Yah, we kinda had that pegged.

????? I have extra.

And there's more where that came from!!

1ST. bag right?

that there was no way for stumpys minions to word the report..positive for the traitor...

If there is another direction you think the a.g. should have taken...let us know..

It could be important...

because Barr pocketed it and provided his own bullshit "summary" of the summary. For all we know, it may have been much clearer but unless Congress gets a copy of it and it is released to the public (or is leaked to the media), then we're stuck with Barr's complete obfuscation of it.

Through the press..through a standup announcement..I don't care how...But he needs to get the word out
whether HIS report has been accurately presented to us...

Will have to see what happens the next couple days with the Barr Congressional testimony showdown tomorrow and Thursday!

posted here - https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212059472

Barr goes first, lies or evades questions then Mueller tells the truth...then what? Impeach Barr?

at that point, as you described it, he will have committed perjury and not only can he be impeached he can be prosecuted too.

damn damn damn Barr

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-complained-that-barrs-letter-did-not-capture-context-of-trump-probe/2019/04/30/d3c8fdb6-6b7b-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.ebcb31826e67



........................The letter made a key request: that Barr release the 448-page report’s introductions and executive summaries, and made some initial suggested redactions for doing so, according to Justice Department officials.
What's in the Mueller report?

A redacted version of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III's report was released to the public on April 18. Here's what's in it. (Brian Monroe, Monica Akhtar/The Washington Post)

Justice Department officials said Tuesday they were taken aback by the tone of Mueller’s letter, and it came as a surprise to them that he had such concerns. Until they received the letter, they believed Mueller was in agreement with them on the process of reviewing the report and redacting certain types of information, a process that took several weeks. Barr has testified to Congress previously that Mueller declined the opportunity to review his four-page letter to lawmakers that distilled the essence of the special counsel’s findings.

In his letter, Mueller wrote that the redaction process “need not delay release of the enclosed materials. Release at this time would alleviate the misunderstandings that have arisen and would answer congressional and public questions about the nature and outcome of our investigation.”

Barr is scheduled to appear Wednesday morning before the Senate Judiciary Committee — a much-anticipated public confrontation between the nation’s top law enforcement official and Democratic lawmakers, where he is likely to be questioned at length about his interactions with Mueller.

A day after the letter was sent, Barr and Mueller spoke by phone for about 15 minutes, according to law enforcement officials.....................................

I was about to post it.

This is interesting:

In their call, Barr also took issue with Mueller calling his letter a “summary,” saying he had never meant his letter to summarize the voluminous report, but instead provide an account of the top conclusions, officials said.

Remember how Rachel Maddow mocked Barr for walking back the 'summary' description? Obviously was after Mueller corrected him.

I try to do "care and feeding" of my LBNs (although sometimes it takes them time to write the full articles)....

No wonder Barr, the coward, wants out of the House hearing.

available here - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142310191#post11

he should be asked is about the letter and if he had an agreement with Trump or anyone else to do exactly that when Muellers report was finally turned in.

before his formal nomination.

Link to tweet

of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

a larger replica of the baby canon!

It still doesn’t explain Mueller not indicting these people for obstruction, not interviewing Trump or Jr.

For those that will inevitably will give the “he goes by the book” , “good soldier”, “straight arrow” argument please explain how you come to this conclusion this based on the actions of Republicans and the FBI and Mueller’s tepid investigation full of“buts”.
The FBIs “earning” Clinton they might be hacked by calling the front desk clerk and leaving a message .

The FBIs “investigation” of Kavanaugh and being just fine with being used politically by Republicans.


I would also like to remind folks that Rosenstein hand picked Mueller for this half-assed investigation.

Because that wasn't his mandate for the investigation. His job was to determine if there was "collusion" between the campaign and Russia. "Obstruction" would be what was going on during the investigation of the collusion and was outside of the scope. The fact that the investigation was being obstructed is something that Congress will be working on. That is basically how they got Nixon.

Interview Trump and Jr which he did not do and that is in the scope of the investigation, does it not?

It’s his job to indict anyone obstructing his investigation because it’s against the law.

That also doesn’t explain the persistent efforts to make Mueller a straight arrow like Comey and McCabe, and Rosenstein who are not straight arrows.

What’s your evidence Mueller is doing anything different than those two corrupted former “straight arrows”?

This not Nixon , this is Russia and Trump today and a Republican Party that is complicit. It took a Republican to finally decide to talk that nabbed Nixon, and that was because Dean realized he was going to be Nixon’s fall guy. Nixon said give the public some low hanging fruit and they will be happy. John Dean cracked.

