Mueller Report Finally Released...

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Clean, Mar 23, 2019.

  1. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 1,000+ Posts

    You’re welcome. I can enlighten you some more but it doesn’t seem to stick. You must be colluding with other unenlightened Libs.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    Good day for America. Bad day for the Communist Resistance.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. mchammer

    mchammer 5,000+ Posts

    Still a political attack by booting the obstruction charge to others.
     
  4. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Yes, he could, but that could go very badly. Someone in DoJ could leak it. It could also get subpoenaed by a court or by the House Judiciary Committee. A court probably wouldn't leak it, but the House Judiciary Committee certainly would if there was a chance to catch Barr in a lie.

    A more likely scenario is that Barr wouldn't blatantly lie but would put heavy spin on it or disregard bad (but not worth pursuing) things Mueller said about Trump's actions. I'm not saying that happened. I'm saying there's a plausible reason for him to do that and therefore reason not to just automatically trust him. And just remember this. We're still talking about politicians. No politician should be given the benefit of the doubt, even if it's one we tend to like, and for the record, I like Barr. However, a politician will always save his own ***.
     
  5. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 1,000+ Posts

    You from March 6 2019:

    "The campaign colluded, that is a fact based on the Trump tower meeting, Stone's interaction with Wickipedia and Manafort sharing polling data. The only question is whether Trump was involved or like I've always believed and merely looked the other way and used it as wind at his sails. "
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  6. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

    Nicely done ia
    Husker suffers from the same delusion othe dems seem to have,that old statements will never resurface.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 1,000+ Posts

    If a mutt repeatedly craps on the floor, it may help to rub their nose in it in hope they learn. I am skeptical about Seattle Husker and OUBubba growing intellectually. It seems that they just enjoy wallowing in their own crap.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. Vol Horn 4 Life

    Vol Horn 4 Life 5,000+ Posts

    What's anyone supposed to do or say when an entire party is trying to take you out over something you know you didn't do. Now he's supposed to pretend the report is wrong? WTF?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Other than Trump himself and his very closest people, nobody knew diddly-dick. They guessed. Democrats at least seem to have guessed wrong (and with great sanctimony), and Republicans seem to have guessed right. Both parties took their positions based on convenience, not a serious look at the facts.
     
  10. UTChE96

    UTChE96 1,000+ Posts

    If the summary report issued by Barr is accurate then Mueller better have a good justification for taking 2 years to investigate a new POTUS to only then issue a finding of no collusion.
     
  11. horninchicago

    horninchicago 5,000+ Posts

    I'm reminded of the line of questioning at the end of "A Few Good Men".

    If there was no collusion, and no Trump campaign members committed crimes or accepted offers from Russians to sabotage the election, then why would it be necessary to obstruct justice? In this case, however, we now know the collusion and crimes didn't occur, so if the AG kept the entire report confidential, and we all know he won't, it wouldn't mean obstruction to reasonable people. The media and Dems and some others are not reasonable, however.

    But Trump has said he wants the full report released, to the extent possible, so the sanctimonious calls from Nadler, et al, are BS.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Clean

    Clean 5,000+ Posts

    ABC News still playing up the fact that Mueller didn't exonerate Trump on obstruction.

    My limited understanding is that prosecutors don't usually exonerate the party that was charged. They either indict or they don't. There wasn't enough evidence to indict. End of story.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Why are you talking about obstruction of justice? It would not be obstruction of justice to keep it confidential. That has nothing to do with this. It would just be stupid and bad governance to keep it confidential.

    Nadler is a partisan hack just like everybody else in this equation. He's not going to admit that his Party and the media have spent two years jumping to conclusions only to have Robert Mueller (who they thought was their hero) take a piss on their face. So he's gotta latch onto something.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019
  14. Phil Elliott

    Phil Elliott 2,500+ Posts

    I said when this whole thing started, and I will repeat it now: Mueller's Job #1 was not to get Trump, it was to keep Hillary out of jail.
     
  15. Clean

    Clean 5,000+ Posts

    Brainless Beto says that if Americans don't get to see the details of Mueller's report, THERE MAY NOT BE ANOTHER YEAR FOR AMERICA!!


    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...is-held-america-may-not-see-244th-year/[/ur;]
     
  16. Phil Elliott

    Phil Elliott 2,500+ Posts

    Well he had to top AOC's 12-year Demise-of-America prediction.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  17. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    I dont know why anyone would trust these clowns in the first place

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Clean

    Clean 5,000+ Posts

    Speaking of AOC, has the titular head of the Democratic Party weighed in on the Mueller Report?
     
  19. theiioftx

    theiioftx 2,500+ Posts

    So is CNN, NBC and MSNBC. In the words of Gomer Pyle,” Suprise, Suprise,suprise!”
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    The republicans didn't have to guess right because we did look at the facts. This investigation had too many issues tied to it from the very start. Mchammer and I stressed this to you about a year ago. TAINT!!!!
     
  21. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • WTF? WTF? x 1
  22. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    You had no facts to look at. You had speculation to look at. Taint notwithstanding.
     
  23. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    No facts? LOL! Okay, man.
     
  24. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I know you value dick-slapping, and this report is understandingly a good opportunity for lots of it. But no, you did not have any facts to support your previous conclusions. You relied on speculation.
     
  25. mchammer

    mchammer 5,000+ Posts

    Deez didn’t care to look at the TAINT!!!
     
  26. mchammer

    mchammer 5,000+ Posts

    NO!!! The other side relied on speculation. It was obvious which side had the greater confirmation bias.
     
  27. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    Here are things we know about this case:

    1) The Steele dossier, which was the main driver behind this investigation, was done by a man who admitted that he couldn't back up the claims in the dossier.

    2) The FBI NEVER verified the contents of the dossier. They went ahead and took the contents to a FISA judge and got what they wanted.

    3) Biased figures heavily involved in the investigation. Mueller hired many people with conflicts of interest.

    4) McCabe himself more or less admitted this investigation was an attempt to get rid of Trump.

    I can produce more if you want. This investigation was **** from the start and I for one don't know why you can't see it. I'm beginning to think it's TDS but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on that.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019
  28. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

  29. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

    I had forgotten these 2 POS outlets won Pulitzers.
    The Washington Post and The New York Times both won Pulitzer Prizes for reporting that bolstered the narrative that Trump and his associates committed treason by working with a foreign government to win an election. The two outlets shared a joint award from the Pulitzer board for national reporting:

    “For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration. (The New York Times entry, submitted in this category, was moved into contention by the Board and then jointly awarded the Prize.)”

    In its article about receiving two Pulitzers in 2018, the Post bragged that its reporting “helped set the stage for the special counsel’s ongoing investigation of the administration.” That investigation concluded that even though the media repeatedly shouted that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” there turned out to be no fire.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019
  30. 2003TexasGrad

    2003TexasGrad 2,500+ Posts

    Effing hilarious.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page