Under pressure, U.S. Justice Department defends handling of Mueller report

[elmrfudd]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Actually, no they don't.

The AG is NOT legally bound to redact grand jury material.

That's a fake excuse.

Deal with the facts.

You're not fooling anyone here really.

It's obvious that you also realize that there is dark damaging to 45 stuff in that report. You want it suppressed. I consider that un-American. Are we an open democracy or a dictatorship by an unhinged authoritarian demagogue. Release it all to congress!

settle down bruce, emotions are making you unhinged

 

 

The Attorney General’s second letter regarding Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report stated that the report will be released to Congress and the public after Barr and his staff have made “redactions that are required.” He lists four categories for redaction: (1) grand jury material; (2) material that potentially compromises intelligence source and methods; (3) material that could affect “ongoing matters,” including ones the Special Counsel has referred to other parts of the Justice Department; and (4) “information that would unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties.” While any one of those categories might be interpreted broadly enough to conceal large swaths of Mueller’s findings, grand jury material is one that permits Barr great discretion in defining its scope.

In his first letter, Barr highlighted Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), which provides that an attorney for the government must not disclose a “matter occurring before the grand jury”—though with some relevant exceptions that Barr did not discuss. Many reasons exist for grand jury secrecy – to prevent flight of a target, to insure deliberations free from interference, to prevent witness tampering, to promote candor from witnesses, and to protect the reputations of those under investigation who are not ultimately charged. See United States v. Proctor & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677, 681, n. 6 (1959). As an “attorney for the government,” Barr has a legal obligation to comply with the rule.

[elmrfudd]

12 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I guess we have to take your word  your opinions on TV are unbiased.

I'mm not the one making claims wrapped in self righteous blather 

 

but we are getting off topic. so lets end it here

Edited April 5, 2019 by elmrfudd

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, riclag said:

Special counsel's team may have misrepresented emails during probe, GOP senators warn

https://www.foxnews.com

Mueller hired to many Trump haters! I often wondered why Mr. Trump called them "12 angry dems". He has access to it all.

 

 

That's the beauty of political correctness. Trump bad, everything he has done and will do bad. Hilary and Bill good - everything they have and will do good and anything not good must be forgiven or swept under a carpet.

 

And all the politically correct liberals know this is only fair and right because all fair and right people thinks so and no other opinion must be tolerated.

 

Reality, justice, - just words these days!

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

settle down bruce, emotions are making you unhinged

 

 

The Attorney General’s second letter regarding Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report stated that the report will be released to Congress and the public after Barr and his staff have made “redactions that are required.” He lists four categories for redaction: (1) grand jury material; (2) material that potentially compromises intelligence source and methods; (3) material that could affect “ongoing matters,” including ones the Special Counsel has referred to other parts of the Justice Department; and (4) “information that would unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties.” While any one of those categories might be interpreted broadly enough to conceal large swaths of Mueller’s findings, grand jury material is one that permits Barr great discretion in defining its scope.

In his first letter, Barr highlighted Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), which provides that an attorney for the government must not disclose a “matter occurring before the grand jury”—though with some relevant exceptions that Barr did not discuss. Many reasons exist for grand jury secrecy – to prevent flight of a target, to insure deliberations free from interference, to prevent witness tampering, to promote candor from witnesses, and to protect the reputations of those under investigation who are not ultimately charged. See United States v. Proctor & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677, 681, n. 6 (1959). As an “attorney for the government,” Barr has a legal obligation to comply with the rule.

Again the grand jury info CAN be released to congress.

It's a simple process.

But 45 lackey Barr does NOT want to release it.

So the people smell a coverup and they are correct.

Quote

Why Barr's Delay In Releasing The Mueller Report Is Unprecedented And Unreasonable

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2019/03/31/why-barrs-delay-in-releasing-the-mueller-report-is-unprecedented-and-unreasonable/#3d8db3be4a40

[Jingthing]

12 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

actually, you understand nothing. all the while, berating people who disagree with you and slinging

insults on those who disagree with your biased opinions from a pseudo intellectual self righteous perch.

