And that Barr's summary of Mueller's report is a cover up that has been in the
works for long before Mueller turned in his documentation.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211968297

The biggest crime in American history is being reinforced by the largest cover
up in American history.

Mueller will be subpoenaed to testify and Republicans will fight it. I can't see Mueller sitting back and letting Barr lie about his report. Even if Mueller just issued a press release claiming that Barr's report did not represent his report.

People are going to believe Mueller no matter that Republicans control the M$M.

Where the hell is Mueller's voice if he is even close to all the praise that has been thrown out there about how much a straight shooter he is ..

.... with his report. According to ex AG Eric Holder it is standard practice to say
why or why not a person or persons were charged after such an investigation by
a special counsel and his or hers staff.

That Rosenstein stopped Mueller from interviewing Trump. He knew he would be fired.

Indict Rosenstein!

in the real report and that could be why he participated in this non- delivery of the report. Ever since I heard that on Mon I have been wary of trusting Rosensten either.

Stayed on to over see the report instead of leaving when he said he would?

It is a couple little things that were "inappropriate" and possible "obstruction" and when you combine them it leads me to believe that the news pundit was onto something and I do not have the trust in Rosenstein as I once did.

Rosenstein was afraid he would be fired.

look at Jessie Smollett as one example of what people will do when they are afraid of getting canned. I imagine that this fear is all over the W House, if not it should be.

Whitaker and Barr effectively fired Mueller, IMO. A Saturday Night Massacre drawn out over a number of weeks, to avoid scrutiny, as it were. But I think and hope that this truth is too big to hide. I don't think we have heard the last from Mueller, either.

by doing the correct thing and bringing a copy of his report to deliver to Congress?? Who in authority wants their work lied about, and misrepresented? Since Barr will not do the right thing, he should be pushed aside.

Based on what has happened, Mueller is just following DOJ orders and doesn't seem to have any major interest in getting out the full truth If Barrr lied or misrepresented Mueller's findings, Mueller has not said one word, so seems to be either complicit or like I said, a good soldier following orders, regardless if the person that issues them is a criminal. I expect he will tell the truth, as much as Barr hasn't specifically denied him the right to divulge, but doubt he will give us any criminal details on orange assmouth, because he's a good Repug and not as good citizen as I hoped. If Mueller is who we thought, this would not be playing out this way. We really need to see the entire report to see what criminality is being ignored and sanctioned for repug presidents only but Dem president gets impeached for minor nothings.

The time to "get out the full truth" is while he's sitting in front of Rep. Schiff and the rest of the Judiciary Committee. This is a guy who simply does not leak information.

If he has nothing to say either he's found nothing or waiting to be asked.

I'm not getting my hopes up,

Did one solider at Kent State refuse to fire live ammunition at unarmed college students, fuck no, and it was illegal, against the law and they just folowed orders. That is what military does, they don't question the legitimacy, they just do it. That is my huge concern, he was told not to investigate the family or the president and to stop the investigation, so he stopped. He was told there was nothing to see and to write the report that way. It looks to me like he wrote it the way he was told, but included all the documents so we could know the true treachery and legal hairsplitting involved in not charged orange assmouth. That is why Barr is 100% adamant that no one see the documents, that's where the true dirt lies on the criminal pretend president.

Absolutely - "a Saturday Night Massacre drawn out over a number of weeks" - nailed it!
And done in such a way that all we can do is sit here and ask, "W-T-F just happened?"

Keep in mind,Iran/ Contra, Iranian hostages,etc. all Barr cover ups.

Congress is the one to make the decision, not Barr. His name will be Mudd if he covers this one.

I think, belatedly he realized that. His answers in open House testimoney will show what he is.

Did anyone hear Ambassador McFaul talk about what a Republican CongressMan tried to accuse him of? He was not happy.

He was very insulted at the Republican questions.

that White House lawyers haven't seen the Mueller report yet?

Last edited Sat Mar 30, 2019, 11:05 AM - Edit history (1)

28 CFR Section 600.8

(c) Closing documentation. 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.

28 CFR Section 600.9

§600.9

(a) The Attorney General will notify the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for each action—...
(3) Upon conclusion of the Special Counsels investigation, including, 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 in appropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.

(c) The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions. All other releases of information by any Department of Justice employee, including the Special Counsel and staff, concerning matters handled by Special Counsels shall be governed by the generally applicable Departmental guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal investigation, and relevant law.

Hmmmmm

Successfully defended ACA; worked for Clinton and Gore.

