DOJ opening a criminal grand jury for 2016 election investigation

[Hayabusa Rider]

From what I can tell the operating "theory" is that "The Professor" who claimed that Russia was behind Trump was planted by the intelligence services/FBI and by god Tail Gunner Barr is going to get his man!

 

[interchange]

I really do fear that they have something to go after. I don't suspect that there is actually anything meaningful to the entire investigation and overall conclusions. The reality of what they find or choose to pursue doesn't scare me. It's the political use of any findings which does. If they are able to mobilize any heat on the investigation of the 2016 election interference, then that can be a powerful weapon to try and defend Trump in the court of public opinion.

 

[fleshconsumed]

I really do fear that they have something to go after. I don't suspect that there is actually anything meaningful to the entire investigation and overall conclusions. The reality of what they find or choose to pursue doesn't scare me. It's the political use of any findings which does. If they are able to mobilize any heat on the investigation of the 2016 election interference, then that can be a powerful weapon to try and defend Trump in the court of public opinion.

I'm sure Lisa Page and Peter Strzok will be prominently featured in the Barr's report.

 

[TheVrolok]

Get people out to vote or he will be president for another 4 years.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I really do fear that they have something to go after. I don't suspect that there is actually anything meaningful to the entire investigation and overall conclusions. The reality of what they find or choose to pursue doesn't scare me. It's the political use of any findings which does. If they are able to mobilize any heat on the investigation of the 2016 election interference, then that can be a powerful weapon to try and defend Trump in the court of public opinion.

"Something" doesn't mean there's something in reality. Barr has been flying all over the world to get anything he can use to create doubt, a weapon the GOP will use. As obstruction was demonstrated that isn't being looked at because there's no defense except Barr invented a false claim of innocence which means the fix is in.

No matter how this turns out we are living in some of the darkest days in US political history with corruption unmatched and the rule of law never so throttled as now.

This cancer goes deep, far deeper than Trump.

 

[Greenman]

I really do fear that they have something to go after. I don't suspect that there is actually anything meaningful to the entire investigation and overall conclusions. The reality of what they find or choose to pursue doesn't scare me. It's the political use of any findings which does. If they are able to mobilize any heat on the investigation of the 2016 election interference, then that can be a powerful weapon to try and defend Trump in the court of public opinion.

Obviously they feel they have something to present to a grand jury. That jury will decide if it's indictment worthy.
The partisan drulers have already heard all the evidence they need to acquit whoever might be charged with whatever crime they might be charged with. That evidence being exactly none.

 

[HomerJS]

Obviously they feel they have something to present to a grand jury. That jury will decide if it's indictment worthy.
The partisan drulers have already heard all the evidence they need to acquit whoever might be charged with whatever crime they might be charged with. That evidence being exactly none.

They do? Really? Despite the reports of all our intelligence agencies? Despite the Republican led Senate Intelligence Committee report which confirmed the results of our intelligence agencies?

 

[fleshconsumed]

Obviously they feel they have something to present to a grand jury. That jury will decide if it's indictment worthy.
The partisan drulers have already heard all the evidence they need to acquit whoever might be charged with whatever crime they might be charged with. That evidence being exactly none.

I take it you don't have any evidence that you did not fuck a goat?

Indict him boys.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Obviously they feel they have something to present to a grand jury. That jury will decide if it's indictment worthy.
The partisan drulers have already heard all the evidence they need to acquit whoever might be charged with whatever crime they might be charged with. That evidence being exactly none.

"They" would be Barr who flew around the world to find anything and as he won't properly recuse himself his thumb will be on the scales. Remember that this is the man who lied about the Mueller Report outright. The evidence the grand jury will be filtered through him personally and the evidence he won't is exactly none, in fact his behaviors suggest that he will interfere.

 

[Greenman]

They do? Really? Despite the reports of all our intelligence agencies? Despite the Republican led Senate Intelligence Committee report which confirmed the results of our intelligence agencies?

How would I know? More to the point, how do you know? If they're sitting a grand jury they must have something they want to show them. Doesn't it make sense to know what that something is before declaring it baseless?

 

[Moonbeam]

Obviously they feel they have something to present to a grand jury. That jury will decide if it's indictment worthy.
The partisan drulers have already heard all the evidence they need to acquit whoever might be charged with whatever crime they might be charged with. That evidence being exactly none.