 

that is the true dark reality

We'll have to agree to disagree on such matters.

I see 45 as a wanna be dictator that is an existential threat to American democracy.

I will never accept him as just another bad president.

He's the worst president ever. 

I am not hiding my bias. I think it is well reasoned.

I would suggest that if you're trying to color your POV as objective that nobody will ever believe you, so why even bother? It doesn't give your POV more credibility. It gives it less. 

Edited April 5, 2019 by Jingthing

[elmrfudd]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Again the grand jury info CAN be released to congress.

It's a simple process.

But 45 lackey Barr does NOT want to release it.

So the people smell a coverup and they are correct.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2019/03/31/why-barrs-delay-in-releasing-the-mueller-report-is-unprecedented-and-unreasonable/#3d8db3be4a40

no, your opinion of the lackey nonsense is baseless.

 

 

so is the cover up ridiculous assumption.

 

 

but lets stop the bickering and when it does come out you can whine about lackeys and coverups till you are blue in the face.

and the media will go along with you.

 

 

[elmrfudd]

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

We'll have to agree to disagree on such matters.

I see 45 as a wanna be dictator that is an existential threat to American democracy.

I will never accept him as just another bad president.

He's the worst president ever. 

I am not hiding my bias. I think it is well reasoned.

I would suggest that if you're trying to color your POV as objective that nobody will ever believe you, so why even bother? It doesn't give your POV more credibility. It gives it less. 

no less than yours of course. any way you try to justify it.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, elmrfudd said:

no, your opinion of the lackey nonsense is baseless.

 

 

so is the cover up ridiculous assumption.

 

 

but lets stop the bickering and when it does come out you can whine about lackeys and coverups till you are blue in the face.

and the media will go along with you.

 

 

If it comes out redacted to congress, it won't have come out. You are supporting a heavily redacted release to congress. That is not good enough for congress and that is not good enough for the vast majority of American people. 

 

Of course Barr is a lackey. That's why 45 picked him. That's all out in the open. 

Edited April 5, 2019 by Jingthing

[elmrfudd]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

If it comes out redacted to congress, it won't have come out. You are supporting a heavily redacted release to congress. That is not good enough for congress and that is not good enough for the vast majority of American people. 

again, you don't even know what is or isn't redacted or what the report says, you merely assume the worst to feed the ridiculous bias.

 

you do not speak for the vast majority.

 

we will end it at that

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, elmrfudd said:

again, you don't even know what is or isn't redacted or what the report says, you merely assume the worst to feed the ridiculous bias.

 

you do not speak for the vast majority.

 

we will end it at that

No. You're wrong. Barr has already openly stated the ways he is redacting it. Don't treat the readers here like fools. Facts are facts. 45 spin only works in 45 bubble world. 

Why are 45 fans so afraid of the entire report being released to congress?

I think we all know,

They know he's rotten too. But they support him no matter what. 

Edited April 5, 2019 by Jingthing

[elmrfudd]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

No. You're wrong. Barr has already openly stated the ways he is redacting it. Don't treat the readers here like fools. Facts are facts. 45 spin only works in 45 bubble world. 

Why are 45 fans so afraid of the entire report being released to congress?

I think we all know,

They know he's rotten too. But they support him no matter what. 

you have nothing to back up your opinions, 

 

so let's leave it at that before you give yourself an aneurysm.

 

the self righteous indignation is tiresome

[Jingthing]

Just now, elmrfudd said:

you have nothing to back up your opinions, 

 

so let's leave it at that before you give yourself an aneurysm.

 

the self righteous indignation is tiresome

Of course I do. Again please don't act like all the readers here are in 45 bubble world.

There are actual FACTS easy to know. Details of the totally unnecessary redaction types in link.

