Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Robert Mueller submits Russia report


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Valid point;  I see this ends with 'Highway';   There is (or at least was),  a user called 'Highway'.

Are you the same user or are you using multiple sign-in user names? 

It's the same poster. He discussed this issue back during the '16 campaign when the Off-Topics were really buzzing with activity. He stated that he has/had several accounts, but never got very specific as to the "why" other than it was due to some message board battles occurring long ago that resulted in accounts being banned. 

He once stated that he now (or at the time) had at least 4 active accounts. One I believe was banned but I can't recall that name. Then there's Highway and TalkTalk. He claimed that there was another one that he posted under elsewhere on the board but wanted it to be a secret. 

It all sounded like a lot of childish BS to me, but, as a man once said, "whatever gets you through the night."

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

It all sounded like a lot of childish BS to me, but, as a man once said, "whatever gets you through the night."

JS119124222_Donald-Trump-phone-conversat

"Guy sounds like some kind of a kook . . . Oh, hi, John Barron here."

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

It's the same poster. He discussed this issue back during the '16 campaign when the Off-Topics were really buzzing with activity. He stated that he has/had several accounts, but never got very specific as to the "why" other than it was due to some message board battles occurring long ago that resulted in accounts being banned. 

He once stated that he now (or at the time) had at least 4 active accounts. One I believe was banned but I can't recall that name. Then there's Highway and TalkTalk. He claimed that there was another one that he posted under elsewhere on the board but wanted it to be a secret. 

It all sounded like a lot of childish BS to me, but, as a man once said, "whatever gets you through the night."

Thanks for that info.   Well at least he isn't trying to represent multiple users  (unless he is really confused,,,, since he ended his talktalk123 post with 'Highway').    

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

He once stated that he now (or at the time) had at least 4 active accounts. One I believe was banned but I can't recall that name. Then there's Highway and TalkTalk. He claimed that there was another one that he posted under elsewhere on the board but wanted it to be a secret. 

It all sounded like a lot of childish BS to me, but, as a man once said, "whatever gets you through the night."

I bet I'm right about who it is too. ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2019 at 9:09 AM, Arturo said:

FALSE!!!  Dozens of indictments, a number of convictions, several guilty pleas is not nothing.  The WH and the AG are trying to bury the Mueller Report, so we may never know the extent of the "nothing" that was found.  But your side is hollering this false narrative.

I want to read all 300 pages of this thing myself. Well, actually, I was going to get 15 people together and have each take 20 pages and a yellow laundry marker and go to town. Probably lots of it is dry legalese, but I am sure there is something substantial in there, especially on the subject of obstruction. I don't see how the Justice Dept. can deny Congress full access to the report.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some on Mueller’s Team Say Report Was More Damaging Than Barr Revealed

 

WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MovieMadness said:

He is probably back in Moscow by now.

Not only that but at least now we also understand why you refuse to let anyone know where you live, MM. It's the first step to finding out where you come from. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, TomJH said:

Some on Mueller’s Team Say Report Was More Damaging Than Barr Revealed

 

WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html

Philip RuckerVerified account @PhilipRucker 17h17 hours ago

 
 

Just in:

Mueller’s evidence on obstruction was alarming and significant — “much more acute than Barr suggested,” per one source.

There was “immediate displeasure” among special counsel team members.

WaPo matches NYT scoop tonight —>

  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

:unsure:

Seth AbramsonVerified account @SethAbramson 40m40 minutes ago

 
 

BREAKING NEWS (from NBC NEWS): Multiple Members of Special Counsel Mueller's Team Consider

the "Evidence on Collusion" to Be "Very Compelling"

================================================

....

“There are members of Mueller’s team who are frustrated that William Barr stepped in and cleared the president on obstruction when Robert Mueller didn’t do that.”

“The intent was to allow Congress and the public to make their own decision about the evidence,” Dilanian said.

 

Dilanian also revealed new reporting that some on the special counsel’s team are frustrated by how evidence of collusion was represented.

“We’re hearing from a separate U.S. official that some members of the Mueller team say that the evidence on collusion, while not establishing a criminal conspiracy, is actually very compelling.

“Some of it may be classified, but to the extent we get to see it, Mueller’s report talks about those contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia, and

raises the issue as to whether the Trump campaign was manipulated by a sophisticated Russian intelligence operation,” Dilanian added.

“We need to see the report. ......

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/nbcs-ken-dilanian-reports-that-members-of-muellers-team-think-evidence-of-collusion-is-very-compelling/

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The “Reputational Interests” of William Barr

(& cover-up history)

 

".......Barr wrote that he would bowdlerize the report in accord with certain criteria: he would black out classified and grand-jury material,

though Congress, if not the public, IS entitled to see grand-jury proceedings, owing to statute and legal precedent, including in the case of Watergate.

Then he imposed a novel and vague category for excision: he would protect the “reputational interests of peripheral third parties.” As for what those “reputational interests” are, who the third parties (as opposed to the first and second parties) are, and what, precisely, “peripheral” means, Barr has appointed himself the sole authority to decide.

The more the story unfolds, the deeper Barr’s interference appears to be....

Barr’s effort to discredit the Mueller investigation should have brought to mind the not-so-distant history of his first stint as Attorney General, under George H. W. Bush. In 1992, just as Bush was leaving office, he issued, with Barr’s support, pardons for six Reagan Administration officials ...........

 

Walsh, who was, interestingly, like Robert Mueller, a consummately professional Republican who believed in the rule of law. Bush dismissed Walsh’s probe as “the criminalization of policy differences,” and the pardons effectively killed it. Walsh reacted with tempered bitterness, divulging in a public statement that Bush was, in fact, a subject of his investigation, and that the materials connected with the Weinberger case included “evidence of a conspiracy among the highest-ranking Reagan Administration officials to lie to Congress and the American public.”

The episode was a textbook lesson on how to short-circuit an independent counsel’s investigation and suppress damning evidence that investigators had uncovered—and William Barr was in the middle of it. .......

 

Richardson refused to countenance a self-serving edit of a transcript designed to exonerate the Nixon White House; Barr has issued a skewed account of the Mueller report, which has permitted the Trump White House to declare itself exonerated. The fact that Barr has since promised a timely release of the report to Congress and the public, but in a version redacted as he sees fit, only underscores the contrast with Richardson.

But there is more in the history of Watergate that clarifies the potentially disastrous role that Barr is playing. .......

 

The Nixon strategy of delay, redaction, and misdirection—despite its failure in 1974, and the passage of decades—survives in Barr’s defense of Trump, though the roles have changed.

Playing the part of Nixon is Barr himself, trying to sell the public and the Congress on an edited version not of White House tape transcripts but of a special counsel’s report. .....

 

Nixon said. “We’re going to protect our people if we can.” Barr is trying to disprove the Nixon-era adage that “it’s not the crime, it’s the coverup” that gets you in the end.

He is also upholding, on behalf of Trump, Nixon’s doctrine, stated years after he left office: “When the President does it, that means it is not illegal.”

Whatever short-term gains Barr makes in defending Trump, he’s cementing his “reputational interests” in history."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-reputational-interests-of-william-barr?utm_medium=social&utm_brand=tny&mbid=social_twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_social-type=owned

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lawmakers get first crack at Barr post-Mueller

Attorney General William Barr is set to testify publicly before the House and Senate on Tuesday and Wednesday, giving Democrats an opportunity to raise the pressure on him to release special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.

Barr is expected to face questions about his handling of the Mueller investigation and report when he testifies on the Trump administration’s fiscal 2020 budget request.

First, Barr will face a small group of lawmakers on the House Appropriations subcommittee with oversight of the Justice Department, a panel chaired by Rep. José Serrano (D-N.Y.) that boasts seven Democrats and four Republicans.

The lawmakers are set to hit Barr hard over the Mueller report.......

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/437936-lawmakers-get-first-crack-at-barr-post-mueller

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MovieMadness said:

Too bad, this story has petered out for the Democrats.