An interesting question to ask, in my opinion, would be 'what kind of' and 'where' a line could be drawn between an honest attempt at nonpartisan open-mindedness, and real unconscious avoidance of data that might negatively threaten to challenge some also unconsciously recognized but deeply inculcated and precious moral belief.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

How would I know? More to the point, how do you know? If they're sitting a grand jury they must have something they want to show them. Doesn't it make sense to know what that something is before declaring it baseless?

You are still acting on the bad faith history of Barr. He will have to show them "something" and as he's demonstrably biased it doesn't have to be contextual, genuine evidence. As it is in the best interest of Trump to whom he owes fealty over the US, absolutely nothing presented to the grand jury needs to be unbiased and certainly the opposite.

 

[jmagg]

Both sides the boy who cried wolf. No one believes anything, beyond the echo chamber.

 

[HomerJS]

How would I know? More to the point, how do you know? If they're sitting a grand jury they must have something they want to show them. Doesn't it make sense to know what that something is before declaring it baseless?

You do know Trump wants to discredit the reports that told us Russia interfered in 2016 to help him. Since we already have those results why should we take anything coming from Barr as more then pure propaganda?

We don't need news headlines about 2 FBI agents texting each other about how they don't like Trump.

 

[Greenman]

You are still acting on the bad faith history of Barr. He will have to show them "something" and as he's demonstrably biased it doesn't have to be contextual, genuine evidence. As it is in the best interest of Trump to whom he owes fealty over the US, absolutely nothing presented to the grand jury needs to be unbiased and certainly the opposite.

My point is that you fellows have already concluded this without knowing anything. You've already decided the outcome without knowing any of the story.

 

[dank69]

My point is that you fellows have already concluded this without knowing anything. You've already decided the outcome without knowing any of the story.

You mean like the way conservatives concluded that Hillary needed to be locked up before and after 20 investigations found nothing to support criminal charges?

 

[HomerJS]

My point is that you fellows have already concluded this without knowing anything. You've already decided the outcome without knowing any of the story.

Like HR said, bad faith history.

 

[senseamp]

The House should investigate this investigation.

 

[Greenman]

You mean like the way conservatives concluded that Hillary needed to be locked up before and after 20 investigations found nothing to support criminal charges?

Just like that.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

My point is that you fellows have already concluded this without knowing anything. You've already decided the outcome without knowing any of the story.

Speaking for myself and the history of these matters I say this is a matter of agenda. Could Barr suddenly reform, renounce Trump's autocratic control, become the US AG and not Trump's lawyer? Well Lazarus rose from the dead which seems more likely but there ya go.

 

[Jhhnn]

Obviously they feel they have something to present to a grand jury. That jury will decide if it's indictment worthy.
The partisan drulers have already heard all the evidence they need to acquit whoever might be charged with whatever crime they might be charged with. That evidence being exactly none.

Or they just feel they need to make this announcement at this time for political purposes. Barr has already shown us that he's neither honest nor trustworthy. He's a Trump partisan. You know it as well as the rest of us. I figure he's trying to build a poison fruit of the poison tree defense but we shall see.

 

[Vic]

Just like that.

Except that the Republicans knew (from their own Congressional report) that Hillary committed no wrongdoing wrt Benghazi, whereas Trump's former campaign manager is in prison right now.
So no, it's not just like that.

 

[Perknose]

The partisan drulers...

Took me a moment to figure out you meant "droolers." Unintended irony abounds here.
In the Venn diagram where basic ignorance overlaps determined ignorance you'll find the current supporters of this administration's initiatives. The rule of law is soaked with their spittle.

 

[SMOGZINN]

My point is that you fellows have already concluded this without knowing anything. You've already decided the outcome without knowing any of the story.

The problem is that we have lost confidence in the DOJ. Barr has too often been obviously politically biased in his decision making. So, it is hard to believe that he is being genuine in this when you consider the timing of this announcement.

 

[Jhhnn]

The problem is that we have lost confidence in the DOJ. Barr has too often been obviously politically biased in his decision making. So, it is hard to believe that he is being genuine in this when you consider the timing of this announcement.

His "frustrated & angered" defense of Trump's obstruction tipped you off, huh? He's a disgrace to his office.