Barr opens an investigation into the FBI Trump Russia investigation without the results of the TR investigation even being publiclally known...

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
64,712
2,045
126
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/us/politics/russia-investigation-justice-department-review.html

Trump barks and Barr accommodates? Did Barr pick a slow investigator to satisfy Trump while protecting the FBI, or has he criminally caved? Will the Democrats impeach him? Should they? I am inclined not to give Barr any credit for slow marching Trump in this. On a side note L Graham is also wanting to investigate the FBI but also told Trump Jr. not to honor the Senate demand to appear before them.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
10,134
1,670
126
What a funny way to launch an obviously contrived distractive ploy as a way to defend the worst criminally invested POTUS I've seen in my lifetime.

I can't decide whether Graham or Barr is the winner of the Most Shameless Trump Sycophant Award as it looks as if they're in a hotly contested race for the title.

This Administration of the Damned where honor, integrity and loyalty to country is a terminal liability that gets people fired for cause has me confounded for a way to describe how utterly devoid of conscience a person has to be in order to keep their jobs in this latest version of the American presidency.
 

cytg111

Diamond Member
Mar 17, 2008
9,896
2,090
136
Those that have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear.
"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say,"

pcgeek - in a race vs. himself for the bottom. Good job.

An AG that does the CIC's corrupt bidding is not problematic to you? - MEH.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
19,658
4,864
136
Those that have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear.
Really? Then I'm sure we can find your posts advocating for the release of the full unredacted Mueller Report, Mueller, McGahn and all relevant parties testify in public.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
13,906
664
126
Really? Then I'm sure we can find your posts advocating for the release of the full unredacted Mueller Report, Mueller, McGahn and all relevant parties testify in public.
What he says would ordinarily be "TRUE" -- given caveats that evidence cannot be fabricated, and an investigation would only proceed to a point where it might be determined that nothing further can be found. Otherwise, this is just another aspect of the Trump administration corrupting our justice system and turning it into a politically-driven Gestapo.

Proceed from this: "Witch hunt" is a misnomer in today's usage. In a witch hunt, one is not hunting for a witch. In a witch hunt, one already has the witch in hand; one is then looking for a crime with which to charge and convict the witch. In an "investigation", one has the definite fact that a "crime has been committed", and the objective follows in a search to find the witch responsible.

Trump's obsession to retaliate for the Russia Probe is a witch hunt, and public resources will be wasted in pursuing it, just as they were wasted in pursuing Benghazi and the e-mails. The waste of public resources aside, let them go forward with it. But the US Attorney assigned to pursue it will suffer damage to his professional reputation if he proceeds -- through each step of an investigation following successive hypotheses that more evidence exists -- beyond a point where he can conclude that there is no further evidence.

This objective reasoning is similar to how objective journalism has attended to news item after news item about Trump and his associates. It is bland and void of emotion, as it should be. Injecting my own emotion after being slapped in the face daily with each appearance of He-Who-Has-No-Name on the TV, I'd personally like to see the entire Trump family hung by the neck until dead on Christmas Day, in front of their kids -- broadcast to civics classes around the country as compulsory viewing.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
48,778
3,005
126
Seriously the time has come to impeach before this and other egregious acts like Barr going after Biden and a whole lot more get going in earnest. The more dastardly things they do the more the House Dems look to be seeking petty revenge.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
5,719
1,022
126
Who the hell knows if there is anything to fear as an unfair result of the probe. Either way, this is not good for our Democracy one bit. It should be crystal clear to every lay person that investigating ties between the Trump campaign and Russia was warranted. Were there any missteps in how this was pursued? Not impossible. However, no one has come up with any credible evidence suggesting that to be the case. And, no, Democrat money funding Steele's private investigation of Trump is not improper. Texts between Page and Strzok, while problematic, do not include any violation of their actual investigative responsibilities or actions. The IG has already investigated these origins and said as much. How many times do we need to look into this, and why shouldn't we be concerned about the partisan choices of who to investigate?

Anyway. Perhaps even they find some problems with the investigation's origins. Unless there is a clear partisan plot, it's hard to think any procedural problems matter one bit. After all, the links between Trump officials and Russia are overt and have been found readily through media sources outside of official investigations. More pertinently, the FBI was receiving tips through foreign diplomats that George Papadopolous, representing the Trump campaign, was bragging about Russia's possession of emails a month before Russia's DNC hacking was known. I mean -- come on. That's about the most blatant cause for investigation that can exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ch33zw1z and dank69

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
96,892
11,681
136
Wouldn't an unredacted Mueller report contain information that the AG cannot legally share unless ordered by the courts?
Oh, I see you're on the "Courts Matter" side of the Trumptardian See-Saw today.

