the "Barr's gonna change it" loonies. Do ANY of you guys realize IF Barr released something Mueller and his minions didn't write they'd be the first to shout "that's not what we said" loudly and often?
Isn't that exactly what the Times broke tonight?
 
You have to hand it to the Trump administration and right wing media, they tried. They successfully duped their base but nobody else.
 
Or...perhaps those "Some on Mueller's Team" should go talk to Mueller and have him talk to Barr, since Mueller is Let me know when "Some on Mueller's Team" have the balls to speak for themselves...and give their names to their words, instead of having "associates" tell the media what someone supposedly said.

working hand in hand with the AG now.

In any case, I'll pass on the rumors.

btw, I found this so pathetically stupid I had to laugh.



Who gives a **** what the special counsel's office did or did not do? They answer to Barr...not the other way around.
I agree 100% this is more anonymously sourced NYT BS. I find it amusing the tin foil hat crowd is still getting sucked in by their BS. Fake News.
 
Isn't that exactly what the Times broke tonight?

They're a little slow to catch on. Mueller is smart enough to stand back and let the political process play out without getting caught up in it. He knows the truth will eventually find it's way out.
 
You are just going to keep falling for anonymous sources arent you. You people dont learn do you.
Anonymous Sources are neither a new concept nor the seedy one that you portray. They are often the only way to get the truth from people who would face discipline if they were revealed.

See: The Society of Professional Journalists
 
They're a little slow to catch on. Mueller is smart enough to stand back and let the political process play out without getting caught up in it. He knows the truth will eventually find it's way out.
Yep no collusion no obstruction charges.
 
Yep no collusion no obstruction charges.

That was the main talking point that everyone was instructed to push. I see it's ingrained in your soul.
 
Fox didn't lie about Russian Collusion the NYT did. :lol:



Look down at your last quote in your sig. You know I'm right again. :lol:

Sorry you are so easily duped by a trump appointee. Simple minds make simple targets though.
 
We can test the veracity of the Times article by having Barr release the Mueller report. Not releasing it seems suspicious for people who claim exoneration. Knowing Trump, if the Mueller report really exonerated him, he'd be handing it out on street corners.

I think it's going to be a lot closer to the sound effect you get when you toss a dozen M-80's into a pig sty at 4:00 AM.

Kinda like The Parker Hotel in My Cousin Vinny.
 
First of all..

I trust Barr about as far as I can throw him..

But, then,

I trust the MSM even less.

Tough call.
 
Trump didn't say to not release the report. He said it's release won't satisfy the Democrats and he is probably right.
He originally said that he wanted it released. Now, he's backpedaling.
 
He originally said that he wanted it released. Now, he's backpedaling.
Not in the clip you posted. He did not say anything about not wanting it relesed.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
Umm....guys...the GOP is back on the attack against the Mueller "report"...Nunes is now calling it the Mueller "dossier" and says it was written by partisans.

That didn't last long.

Andrew Lawrence on Twitter: "Devin Nunes is attacking the credibility of the Mueller report, says he's calling it "the Mueller dossier (sounds scary, right?)," and says "partisans wrote this"… https://t.co/E7LrVXVxs6"

Rank speculation disclaimer:

Nadler and Congressional Dems have access to far more info than the public does. They just subpoena'd the Mueller report, if I heard correctly. (Been somewhat tuned out of news the past few days.)

In my estimation, Nadler would not pull a liberal Benghazi. At least I don't think he would. If he is pulling Liberal Benghazi, and dragging this thing out without any hint or inkling of an idea about exactly what he's looking for, then he's going to lose public support fast.

To analogize.. It's like a Mom asking her teenager where he went last night, when she has advance knowledge he went out drinking.
 
Keep in mind: every single attorney hired is a Democrat and all but one donated to Democrat campaigns, only.

This anonymous speculation is why the Democrats will never allow the report to go public.
 
Back
Top Bottom