BARR

[seacoaster]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

[dislaxxic]

Seems that Mueller isn't the only one concerned about press reports...it's now part of Fred Flintstone's "rationale" for his boss's behavior... What the heck??

'Barr was asked specifically about Trump’s demand that his White House counsel Don McGahn publicly deny a report that Trump had previously ordered that McGahn fire the special counsel.

The attorney general claimed that the conduct didn’t amount to criminal obstruction because it was plausible that Trump was concerned with spinning the press rather than impeding the investigation. Barr argued that Trump may have been frustrated that the New York Times had mischaracterized exactly what the President had ordered McGahn to do, because, in Barr’s telling, the President may have merely been seeking for the removal of Mueller on the basis of alleged conflicts, rather than a full termination of investigation.

“As the report indicates,” Barr claimed, “it could also have been the case that he was primarily concerned about press reports.”

Furthermore, Barr argued, Trump knew that McGahn had already been interviewed by the special counsel’s staff “weeks before.”

But Mueller’s report engaged with these theories and expressed deep skepticism about them."

"Spinning the press rather than impeding the investigation." Wait....WHAT??

..

[old salt]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

[seacoaster]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

You expected better; so you mock his former service. That doesn't sound right for tough ex-service guys like you and C&S.

But it is perfect; you sound almost exactly like Giuliani. This is the perfect sync'ing up: your sophistry on behalf of Trump and Flynn and the other "process criminals" with Giuliani's fetishism for the President. How proud you must be.

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 25 did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of [the Special Counsel's] Office's work and conclusions."

This is a polite way of saying "your summary is poorly done, and grossly incomplete." It's probably also a polite way of indicating that Mueller thinks the summary is Barr's crossing the line to a complete political hack, toadying to the President's commands.

[dislaxxic]

That's just flat wrong, Salty. As we often say around here, you're welcome to your own opinion, but you're NOT welcome to your own facts. You know perfectly well that Mueller was working to stay within the DoJ guidelines regarding indictment of a sitting president. He gave a report to the AG that was intended to be analyzed and pursued up the chain of command. We will likely discover a LOT more about this as a result of today's Post and NYT reporting. It's disingenuous in the extreme to read that part of the Report that's been made public and NOT conclude that there was nothing remotely approaching a "total exoneration". Quite the opposite in fact, the roadmap, in the form of numerous (10 is it?) examples of possible obstruction make it quite clear that we have not arrived even CLOSE to the full picture on this matter.

..

[Matnum PI]

Opinion piece from James Comey. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/opin ... imony.html

[cradleandshoot]

That's just flat wrong, Salty. As we often say around here, you're welcome to your own opinion, but you're NOT welcome to your own facts. You know perfectly well that Mueller was working to stay within the DoJ guidelines regarding indictment of a sitting president. He gave a report to the AG that was intended to be analyzed and pursued up the chain of command. We will likely discover a LOT more about this as a result of today's Post and NYT reporting. It's disingenuous in the extreme to read that part of the Report that's been made public and NOT conclude that there was nothing remotely approaching a "total exoneration". Quite the opposite in fact, the roadmap, in the form of numerous (10 is it?) examples of possible obstruction make it quite clear that we have not arrived even CLOSE to the full picture on this matter.

..

Mueller is going to testify in front of Congress sometime this month. We will finally get to hear it strait from the horses mouth. I understand Old Salts point. If Mueller had something to say about his investigation why didn't just make his specific findings and not findings clear for everyone? He punted it over to Barr to interpret what he discovered. It should help immensely when Mueller can set the record strait.

[OCanada]

Wrong on virtually all counts.

He followed his regulations. Barr lied about what he said mans has been lying ever since. RM trusted his AG to have integrity and not lie or lead a cover up. That was his mistake.

[cradleandshoot]

Wrong on virtually all counts.

He followed his regulations. Barr lied about what he said mans has been lying ever since. RM trusted his AG to have integrity and not lie or lead a cover up. That was his mistake.

Mueller is the only person that can clear the air on this matter. Barr just flat out lying makes no sense. There is zero chance Mueller would not just say he is lying. Which apparently is what he is now doing. If Barr is lying here, that would make him one of the dumbest people on the planet.

[old salt]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

You expected better; so you mock his former service. That doesn't sound right for tough ex-service guys like you and C&S.

But it is perfect; you sound almost exactly like Giuliani. This is the perfect sync'ing up: your sophistry on behalf of Trump and Flynn and the other "process criminals" with Giuliani's fetishism for the President. How proud you must be.

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 25 did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of [the Special Counsel's] Office's work and conclusions."

This is a polite way of saying "your summary is poorly done, and grossly incomplete." It's probably also a polite way of indicating that Mueller thinks the summary is Barr's crossing the line to a complete political hack, toadying to the President's commands.

So it's only appropriate to (constantly) mention Mueller's military service, to establish his bona fides, when it reflects favorably upon him.

But it's verboten to mention it when criticizing or questioning him ? For 2+ years we heard Mueller doesn't leak or spin.
Then he writes a letter, designed to be leaked at a strategic time, complaining about not being able to spin his report.

