1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

  2. Live Rockets Discussion
    Jalen Green looks like a legit star, Amen Thompson is shining and the Rockets have found something without Alperen Sengun. Clutch is talking about the 10-game winning streak at 11:00am as we talk Rockets live!

    Talking Rockets - LIVE!

Barr is dumping 150 years of AG separation of powers to be Trump's B***h

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by Sweet Lou 4 2, Apr 12, 2019.

  1. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    Unlike you who has a clear partisan bias Greenwald is supposed to be unbiased yet he is claiming that Mueller did something to the report and had not even seen it.

    So now that is has been proven that the"meltdown " is warranted because Barr was lying and omitting facts Greenwald was very premature.
     
  2. MojoMan

    MojoMan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,746
    Likes Received:
    2,153
    cml750 likes this.
  3. Nook

    Nook Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    53,785
    Likes Received:
    111,485
    I wouldn't refer to him as Baghdad Bill Bar because his office deserves a certain level of respect. However, William Barr did lie in his press conference and he also purposely presented a biased and incomplete picture of the report.
     
    Amiga, NewRoxFan and justtxyank like this.
  4. MojoMan

    MojoMan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,746
    Likes Received:
    2,153
    If you say so. Sour grapes much?
     
  5. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    42,653
    Likes Received:
    39,216
    His letter "summarizing" the report flat out lied about whether Mueller considered the memo from the office of legal counsel when issuing his report. Barr said that Mueller made his findings independent of that. Mueller's report says the exact opposite and specifically says that because that memo says he can't charge Trump he won't issue a finding.

    The Attorney General of the United States lied to the Congress in written form in an attempt to protect the president. It's just insane what's going on here.
     
    Amiga and Nook like this.
  6. MojoMan

    MojoMan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,746
    Likes Received:
    2,153
    That is not what Barr said. Perhaps it would be wise for you to go watch Barr's press conference before you repeat this falsehood again.
     
  7. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,805
    Likes Received:
    53,592
    Here are three lies:



     
  8. adoo

    adoo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,509
    Likes Received:
    6,047
    WH council Don McGahn testified (for the SC investigation) for ~ 30 hrs during which
    he provided Mueller this specific incident of Trump committing obstruction of Justice


    is there a better eg of intent to obstruct justice !!!

    https://twitter.com/AriMelber/status/11189418375 97794304
     
    #168 adoo, Apr 18, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2019
  9. Nook

    Nook Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    53,785
    Likes Received:
    111,485
    Absolutely. I am surprised this isn't a bigger topic yet.

    The level of brazen disregard the Attorney General of the United States has for the law is staggering.

    Post 9/11 I became very concerned that the terrorist actions would be used as a springboard to restrict civil rights and result is less government accountability. We saw G.W. Bush greatly increase the Executive Branch. Then Obama was elected promising transparency and he did the exact opposite, he not only maintained the powers taken by Bush, he expanded the powers under Eric Holder.

    Now we have Trump as President, and we see that those that hold some of the highest offices simply do not fear punishment or accountability. There is no respect for the office. When the Attorney General has some belief in rule of law and checks and balances, he has to go. The current Attorney General of the United States of America read the Mueller Report, provided it first to the President's counsel.... and then purposely and repeatedly lied to the American people and to Congress...... and lied about something of enormous importance.

    This is a huge deal, and makes me question what the end game is..... is this the new normal?
     
  10. Nook

    Nook Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    53,785
    Likes Received:
    111,485
    Sour grapes?

    No, more concern that the Attorney General of the United States would openly lie to the American people and to Congress.... fully knowing that his lies and deception would be found out. If that isn't alarming to you, then I don't know what is.

    This is another huge piece of the puzzle...... from GW Bush and his administration doing whatever they wanted, including starting a war with lies....... to The Obama administration letting the Attorney General suck up more and more powers and Obama assassinating a 16 year old American citizen in Yemen that had never even been charged with a crime.......... to this "administration" that is the most corrupt in US history.... Not Nixon or Kennedy or Grant can come close to what this administration is doing.

    There are costs for allowing this **** to happen.
     
  11. adoo

    adoo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,509
    Likes Received:
    6,047


    in addition, the American Bar Association should dis-bar the so-called AG
     
    #171 adoo, Apr 18, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2019
    FranchiseBlade likes this.
  12. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    I think the thing is that he knew his lies would be uncovered. He also knew that some people would still buy into his lies even after the truth was exposed.

    Sadly is that others will simply ignore the truth and choose to believe the lie. Look at the Trump defenders on this bbs.
     
  13. Astrodome

    Astrodome Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    10,994
    Likes Received:
    12,208
    Haha, I guess he is public enemy #1 at this point. This is funny
     
  14. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    Yet, you have trouble articulating what is so insane about the actual evidence people on the left mention when discussing this.
     
  15. Nook

    Nook Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    53,785
    Likes Received:
    111,485
    I will read the Mueller report in its entirety tomorrow.

    A couple of observations from what I have read so far of the report and the comments of Barr.

    #1 Mueller spells out that he consulted with the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel on whether a sitting President can be indicted. The Office of Legal Counsel concluded, based on Watergate, that a sitting President could not be criminally indicted. Mueller then spells out that he is an attorney operating under the Justice Department and accordingly he can not call for an indictment of President Trump.
    #2 Based on the legal standard that he cannot indict the sitting President, he moves to whether he can exonerate the President. In volume 1 he explicitly says that based on legal standards and the known facts, he cannot exonerate the President.
    #3 Since Mueller cannot criminally indict and cannot exonerate the President, he next lists numerous examples of obstruction of justice efforts made by the President.
    #4 Mueller then states that while he has no power to indict Trump based on the policy of the Justice Department, Congress does have the ability to indict to ensure no one is above the law.
    #5 Amazingly he does not stop there. He actually spells it out; that congress can indict for obstruction of justice by the President and gives examples that fit what facts were disclosed in the report!
    #6 Mueller even takes it further... he says that indicting a President when he isn’t in office any longer is a possible option.

    Essentially Mueller says he finds no evidence of collusion but lots of evidence of obstruction of Justice and he cannot indict as a special counsel based on the policies of the JD and the comments of Barr that he will not indict a sitting President. So he turns his focus to Congress and gives them a legal blue print to criminally charge the President.

    Now on to Barr.
    He has been purposely deceptive and has flat out lied at his press conference and with his earlier released statements.

    #1 William Barr flatout lied when he said that Mueller did not consider the Justice Department’s policy on indicting a sitting President. This is a complete and intentional lie. Mueller dedicates a lot of his report explaining that he did rely on the Justice Department’s policy on indicting criminally a sitting President. You can reach your own conclusions as to why.
    #2 Barr claims that the President completely cooperated with Mueller. The report specifically lists many examples of Trump doing the exact opposite.
    #3 Barr also said that Mueller gave no indication that congress should determine if the President should be criminally charged. Yet Mueller goes into pain staking detail about Congress having an obligation under the checks and balances.
     
    Anticope, Amiga, havoc1 and 2 others like this.
  16. jcf

    jcf Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,190
    Likes Received:
    2,271
    In fairness, one is a crime, and one isn't.
     
  17. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,805
    Likes Received:
    53,592
    Renato Marioto is a former Federal prosecutor...

    The Obstruction Case Against Trump that Barr Tried to Hide
    Even with redactions, Mueller’s report is clear Trump undermined the Russia investigation.

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/19/barr-obstruction-mueller-trump-226664
     
  18. dobro1229

    dobro1229 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    23,888
    Likes Received:
    19,692
    I don’t get why anything related to Barr is funny. Are you okay with him lying about the Mueller report findings in order to create a false narrative for Trump?

    I mean... obviously you are. I seem to recall days upon days in the Mueller thread of victory lap posts, chest pumping, and straight up hostility toward people like me for having the nerve to respond with a retort. All because Barr intercepted the report to create a completely false narrative about the underlying findings.

    Again... I don’t see the humor here in laughing at people not being in love with Barr here. This isn’t one of those screaming dumb libtard things man. He’s the top cop to our country, and he’s clearly a hyperpartisan liar. Not sure why you are okay with that. How would you feel if Bernie Sanders won in 20 and named AOC as his AG? Would you find that funny too?
     
    havoc1 likes this.
  19. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,805
    Likes Received:
    53,592
  20. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,805
    Likes Received:
    53,592
    Charlie Savage on the New York Times detailed the places where trump appointee attorney general barr took content from the Mueller Report out of context if not outright lied about Mueller's finding... proving barr simply acted to protect trump...



    How Barr’s Excerpts Compare to the Mueller Report’s Findings

    Attorney General William P. Barr sent a letter to Congress last month citing brief fragments from the Mueller report. Now that the document is public, his selections are coming under scrutiny.

    By Charlie Savage

    When Attorney General William P. Barr sent Congress a four-page letter last month describing his take on the conclusions of Robert S. Mueller III’s special counsel investigation, he quoted several fragments of Mr. Mueller’s then-secret report.

    But none of the excerpts were in context or even complete sentences, raising the question of whether he was portraying their thrust and tone accurately or skewing them to make them sound better for President Trump.

    Now that the report is out, readers can see where Mr. Barr plucked those phrases from.

    Mr. Barr took Mr. Mueller’s words out of context to suggest the president had no motive to obstruct justice

    FROM WILLIAM P. BARR
    “In making this determination, we noted that the special counsel recognized that ‘the evidence does not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,’ and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the president’s intent with respect to obstruction.”

    FROM ROBERT S. MUELLER III

    Vol. II, Page 157: Obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect noncriminal personal interests, to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area, or to avoid personal embarrassment. The injury to the integrity of the justice system is the same regardless of whether a person committed an underlying wrong. In this investigation, the evidence does not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference. But the evidence does point to a range of other possible personal motives animating the president’s conduct. These include concerns that continued investigation would call into question the legitimacy of his election and potential uncertainty about whether certain events — such as advance notice of WikiLeaks’ release of hacked information or the June 9, 2016, meeting between senior campaign officials and Russians could be seen as criminal activity by the president, his campaign or his family.

    Mr. Barr, in explaining why he was declaring Mr. Trump cleared of obstructing justice, cited this sentence fragment about how the evidence Mr. Mueller had gathered did not prove there had been any conspiracy with Russia for Mr. Trump to cover up. This use of Mr. Mueller’s words turned the special counsel’s meaning on its head: The brief excerpt came from a list of other possible reasons Mr. Trump might have had to corruptly impede the investigation, and which Mr. Barr did not mention.

    Mr. Barr omitted words suggesting that there was complicit conduct that fell short of “coordination”

    FROM WILLIAM P. BARR
    “The special counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: ‘[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.’”
    FROM ROBERT S. MUELLER III

    Vol. I, Page 1: The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

    Mr. Barr took a larger passage in which the Mueller report suggested that the Trump campaign and the Russian government were knowingly dancing together at a distance, and then excerpted a fragment to make it look like a cleaner exoneration.

    Similarly, Mr. Barr truncated the special counsel explanation of what “coordination” meant — and didn’t mean

    FROM WILLIAM P. BARR
    “In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the special counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign ‘coordinated’ with Russian election interference activities. The special counsel defined ‘coordination’ as an ‘agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on election interference.’”
    FROM ROBERT S. MUELLER III

    Vol. I, Page 2: We understood coordination to require an agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other’s actions or interests.

    In the second sentence, which Mr. Barr omitted, Mr. Mueller again emphasized that there can be a type of complicit conduct that falls short of how the special counsel defined coordination.

    Mr. Barr omitted the reason Mr. Mueller trumpeted the thoroughness of his factual investigation

    FROM WILLIAM P. BARR
    “After making a ‘thorough factual investigation’ into these matters, the special counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment.”
    FROM ROBERT S. MUELLER III

    Vol. II, Page 2: Second, while the O.L.C. opinion concludes that a sitting president may not be prosecuted, it recognizes that a criminal investigation during the president’s term is permissible. The O.L.C. opinion also recognizes that a president does not have immunity after he leaves office. And if individuals other than the president committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available.

    In his letter to Congress, Mr. Barr did not explain that Mr. Mueller was trying to leave open the possibility that prosecutors in the future, after Mr. Trump leaves office, could look at the evidence he gathered and decide then whether to indict Mr. Trump. That rationale — which stemmed from the view of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, or O.L.C., that sitting presidents cannot be indicted but former presidents lose such immunity — conflicted with Mr. Barr’s move to pronounce Mr. Trump cleared now.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now