You may have missed all the attempts at the in-person interviews that were made with Drumpf, where Ghouliani thwarted it every step of the way. And IIRC, only written responses submitted.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/14/politics/trump-interview-mueller-request/index.html

Of course the opportunity is there for the House to bring them all in so they can perjure themselves.

Regarding Jr., Mueller apparently focused specifically on "campaign finance" & Russia vs "collusion" for him and didn't feel there was enough regarding the campaign finance angle.

Interesting take by Ari Melber on that here - https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari/watch/ari-melber-why-mueller-did-not-charge-donald-trump-jr-1498692675608



No, his "job" is what is set forth when he was appointed as a "Special Counsel" with whatever scope he is given- https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2010-title28-vol2/pdf/CFR-2010-title28-vol2-sec600-1.pdf

He can and did eventually farm out things outside of his scope - like Manafort's Ukraine malfeasance and Cohen's hush money drama. And note that he doesn't personally "indict". A grand jury does that.



I don't think I have said anything of the sort. All of these individuals are Republicans. However some of them come from a career in the federal government (as I did) and there is a certain bureaucratic sense of purpose that gets pounded into your head when you are a career type vs an appointee.



Again - I have said nothing of the sort. However I do know that Mueller served as FBI Director beyond the normal 10-year term, which had been imposed by law after Hoover. I.e., President Obama, a Democrat, felt secure enough in the man to request that Congress extend his appointment for an additional 2 years, which they did without question.



This is conspiracy and obstruction and coverup. You had a "break-in" to Democratic party "files" (whether "paper" or "electronic" ) by GOP operatives. The GOP were just as "complicit" back then as they are now (although they had less crazy loons like the Gym Jordans or Devon Nunes then), and 2 years passed between the break-in and the hearings, and all sorts of GOP higher-ups (e.g., Mitchell, Ehrlichman, and Haldeman) ended up in prison. Both events were related to and happened during a Presidential election and both had a President knee-deep in keeping it under wraps. But what is happening now is "Watergate on steroids" with the introduction of foreign actors as the "burglars" with people like the Nixon-tatooed Stone as a go-between now, being not much different from the speedo-swim trunk wearing Liddy was back in the '70s.

usual dung.

Mueller can have Giuliani arrested for obstructing.
It’s not rocket science.

”Of course the opportunity is there for the House to bring them all in so they can perjure themselves. “

Oh sure, they’ll never use the I can’t recall and plead the 5th 🙄

”No, his "job" is what is set forth when he was appointed as a "Special Counsel" with whatever scope he is given- .... He can and did eventually farm out things outside of his scope - like Manafort's Ukraine malfeasance and Cohen's hush money drama. And note that he doesn't personally "indict". A grand jury does that.”

.

Well thanks tor he condescending “lesson” on indictments.

His job is to uphold the law. As you note he had zero problem indicting the others for crimes unrelated to Russian collusion.

So now he can go picking and choosing who he might bust? If so, then he also has the option to break the scope to stop this maniac from destroying the country. Your premise just fell apart.

Also I never said you stated Mueller is a straight arrow , though it’s been said many times on DU.

No, you and many others keep insisting Barr stopped the investigation, that Rosenstein must have directed him off the path etc
But that’s not what the evidence shows.

So I’m still waiting for you to explain the perpetual implications that Mueller is a straight up arrow and quit dancing around the issue.

He went off the scope and thus your “However some of them come from a career in the federal government (as I did) and there is a certain bureaucratic sense of purpose that gets pounded into your head when you are a career type vs an appointee. “ also is now debunked by you.

He either goes by the book or not.

He decided to bust low level crimes but heaven forbid he stops Trump from obstructing. What a load! Lol! Get real.


Btw Watergate doesn’t even come close to the crimes and corruption committed here it’s ridiculous to even make the comparison and, as I pointed out, there were Republicans back then willing to talk, I even gave you the name John Dean, but there are none now.

which is completely off the wall.

Go look up what a "grand jury" does and quit with the ridiculous baiting about "straight arrows" and other nonsense.

Check this out for what Mueller did when he was starting his investigation and take note (and no he was not "personally" issuing indictments nor had the authority) -

I hope you are watching (or at least listening) to the Barr hearing right now (it just started up again) and get up to speed..

Trump obstructed justice.

He covered up for Trump.

"Context, nature, and substance" kinda covers it all! (Especially "substance"...) Many people only see the headline, and the truth is ill served when the headline understates what's actually conveyed in the article.

to watch..

That since Mueller is still a DOJ employee, that department has to set a time for his Congressional testimony. They, and tRump, have said they have no problem with him testifying, but have so far stonewalled on setting a time for that to happen.