[seacoaster]

"...designed to be leaked at a strategic time...."

Please. Did you have lunch with Ignatius today or something?

[ggait]

Barr asks Mueller why didn't just pick up a phone and call him and instead put his concerns in writing. "Hey Bob, what's with the letter?"

So weird from Mueller.

It is almost like he's acting as if he doesn't trust Barr anymore and needed his objections written down so they wouldn't be buried.

All these forking lawyers with their notes and memos to file!

[youthathletics]

Barr called Mueller's bluff with his quick turnaround recap of the 400 page doc. Mueller had hoped someone else would do the dirty work, since he could not find anything worthy of even recommending or suggesting criminal activity to further take place. Otherwise, he would have been quite frank about it.

SC had the green light to do as it pleased. Section C gave him complete discretion to prosecute....even the son who met in the hotel for OpResearch is free and clear.

[foreverlax]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

Nope...you have no idea what Mueller's reasoning was for the decision(s) he made AND it's not Mueller's job.

Congress or the AG are the ones who decided...but you know all of this.

[cradleandshoot]

Barr called Mueller's bluff with his quick turnaround recap of the 400 page doc. Mueller had hoped someone else would do the dirty work, since he could not find anything worthy of even recommending or suggesting criminal activity to further take place. Otherwise, he would have been quite frank about it.

SC had the green light to do as it pleased. Section C gave him complete discretion to prosecute....even the son who met in the hotel for OpResearch is free and clear.

Mueller will soon have his chance to explain this entire kerfluffle. When I read over and over from the usual jackwagons here that don't know their rump from a hole in the ground that Barr is lying... One thing I do know for certain... Barr is a much more skilled attorney than any of the fan lax knuckleheads that pretend to understand the law more than Barr does. If you people REALLY think he would perjure himself... you are even dumber than I thought you all were. Do you all REALLY think an attorney with Barrs experience is that stupid? I sure don't. The truth will be revealed when Mueller testifies. I am guessing he may, just possibly be asked about Barrs interpretation of his report. Stay tuned boys and girls for the thrilling finale.

[old salt]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

Nope...you have no idea what Mueller's reasoning was for the decision(s) he made AND it's not Mueller's job.

Congress or the AG are the ones who decided...but you know all of this.

Like any US Atty, Mueller had the power to bring indictments, but he couldn't even provide an opinion on whether or not the main target of his obstruction investigation broke the law ? Barr & Rosenstein didn't constrain him & we now know that neither did the OLC quidance.

What was his reasoning ? Divine for us, the reasoning behind these weasel words.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... t-followed

Barr had to handle Mueller punting the obstruction decision to him. Mueller refused to make a decision on the obstruction charge, writing in the report that "a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment."

Why decline to make "a traditional prosecutorial judgement" ? Might he have been happy with Barr & Rosenstein making the judgement (& taking the heat) & he just wanted to control the narrative ?

[cradleandshoot]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

Nope...you have no idea what Mueller's reasoning was for the decision(s) he made AND it's not Mueller's job.

Congress or the AG are the ones who decided...but you know all of this.

Holy sheepdip forever... you just accidentley swerved into some bona fide truth there bucko... none of us have any idea what Muellers reasoning was for his decision. The one thing being presented here from some folks is that Barr is... quote on of our posters here... "a lying POS" i only wonder if it comes to pass that Barr is not the lying POS he is being made out to be here will any of you dickheads have the balls to apologize to him? My instincts tell me no... none of you jack wagons will ever have the balls to admit you were wrong and slander and degraded the man. Yall better hope you are right. If you are wrong I will never stop busting your chops over this. If I am wrong I expect the same. One difference... I will admit it if I am wrong. That is something NONE of you will ever do.

[foreverlax]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

Nope...you have no idea what Mueller's reasoning was for the decision(s) he made AND it's not Mueller's job.

Congress or the AG are the ones who decided...but you know all of this.

Holy sheepdip forever... you just accidentley swerved into some bona fide truth there bucko... none of us have any idea what Muellers reasoning was for his decision. The one thing being presented here from some folks is that Barr is... quote on of our posters here... "a lying POS" i only wonder if it comes to pass that Barr is not the lying POS he is being made out to be here will any of you dickheads have the balls to apologize to him? My instincts tell me no... none of you jack wagons will ever have the balls to admit you were wrong and slander and degraded the man. Yall better hope you are right. If you are wrong I will never stop busting your chops over this. If I am wrong I expect the same. One difference... I will admit it if I am wrong. That is something NONE of you will ever do.

"Accidently swerved"...hardly. I learned early on in my career that when someone asks me a question that requires facts, I better have facts. I am still in the camp of we have no idea how much we don't know, so I'll hold my opinion until all the facts are in.

I don't know if Barr is a liar, in this case or anywhere else..I do know he is a master a word chess.

Not sure your who your blah blah blah was aimed at so I'll let them age....

[cradleandshoot]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

Nope...you have no idea what Mueller's reasoning was for the decision(s) he made AND it's not Mueller's job.

Congress or the AG are the ones who decided...but you know all of this.