Tomorrow will be the "Supreme Executive Privilege" side, we are all certain.
 
Mar 11, 2004
19,095
1,681
126
Who the hell knows if there is anything to fear as an unfair result of the probe. Either way, this is not good for our Democracy one bit. It should be crystal clear to every lay person that investigating ties between the Trump campaign and Russia was warranted. Were there any missteps in how this was pursued? Not impossible. However, no one has come up with any credible evidence suggesting that to be the case. And, no, Democrat money funding Steele's private investigation of Trump is not improper. Texts between Page and Strzok, while problematic, do not include any violation of their actual investigative responsibilities or actions. The IG has already investigated these origins and said as much. How many times do we need to look into this, and why shouldn't we be concerned about the partisan choices of who to investigate?

Anyway. Perhaps even they find some problems with the investigation's origins. Unless there is a clear partisan plot, it's hard to think any procedural problems matter one bit. After all, the links between Trump officials and Russia are overt and have been found readily through media sources outside of official investigations. More pertinently, the FBI was receiving tips through foreign diplomats that George Papadopolous, representing the Trump campaign, was bragging about Russia's possession of emails a month before Russia's DNC hacking was known. I mean -- come on. That's about the most blatant cause for investigation that can exist.
Pretty sure it will just be them raging about Strzok and Steele. They have nothing and this is just to try and prop up them casting doubt on those that did the report since they know they're not gonna be able to keep the report under wraps permanently (and know its damning and likely won't be able to spin what's in it with selective quoting), so they have to attack the messengers.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
54,878
8,375
126
Wouldn't an unredacted Mueller report contain information that the AG cannot legally share unless ordered by the courts?
Barr can petition the Court to release the information to Congress. I doubt they'd say no. Barr won't do that, of course, because he's shielding Trump from the consequences of his own actions. He's a disgrace to the office he serves.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
10,357
1,220
126
What a funny way to launch an obviously contrived distractive ploy as a way to defend the worst criminally invested POTUS I've seen in my lifetime.

I can't decide whether Graham or Barr is the winner of the Most Shameless Trump Sycophant Award as it looks as if they're in a hotly contested race for the title.

This Administration of the Damned where honor, integrity and loyalty to country is a terminal liability that gets people fired for cause has me confounded for a way to describe how utterly devoid of conscience a person has to be in order to keep their jobs in this latest version of the American presidency.
Add Mitch McConnell for the trifecta.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
27,862
1,872
126
Barr opens an investigation into the FBI Trump Russia investigation without the results of the TR investigation even being publiclally known...
Certain high ranking members of Congress can view the Mueller Report with a mere 1% redaction, which is safe to presume involves ongoing cases and maybe personal information on people. The public has the report. Congress can view practically all of it, certainly MORE than enough to understand the conclusions and why they were determined.

So just what the heck does "without the results" mean?
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
13,906
664
126
Barr can petition the Court to release the information to Congress. I doubt they'd say no. Barr won't do that, of course, because he's shielding Trump from the consequences of his own actions. He's a disgrace to the office he serves.
Disgrace abounds, but it is not symmetrical between political parties or factions as the columnist Jonah Goldberg keeps insisting.

If you follow religiously an agenda and ideology which assumes that Greed is a Virtue, and if you follow a defense-attorney's practice at every turn to limit dissemination of facts and get a client off as "not guilty", then you will likely follow a path of using deception, obstruction, and fantasy so that you can hold on to Power. One can objectively measure this, going back to the scandals that occurred during Bush's administration, following through the Breitbart scams over "ACORN" and Sherrod, FOX news censoring or otherwise failing to report salient fact and spinning anecdotal argument in their news comment, Trump's lies, Sanders' lies -- all of their lies.

The Steele Dossier is case in point. There is no reason to assume that the Steele Dossier contains fabricated evidence. Either political party would want such a report to contain the Truth because Truth is the best propaganda. If, on the other hand, your own party engages in deceitful practices and proliferates misinformation and distraction, you would automatically assume that the opposition does the same. Therefore, the Steele Dossier is "FALSE" because the Democrats solicited and paid for it after the GOP had done before the Primary. If the FBI wanted to carefully vet the document because of its origins, that's just good investigative common sense, no different or worse than requiring corroborating information for Michael Cohen's assertions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
64,712
2,045
126
Certain high ranking members of Congress can view the Mueller Report with a mere 1% redaction, which is safe to presume involves ongoing cases and maybe personal information on people. The public has the report. Congress can view practically all of it, certainly MORE than enough to understand the conclusions and why they were determined.

So just what the heck does "without the results" mean?
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/barr-indulges-trump-with-another-probe-of-trump-russia-inquiry-59565637542
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY