• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Judge says Barr distorted Mueller findings

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jhhnn said:
They can seek a stay on appeal.
Click to expand...
Aren't court trial verdicts the things that are appealed? In the middle of a case a defendent can refuse a judges order and say "I will not comply until SCOTUS rules on it?

I may be completely ignorant but never heard this in trials before.
 
HomerJS said:
Aren't court trial verdicts the things that are appealed? In the middle of a case a defendent can refuse a judges order and say "I will not comply until SCOTUS rules on it?

I may be completely ignorant but never heard this in trials before.
Click to expand...

Separation of powers issues transcend normal procedure.
 
Printed Circuit Bro said:
Yes, I have a copy of the report. Is there something specific on a specific page you'd like to discuss?

Or are we just going to wave our pitch forks and torches and scream that Trump is the devil, sating our emotional irrationalities?
Click to expand...

Doesn't really seem like we need to scream Trump is the devil or anything, the report itself lays out all the necessary elements of multiple felonies committed by Trump. Having read the report you presumably agree?
 
fskimospy said:
Doesn't really seem like we need to scream Trump is the devil or anything, the report itself lays out all the necessary elements of multiple felonies committed by Trump. Having read the report you presumably agree?
Click to expand...
The report is not a determination of guilt. That's what the impeachment is for.
 
Printed Circuit Bro said:
...to the public anyway, and wasn't part of the question that I was asked unless you're trying to move the goal posts now.
Click to expand...

This topic is largely about releasing the un-redacted report, to Congress at least.

I'm also curious as to why you think a federal judge is incorrect in assessing the dubious interpretation from William Barr, by comparing it to what you gathered from reading the same report that this same judge read.

It seems you value your assessment more than this guy's. I think that is why people are asking you to pinpoint the topics that you don't find concerning, with relation to William Barr's summary of the same report (which is already largely considered a duplicitous summary of the content)
 
Last edited:
And to think, just last year conservatives were demanding apologies after Barr's OP ED piece was released hours after the report was released. Who knew?

Where are they now?
 
zinfamous said:
This topic is largely about releasing the un-redacted report, to Congress at least.

I'm also curious as to why you think a federal judge is incorrect in assessing the dubious interpretation from William Barr, by comparing it to what you gathered from reading the same report that this same judge read.

It seems you value your assessment more than this guy's. I think that is why people are asking you to pinpoint the topics that you don't find concerning, with relation to William Barr's summary of the same report (which is already largely considered a duplicitous summary of the content)
Click to expand...
Wait, did I comment on the judge's assessment? I don't think so.

I said I don't care what Barr's statement said. I only care about what's in the report. That's all that matters: the report contents.
 
Printed Circuit Bro said:
Wait, did I comment on the judge's assessment? I don't think so.

I said I don't care what Barr's statement said. I only care about what's in the report. That's all that matters: the report contents.
Click to expand...

Kind of the entire point of this case is that the Judge is stating that because of Barr's dishonesty in what he said about the report he can not trust that Barr did not use his powers to redact the report to massage what was in it to be what he wanted to be in it. A few carful redactions here, and few there, and voila! the report does not say what it was intended to say.
 
Printed Circuit Bro said:
Is there a reading problem here? The Mueller Report is not a trial. It is not a determination of guilt, only a presentation of evidence.
Click to expand...

You should start with the person in your mirror because where the fuck are you getting that interpretation of their words? Where the fuck did they say any such thing?

FYI, trials are not infallible either, so hey, guess we can argue in the goddamn dumbest way possible endlessly instead of you simply answering people's question, which is, what exactly in the Mueller Report did you find to not be incredibly damning with regards to Turmp's actions? Be specific or STFU.

One last thing, I say that simply because apparently other people are willing to keep putting up with the never ending parade of quibbling dipshits, of which you are just the latest in a very long line. I don't. You've already shown you're not worth the time. I'd rather go fight over toilet paper at Wal-Mart, at least that's fit to wipe my ass with. Your posts? Not so much.
 
SMOGZINN said:
Kind of the entire point of this case is that the Judge is stating that because of Barr's dishonesty in what he said about the report he can not trust that Barr did not use his powers to redact the report to massage what was in it to be what he wanted to be in it. A few carful redactions here, and few there, and voila! the report does not say what it was intended to say.
Click to expand...

Barr wasn't the only person responsible for redactions. There were a whole team of lawyers making those decisions. Remember, this was the largest investigation since the 9/11 report. There wasn't just 1 guy with white out and a type writer changing the report as he saw fit.

If they broke the law then they deserve to be prosecuted.

All I care about is what's in the report. Barr's memo is irrelevant because it's not part of the report. You can dog whistle all you want but the only thing that's important is the evidence submitted to Congress in the report.

It's a shame that Congress is so corrupt, also, that someone didn't think sharing potentially redacted information with them was worth the risk. Sounds like politicians being politicians, though. Who'd have thunk.
 
darkswordsman17 said:
You should start with the person in your mirror because where the fuck are you getting that interpretation of their words? Where the fuck did they say any such thing?

FYI, trials are not infallible either, so hey, guess we can argue in the goddamn dumbest way possible endlessly instead of you simply answering people's question, which is, what exactly in the Mueller Report did you find to not be incredibly damning with regards to Turmp's actions? Be specific or STFU.

One last thing, I say that simply because apparently other people are willing to keep putting up with the never ending parade of quibbling dipshits, of which you are just the latest in a very long line. I don't. You've already shown you're not worth the time. I'd rather go fight over toilet paper at Wal-Mart, at least that's fit to wipe my ass with. Your posts? Not so much.
Click to expand...
I think there's definitely a reading problem here and it's not me. I'm not claiming anyone else's words, lol. What interpretation of whose words? These are my words.

Did I claim something in the report not to be damning? Please quote where I said that. In fact, please quote where I have made ANY evaluation of any specific piece of content in the Mueller Report. I'll wait.

You are incredibly rude. Your insults are uncalled for. You're becoming angry and lashing out. That says a lot about you. If you'd rather go fight over toilet paper at Wal-Mart instead of reply to my posts, why are you replying to my posts?
 
Printed Circuit Bro said:
Barr wasn't the only person responsible for redactions. There were a whole team of lawyers making those decisions. Remember, this was the largest investigation since the 9/11 report. There wasn't just 1 guy with white out and a type writer changing the report as he saw fit.
Click to expand...
No, but he had the final word on the redactions. He could, at his discretion, add or remove redactions.
The point is that his dishonestly makes it so that the judge does not trust that he did so fairly. It is about integrity, and Barrs lack of it, rather than a legal issue.
The Judge is saying that the redacted report is only as trustworthy as the person that redacted it. Barr is not trustworthy, so neither is his redaction of it.

If they broke the law then they deserve to be prosecuted.
Click to expand...
I agree, now who do you suppose we get to prosecute the head prosecutor?
Remember, this case is over whether or not Congress can have the evidence they would need to prosecute him.

You can dog whistle all you want but the only thing that's important is the evidence submitted to Congress in the report.
Click to expand...
No, what is important is the actual evidence, not the evidence that might or might not have been tampered with. We don't know if the evidence was tampered with. That is what this case is trying to find out!

It's a shame that Congress is so corrupt, also, that someone didn't think sharing potentially redacted information with them was worth the risk. Sounds like politicians being politicians, though. Who'd have thunk.
Click to expand...
So, you would think that if a suspected criminal refused to allow the police to search his car, even with a warrant, it is because the cops are the ones that can't be trusted?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top