Holy sheepdip forever... you just accidentley swerved into some bona fide truth there bucko... none of us have any idea what Muellers reasoning was for his decision. The one thing being presented here from some folks is that Barr is... quote on of our posters here... "a lying POS" i only wonder if it comes to pass that Barr is not the lying POS he is being made out to be here will any of you dickheads have the balls to apologize to him? My instincts tell me no... none of you jack wagons will ever have the balls to admit you were wrong and slander and degraded the man. Yall better hope you are right. If you are wrong I will never stop busting your chops over this. If I am wrong I expect the same. One difference... I will admit it if I am wrong. That is something NONE of you will ever do.

"Accidently swerved"...hardly. I learned early on in my career that when someone asks me a question that requires facts, I better have facts. I am still in the camp of we have no idea how much we don't know, so I'll hold my opinion until all the facts are in.

I don't know if Barr is a liar, in this case or anywhere else..I do know he is a master a word chess.

Not sure your who your blah blah blah was aimed at so I'll let them age....

"Mueller, a former FBI director, concluded there was insufficient evidence to show a criminal conspiracy. Mueller opted not to make a conclusion on whether Trump committed obstruction of justice, but pointedly did not exonerate him. Barr has said he and Rod Rosenstein, the Justice Department’s No. 2 official, then determined based on Mueller’s findings there was insufficient evidence to establish that Trump committed criminal obstruction." This is where my blah, blah, blah was going. This is why Mueller needs to testify ASAP. Do you agree that Barr is a lying POS? Was he basing his determination off of what Mueller concluded. Mueller is the guy who effed up the summation of his own damn 2 year investigation. Read those words very slowly skippy… THEN DETERMINED BASED ON MUELLERS FINDINGS THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THAT TRUMP COMMITED CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION. That does not mean Trump is not a jerk that probably threw every monkey wrench he could into the investigation. This means Mueller has to do what he should have done from the damn start.. explain what the hell his investigation found outside of a couple of flunkies associated with Trump. Why the hell Mueller threw this onto the AGs lap is beyond me? I could see him having a joint press conference with the AG This was his baby and at the most critical moment he turned it over to someone else... I DON'T GET IT.

[Typical Lax Dad]

"Ranger Bob needs to stop sweating cable news spin & letting the NYT/WP start fights which involve him.
The public can read his report & draw their own conclusions.
If Ranger Bob thought Trump should be impeached for obstruction, why didn't he just say so in his report ?
Marines & Rangers don't whine about context."

This, I once thought, was beneath you.

After 2+ years of hero worship, Mueller found himself with a 4th & 1, ....& he punted.

He let this drag on for over 2 years then didn't have the courage to clearly, unequivocally provide his opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, or committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Based on the NYT report, Barr & Rosenstein apparently expected him to.

For 2+ years, he put the country through this , only to give us inconclusive weasel words on obstruction of justice.
I expected better.

Nope...you have no idea what Mueller's reasoning was for the decision(s) he made AND it's not Mueller's job.

Congress or the AG are the ones who decided...but you know all of this.

Holy sheepdip forever... you just accidentley swerved into some bona fide truth there bucko... none of us have any idea what Muellers reasoning was for his decision. The one thing being presented here from some folks is that Barr is... quote on of our posters here... "a lying POS" i only wonder if it comes to pass that Barr is not the lying POS he is being made out to be here will any of you dickheads have the balls to apologize to him? My instincts tell me no... none of you jack wagons will ever have the balls to admit you were wrong and slander and degraded the man. Yall better hope you are right. If you are wrong I will never stop busting your chops over this. If I am wrong I expect the same. One difference... I will admit it if I am wrong. That is something NONE of you will ever do.

"Accidently swerved"...hardly. I learned early on in my career that when someone asks me a question that requires facts, I better have facts. I am still in the camp of we have no idea how much we don't know, so I'll hold my opinion until all the facts are in.

I don't know if Barr is a liar, in this case or anywhere else..I do know he is a master a word chess.

Not sure your who your blah blah blah was aimed at so I'll let them age....

"Mueller, a former FBI director, concluded there was insufficient evidence to show a criminal conspiracy. Mueller opted not to make a conclusion on whether Trump committed obstruction of justice, but pointedly did not exonerate him. Barr has said he and Rod Rosenstein, the Justice Department’s No. 2 official, then determined based on Mueller’s findings there was insufficient evidence to establish that Trump committed criminal obstruction." This is where my blah, blah, blah was going. This is why Mueller needs to testify ASAP. Do you agree that Barr is a lying POS? Was he basing his determination off of what Mueller concluded. Mueller is the guy who effed up the summation of his own damn 2 year investigation. Read those words very slowly skippy… THEN DETERMINED BASED ON MUELLERS FINDINGS THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THAT TRUMP COMMITED CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION. That does not mean Trump is not a jerk that probably threw every monkey wrench he could into the investigation. This means Mueller has to do what he should have done from the damn start.. explain what the hell his investigation found outside of a couple of flunkies associated with Trump. Why the hell Mueller threw this onto the AGs lap is beyond me? I could see him having a joint press conference with the AG This was his baby and at the most critical moment he turned it over to someone else... I DON'T GET IT.

Ain’t that the truth!!