 

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/03/30/william-barr-mueller-report-226340

 

[elmrfudd]

Of course I do. Again please don't act like all the readers here are in 45 bubble world.

There are actual FACTS easy to know. Details of the totally unnecessary redaction types in link.

 

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/03/30/william-barr-mueller-report-226340

 

 

an opinion article full of conjecture by an Illinois democrat is not a fact, but keep riding the 

self righteous indignation for all its worth. it is hilarious

Edited April 5, 2019 by elmrfudd

[Jingthing]

This defies logic. If he was not heavily redacting it, he could have (and should have) released all of it long ago. The American people aren't that stupid. We see the game that lackey Barr is playing.

 

It's hard to even keep track of your POV.

On the one hand you argue strongly for that Barr is REQUIRED to heavily redact.

When actually he is not.

Then on the other hand you imply that it's a fake narrative to suggest that he is heavily redacting it now and only intends to release a heavily redacted report.

You can't have it both ways!

 

My POV is clear and I am confident it is shared by the vast majority of the American people -- release it all to congress ASAP.  That's the only way that is acceptable. 

Edited April 5, 2019 by Jingthing

[elmrfudd]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

This defies logic. If he was not heavily redacting it, he could have (and should have) released all of it long ago. The American people aren't that stupid. We see the game that lackey Barr is playing.

you simply have no basis for the assumptions you make other than bias.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, elmrfudd said:

you simply have no basis for the assumptions you make other than bias.

I'll let you have that weak tea final word.

We're not communicating. 

I'm clear -- release the entire report to congress including grand jury stuff and if not, time to go to court.

Cheers.

[elmrfudd]

14 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

This defies logic. If he was not heavily redacting it, he could have (and should have) released all of it long ago. The American people aren't that stupid. We see the game that lackey Barr is playing.

 

It's hard to even keep track of your POV.

On the one hand you argue strongly for that Barr is REQUIRED to heavily redact.

When actually he is not.

Then on the other hand you imply that it's a fake narrative to suggest that he is heavily redacting it now and only intends to release a heavily redacted report.

You can't have it both ways!

 

My POV is clear and I am confident it is shared by the vast majority of the American people -- release it all to congress ASAP.  That's the only way that is acceptable. 

i never said anything about how much should be redacted, merely the reference to rule 6e that

is the guideline for what gets redacted.

 

you have made assumption after assumption of the criminality you are sure exists in the report

based on absolutely zero factual data. and you think id there is any redaction

you make ridiculous unfounded accusations of the AG being a lackey. it's childish and wrought with emotion.

 

get off the self righteous indignation pedestal you put yourself on. it is embarrassing

 

Edited April 5, 2019 by elmrfudd

[Thingamabob]

Come Dems, stop this obsession and come up with some policies we can vote for.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

Come Dems, stop this obsession and come up with some policies we can vote for.

Medicare for All.

Now vote. 

Need to turn the senate and the white house first.

Thanks for your support. 

[atyclb]

did mueller conclude in his report that trump and/or others should be indicted for criminal collusion?

[Jingthing]

Just now, atyclb said:

did mueller conclude in his report that trump and/or others should be indicted for criminal collusion?

No.

But we still need to see the report.

Criminal indictments and high crimes and misdemeanors worthy of impeachment are not the same thing.

The justice department policy is that sitting presidents can't be indicted.

We don't know if that's the reason Mueller didn't suggest indicting 45.

Again, without the report, we know very little. 

[elmrfudd]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Medicare for All.

Now vote. 

Need to turn the senate and the white house first.

Thanks for your support. 

medicare for all....

which is not even remotely financially feasible and will destroy 

what is there now.  a brilliant plan

 

but then why should that stop the liberal lunatics

 

 

we are getting way off topic here, so lets nip it in the bud

Edited April 5, 2019 by elmrfudd

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

...