Care to explain your "hmmmmmm"?

is about a lot of people here complaining about following the regulations, about who gets the report and how it gets sent to Congress - that were written under a democratic administration. A lot of people here seem to think the regs are a dirty Repug trick. We wrote them.

appointed was repealed and the current law regulating the appointment of Special Prosecutors was enacted.

Starr's investigation lasted many years, had too little in the way of guidelines and constraints, and was very costly to American taxpayers. He wasn't answerable to the AG's office either, but rather to the Republican-controlled Congress.

Those flaws led to "reforms" that now should lead to more reforms.

Allowed to expire.

At least that's what I got out of it. If those were the entire duties of the Attorney General for the Special Prosecutor that Rachel showed last night, I know you're right.

Between these maneuvers and Barr's position that no president would be culpable for obstruction, we see EXACTLY why he was nominated.

barr should have been a conduit at the very most. Just a bureaucratic formality. Not the person who owns, redacts, edits, and decides what is classified for THE THIRD HIGHEST RANKING PERSON IN OUR GOVERNMENT - THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Just saying - this is a ridiculous turn of events but no surprise since the repubicans have tried it before - during Watergate.

"In early 1973 Senate Democrats led the charge to form a special committee to focus on Watergate. While the Senate Watergate Committee was being created, Republican Senator Edward Gurney of Florida belittled the investigation as “one of those political wing-dings that happen every political year.” Ted Stevens, a Republican senator from Alaska, repeated Mr. Ford’s warning that the investigation could become a “political witch hunt,” according to Mr. Kutler.

Meanwhile, the ranking Republican on the Senate Watergate Committee, Howard Baker of Tennessee — a man often lauded for putting principle over party — met with Mr. Nixon to discuss strategy. To “maintain his purity in the Senate,” Mr. Baker didn’t want anyone to know about meeting Mr. Nixon, wrote the White House counsel, John Dean, in a memo before a meeting with Mr. Nixon. Once the hearings started in late spring of 1973, Mr. Baker’s staff leaked information about the committee’s witnesses and plans to Mr. Nixon.

...

Most congressional Republicans rallied around Mr. Nixon when the White House released edited transcripts of those tapes in April 1974 that showed Mr. Nixon scheming with his aides. As the House Judiciary Committee began debating possible impeachment in July, Representative Delbert Latta of Ohio said the evidence failed to prove Mr. Nixon’s direct involvement in Watergate.

...

More Republicans abandoned Mr. Nixon on the obstruction-of-justice charge only after he complied with the Supreme Court’s order on Aug. 5, releasing the “smoking gun” tapes that proved he had ordered a cover-up of the Watergate crimes. Still, many party members of the Judiciary Committee later filed reports arguing that Mr. Nixon was innocent of two of the three articles of impeachment sent to the full House."

History is a hard master when people pay attention to it instead of the spin.

Tried and true just like repubicans always do. They have to cheat to win. Then they have to cheat when they get caught cheating to win.

Read more:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/opinion/watergate-republican-party.html

forget that he's said (may have to check this) he's sending it to the White House next so that they can do executive privilege redactions as well.

All of this before Speaker Pelosi, gets it.

Pisses me the f' off! But what pisses me off more as he's allowed to get away with this shite.

But how can we believe him when his actions since the report was released prove that he lied about how he would handle this just to be approved as AG?

We can't.

He said there were "no plans" to send it to the White House. Plans can change.

Thanks. With all the bullshit they throw at the wall, it's getting easy to "mis-remember" what sticks sometimes.

every single mistake in so doing, lying all along the way, and then he (Mueller) will send a complete copy to Pelosi or Schiff to set the record straight. That would sink Barr's ship pretty well.

See post #10

As William Safire wrote in the 1980's, Barr was nothing more than a "political hack."
And he still is. #coverup

cover up prosecution. He's the mobsters fixer, every crime family has them, the Bush & tRumps crime family has Barr.

Last night I, too, questioned the wisdom of turning over the report to a political appointee of the subject of the investigation. "Them's the rules," they said.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11970706

How can the executive branch be expected to prosecute or check the executive branch

But a special prosecutor under the control of the legislative branch can be misused too. Ken Starr was answerable to the Republican-controlled Congress and went far afield at an astronomical cost to taxpayers.

I think we will need to reform the law again and have a strictly bipartisan commission in charge of receiving the report.

9 Supreme Court justices disagree with you.

And every bureaucrat that actually gets to write and enforce the detailed rules that come from the basic laws that Congress passes. The ACA was like a thousand pages, but the real power was with the bureaucrats who wrote the tens of thousands of pages of actual rules that enforced it.

Summary: there's FAR more power in unelected authorities than elected ones.