• 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.

Special Counsel Mueller has submitted his report to Attorney General Barr

Page 20 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
fskimospy said:
I’m not aware of a single member of Congress calling for the public release of the report including grand jury deliberations or classified information. When people say the ‘full report’ it should be understood as ‘the full report minus things that would be illegal to include’.
-snip-
Click to expand...

Numerous Congress persons have been clamoring for the "full release". Their words, not mine.

So now it's acceptable to say "full release" but not mean "full release"?

Are you claiming that the American public hears "full release" but understands "full release" doesn't mean full release? Damn, you give them a lot more credit than I.


Edit:
Speaking of bets (referring to your post above), anybody wanna bet there will be no complaints when the "full" comes out with redactions or ommissions?

Fern
 
Last edited:
Fern said:
Numerous Congress persons have been clamoring for the "full release". Their words, not mine.

So now it's acceptable to say "full release" but not mean "full release"?
Click to expand...

Sure, I think it is implicitly obvious when public officials say an action should be taken that they mean that action should be taken in accordance with the law unless they state otherwise.

Are you claiming that the American public hears "full release" but understands "full release" doesn't mean full release? Damn, you give them a lot more credit than I.

Fern
Click to expand...

I think if you asked the average American if they think the Democrats are calling for the unauthorized disclosure of classified information they would not think that is the case.
 
brandonbull said:
Looks like Putin activated that long idle sleeper cell of posters in P&N. I think we had 10 million votes just cast for Trump in 2020. Damn Russia interference making people vote.
Click to expand...

russian sleeper cell agent account here - actually i'm activating all my sleeper cell accounts to try and spam my youtube channel so i can get a million views and stop working 9-5 job. was trying to find the right forum to do it here but doesnt look like theres a thread for posting youtube videos so gave up. then saw this.

i am enjoying the liberal sjw tears. yes putin definitely wanted dump to win, but dump is a narcissistic windbag moron, he's too busy banging hookers to be colluding. collusion implies 2 way. i'm not a dump supporter, but i always thought the russia collusion thing sounded dumb. and also hypocritical, given how the CIA literally intervenes in other countries elections via murdering democratically elected rulers and replacing with dictators. hilllary was an awful candidate. both the left AND the right hated her. only liberals liked her. as soon as she lost people were crying about misogyny blahblahblah. then they went on and on about russia collusion, which seemed like it might go somewhere with the slew of convictions, but based on rachel maddow's tears looks like its fizzled out with the latest developments. so unless the dems back someone good like andrew yang in 2020, its gonna be dump being reelected again.
 
fishjie said:
russian sleeper cell agent account here - actually i'm activating all my sleeper cell accounts to try and spam my youtube channel so i can get a million views and stop working 9-5 job. was trying to find the right forum to do it here but doesnt look like theres a thread for posting youtube videos so gave up. then saw this.

i am enjoying the liberal sjw tears. yes putin definitely wanted dump to win, but dump is a narcissistic windbag moron, he's too busy banging hookers to be colluding. collusion implies 2 way. i'm not a dump supporter, but i always thought the russia collusion thing sounded dumb. and also hypocritical, given how the CIA literally intervenes in other countries elections via murdering democratically elected rulers and replacing with dictators. hilllary was an awful candidate. both the left AND the right hated her. only liberals liked her. as soon as she lost people were crying about misogyny blahblahblah. then they went on and on about russia collusion, which seemed like it might go somewhere with the slew of convictions, but based on rachel maddow's tears looks like its fizzled out with the latest developments. so unless the dems back someone good like andrew yang in 2020, its gonna be dump being reelected again.
Click to expand...

At least you’re honest.
 
fskimospy said:
McConnell just blocked a senate resolution calling for the report to be made public.

Odd that he would oppose releasing a report that totally clears Trump.
Click to expand...

Disgusting shit, but then this is McConnell we're talking about. Truly a bastard, his contempt for the people is something to behold.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
How fucking in-reprehensibility pathetic.

I've seen some dumb fucks in my life - but you are the royal supreme of cuck retards.

As long as someone has a D next their name, you trust them more based on the emphasis of a letter to their name rather than their actual character. How pathetic. Consider drowning yourself in bleach with that level of stupidity. Allow me to find a hooker with a 'D' next to their name. I'm sure you can use that as an emphasis to ensure you that they don't have aids. You believe me, right?

As if Mueller has something to gain by defending someone that is potentially trying to help the Russian government.
Click to expand...
Interesting! Something I said seems to have triggered you. I hope you'll be OK. I'm going to take a nap.
 