 

we are getting way off topic here, so lets nip it in the bud

From my POV, already well nipped.

[Becker]

11 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

medicare for all....

which is not even remotely financially feasible and will destroy 

what is there now.  a brilliant plan

 

but then why should that stop the liberal lunatics

 

 

we are getting way off topic here, so lets nip it in the bud

So what's been implemented in all other countries in the West is impossible in the US?

Riiiiight. Brilliant statement.

[elmrfudd]

23 minutes ago, Becker said:

So what's been implemented in all other countries in the West is impossible in the US?

Riiiiight. Brilliant statement.

"all other countries" ? really?

 

 yes those countries that tax the crap out of everything to fund

the ever increasing costs, while the quality of care deteriorates,

wait times increase and a bunch of bureaucrats decide what is and

what isn't an essential procedure they will provide. 

what a great example you seem to be so proud of.

 let's ignore the scope and size compared to these shining examples

you seem to be so proud of.

 

well i guess if we want to pay 3 or times the price for fuel

add a GST tax on everything, raise income taxes and add in

a VAT so we can be like the EU, wouldn't that be great.

We will never model the country after the EU disaster.

 

what an ignorant statement.

 

lets get back on topic please

Edited April 5, 2019 by elmrfudd

[Chomper Higgot]

14 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

"all other countries" ? really?

 

 yes those countries that tax the crap out of everything to fund

the ever increasing costs, while the quality of care deteriorates,

wait times increase and a bunch of bureaucrats decide what is and

what isn't an essential procedure they will provide. 

what a great example you seem to be so proud of.

 let's ignore the scope and size compared to these shining examples

you seem to be so proud of.

 

well i guess if we want to pay 3 or times the price for fuel

add a GST tax on everything, raise income taxes and add in

a VAT so we can be like the EU, wouldn't that be great.

We will never model the country after the EU disaster.

 

what an ignorant statement.

 

 

No, let’s just keep paying more for less.

[Trouble]

All this hype is just news organizations trying to sell news. It's all about the Dems trying to create news.  Barr will follow the law and release the report and yes there will be some redactions.  Dems are just hoping to find some bit of anything to continue the anti-Trump agenda.  Granted one may not like Trump the person but that does not mean he did anything illegal in regard to the election. If people would just separate hate of the man and try and stop using the Mueller investigation as a method of justifying the hate most Americans would be a lot happier.  The Dems may not like Trump for a lot of reasons but trying to conflate the hate with Russian collusion or obstruction of justice isn't really working very well.

[atyclb]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

4 hours ago, atyclb said:

did mueller conclude in his report that trump and/or others should be indicted for criminal collusion?

No.

But we still need to see the report.

Criminal indictments and high crimes and misdemeanors worthy of impeachment are not the same thing.

The justice department policy is that sitting presidents can't be indicted.

We don't know if that's the reason Mueller didn't suggest indicting 45.

Again, without the report, we know very little. 

 

 

so you think the ag might be suppressing or withholding muellers possible conclusion of impeachable offenses?

[Jingthing]

Just now, atyclb said:

 

 

so you think the ag might be suppressing or withholding muellers possible conclusion of impeachable offenses?

No! I think there are likely impeachable offenses in the report and Mueller intended CONGRESS to see the full report and decide for themselves. Particularly about obstruction of justice. Just because there are impeachable offenses doesn't mean congress should or will impeach. That's a political decision. They probably wouldn't because the Senate is in 45's corner. Many people get confused about the definition of impeachable offenses. They are not the same thing as indictable crimes. They can overlap but they don't need to. 

[spidermike007]

13 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Maybe there's something to that "Deep State" business. A cadre of benchwarmers that can be called upon at any time to keep the train on the tracks.

And if anything, the real deep state are those that are protecting Trump at all costs. The full report should be released. What are they hiding? Who is Barr protecting? Which family member? Kind of reminds one of a Cosa Nostra film.