That was Barr's plan was it not?  To keep the truth of the full report from the American people.  Or the American sheep should I say.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

That was Barr's plan was it not?  To keep the truth of the full report from the American people.  Or the American sheep should I say.

It appears you believe there is very damaging info to Trump or Trump officials in the full report that Barr is trying to suppress.     Let's assume that is true.

Is Mueller and Rosenstein part of the 'fix'?   Rosenstein said he was saying on until the job was done.    Mueller has a reputation for being above board;      Was all of 'that' just part of a pre-planned cover-up?    I.e. Mueller and Rosenstein just appeared to be doing their duty,  but their intent all along was to keep finding from going public (or even to members of Congress?).

If Mueller and Rosenstein know there is 'juice' in the report that Barr is trying to suppress,  why haven't they come forward?      

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

It appears you believe there is very damaging info to Trump or Trump officials in the full report that Barr is trying to suppress.     Let's assume that is true.

Is Mueller and Rosenstein part of the 'fix'?   Rosenstein said he was saying on until the job was done.    Mueller has a reputation for being above board;      Was all of 'that' just part of a pre-planned cover-up?    I.e. Mueller and Rosenstein just appeared to be doing their duty,  but their intent all along was to keep finding from going public (or even to members of Congress?).

If Mueller and Rosenstein know there is 'juice' in the report that Barr is trying to suppress,  why haven't they come forward?      

 

Those are pretty big assumptions all around.  My point is that the Trumpists are content NOT to see the report AT ALL as they have Barr's summary which they LIKE.  Hence the talking point that the Mueller report has 'petered out.'

Well, it may just peter out if it disappears and no one actually gets to see it.  Let's see the exoneration!!!

And while on that subject let's see the tax returns if they are so innocent and without conflictions and the school reports if they are so glowing!  How many years did we hear the GOP crow about Hillary's deleted emails.  Mueller spends two years on a report about Russian interference and no one can see it because it suits Trump's narrative?  What a joke.

And Mueller and Rosenstein are by-the-book employees of the DOJ.  I trust their honesty but that does not mean they are going to start going to the press for interviews.  Patience grasshopper.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

And Mueller and Rosenstein are by-the-book employees of the DOJ.  I trust their honesty but that does not mean they are going to start going to the press for interviews.  Patience grasshopper.

Well surprise \ surprise;  we have the same view of 'this'.     

But as it relates to patience:    to me you need to practice some also.    If Mueller and Rosenstein are by-the-book employees of DOJ,    I trust that they will eventually speak-out if Barr continues to be successful in his attempt to suppress info  Mueller and Rosenstein believe should be released.

I.e. we all need to be patience to see how this plays out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jamesjazzguitar said:

Well surprise \ surprise;  we have the same view of 'this'.     

But as it relates to patience:    to me you need to practice some also.    If Mueller and Rosenstein are by-the-book employees of DOJ,    I trust that they will eventually speak-out if Barr is successful in his attempt to suppress info  Mueller and Rosenstein believe should be released.

I.e. we all need to be patience to see how this plays out. 

Mueller figures that he will be called to testify and if he is asked the right questions we will then learn if he was dissatisfied with Barr's representation of his findings.  But my guess, and it is a guess, is that Mueller will just keep his mouth shut unless asked.

Having said that I agree with Adam Schiff that there is plenty of PUBLIC evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians.  I take it that Mueller thought that he did not have enough of a criminal case with the evidence he had.   But reading what he did gather could be very damaging to Trump politically - moreso than sleeping with a porn star.  Compromising yourself with a foreign adversary to win an election as Schiff said "is not okay."  If it was, where would this type of shenanigans end?

My point all along about the Trump Tower meeting was that the Russians were never ever going to show up with stolen emails.  All they needed from the Trumps was a "I love it" to know that they were on the same page and that there would be a quid pro quo - which arguably we have seen as well with the shift on Russian sanctions and Trump trying to give cover to Putin at every turn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...