Moonbeam said:
Interesting! Something I said seems to have triggered you. I hope you'll be OK. I'm going to take a nap.
Click to expand...

Totally bro;. I'm raging at 70's based moron that philosophizes on a public computer building forum. Absolutely. You're not at all incorrect.

Go take another hit of acid with 70's hipster pants and prance around like your stereotypical self. It's much more laughable when you meet the stereotypes that we all know and love that you fulfill.
 
fskimospy said:
McConnell just blocked a senate resolution calling for the report to be made public.

Odd that he would oppose releasing a report that totally clears Trump.
Click to expand...

Trump said he's fine releasing the report, so he'll tell the turtle to make it public, right?
 
But McConnell objected, noting that Attorney General William Barr is currently working with Mueller to determine what in his report can be released publicly and what cannot.

“The special counsel and the Justice Department ought to be allowed to finish their work in a professional manner,” McConnell said. “To date the attorney general has followed through on his commitments to Congress. One of those commitments is that he intends to release as much information as possible."
Click to expand...

How dare McConnell allow Mueller and Barr to finish their work.
 
So..McConnell has blocked the release of the report, even though the House voted 420-0 to release it. At this point, only Barr and Rosenstein have seen the report. 🙄
 
VRAMdemon said:
So..McConnell has blocked the release of the report, even though the House voted 420-0 to release it. At this point, only Barr and Rosenstein have seen the report. 🙄
Click to expand...

No. He hasn't blocked the release of the report.

It's only a resolution, not a bill, thus no effect in law. Everyone is calling for its release, Trump says release it and Barr has said he will release it, so a resolution is superfluous.

BTW: The House's vote was on a resolution also; not a bill.

Fern
 
Fern said:
No. He hasn't blocked the release of the report.

It's only a resolution, not a bill, thus no effect in law. Everyone is calling for its release, Trump says release it and Barr has said he will release it, so a resolution is superfluous.

BTW: The House's vote was on a resolution also; not a bill.

Fern
Click to expand...
So what's the political gain from snubbing the non-binding resolution?
 
Trump remaining embittered and angry despite his "win" is a sign of things still not being at their absolute darkest yet.

So we've got that ahead of us...
 
jackstar7 said:
So what's the political gain from snubbing the non-binding resolution?
Click to expand...

I'm unaware of any political gain.

Seems like a waste of time to me.

Resolutions are just "show", no effect in law. From the poster above it sounds like the Senate may take it up later.

Fern
 
fskimospy said:
McConnell just blocked a senate resolution calling for the report to be made public.

Odd that he would oppose releasing a report that totally clears Trump.
Click to expand...

Why do you think it’s odd? He’s got more leverage on Trump to sign/veto whatever he wants now.
 
fskimospy said:
I don’t understand why people try and argue that the Russians didn’t influence the election. Of course they did, it’s just common sense.

If you believe that disinformation was enough to convince 1% of Clinton voters to stay home or 0.5% of Clinton voters to vote for Trump then Russian interference was not only effective, but decisive. That’s a pretty low bar to cross.
Click to expand...
Thinking about this a little further, why was it the 1% the Russians might have swayed that made the difference? How many changed their minds by Comey's little "she's not a criminal just stupid" speech? How many changed their minds when they found out the DNC was working against Bernie? How many votes did Hillary give up by ignoring a few key states? What about the deplorable's comment? Or that little oops when she got the debate questions in advance? I think that cost her a few swing votes as well.

Why is it that none of those things enter the equation? If Hillary and the DNC had done a better job those few votes the Russians may have influenced wouldn't have mattered at all. That election was Hillary's to lose, and by golly, she pulled it off.
 
Greenman said:
Thinking about this a little further, why was it the 1% the Russians might have swayed that made the difference? How many changed their minds by Comey's little "she's not a criminal just stupid" speech? How many changed their minds when they found out the DNC was working against Bernie? How many votes did Hillary give up by ignoring a few key states? What about the deplorable's comment? Or that little oops when she got the debate questions in advance? I think that cost her a few swing votes as well.

Why is it that none of those things enter the equation? If Hillary and the DNC had done a better job those few votes the Russians may have influenced wouldn't have mattered at all. That election was Hillary's to lose, and by golly, she pulled it off.
Click to expand...

Who said they weren't? Were you under some impression that the sole reason Hillary lost was because of Russian meddling?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top