• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Barr proceedings started

Stanyon

Stanyon

WWMRD?
sun rise said:
Despicable donald started the war against Democracy.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? During the hearing I watched on C-SPAN Barr was talking about looking into the legitimacy of the FISA started by the Obama administration to wiretap the Trump campaign pre-election and the possibility that the DOJ was possibly politicized to attempt to prevent Trump from being elected -of course this is all waiting on an investigation.

Do you think any of this might play into the current push for impeaching/deligitimizing Barr?
 
Last edited:
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
sun rise said:
Yes with all the consequences that could follow. From what I read, he can indeed be impeached. If he keeps thumbing his nose at the House and continues to tell them to get lost, the steps would be to cite him for contempt and subject him to a large fine and possibly a jail sentence. Then presumably impeach him as well.
LOCK HIM UP.

And continue working through all of the swamp creatures one by one. Despicable donald started it. The House should finish it and him. Despicable donald started the war against Democracy. The House needs to step up and stop him.
Click to expand...
Most, if not all of you are to young to remember Watergate. Unfortunately, I am not.

Congressional subpoenaś were ignored then too.

Remember Barr volunteered to show up today, he was not ordered by subpoena.

If Knadler issues a subpoena, Barr will ignore it, and tie the whole thing up in court for months.

It is unprecedented for a cabinet level official to be questioned by staff, a change to the rules the dim-0-crats made.

The dims remind me of a Japanese soldier in the jungle still fighting WW2, the war is over, they just don´t know it.

For two years all we heard from them was collusion, collusion, collusion. They told us to be patient Mueller would deliver the goods for them. Heard any of them say Russia or collusion lately ?

They have decided to vilify a man over two bit letters and not letting them have grand jury testimony, which he cannot legally do.

How perfectly pitiful and inept they are. I am sure Trump is laughing at these bozoś, I know I am. But I have been laughing at dim-o-crats for fifty years. They are the joke that keeps on giving.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Shadow Link said:
I think your talking about the spin coming from the media here. It was spun from when Trump mentioned that the Russians or anyone should hack the information wiped from Clinton's server — which would then include the gap between intention and action being the ironic hilarity Trump was using while simultaneously mocking the democrats with their actual offense of covering up their Russian collusion.
Click to expand...
Actually it wasn't "spin" at all, as when Trump asked the Russians to release Hillary's e-mails at a campaign rally, which was recorded and can be seen, according to Mueller's report five hours later the Russians hacked into the DNC computers, later gradually releasing the e-mails.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Enoch07 said:
Then why didn't the Dems ask a single question about Russian interference to Barr yesterday?

If its soooooo important. Why was more time not spent on it yesterday?

That's why it's funny. The Dems showed their true intent yesterday. And it has nothing to do with Russian interference.
Click to expand...
Actually it was covered as the main thrust of questioning Barr was dealing with Mueller's report that deals with the Russian hacking and those in Trump's camp that had contacts with them. How in the world could you have missed that, especially since that's the main theme in Mueller's 400 page report?
 
Enoch07

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
metis said:
Actually it was covered as the main thrust of questioning Barr was dealing with Mueller's report that deals with the Russian hacking and those in Trump's camp that had contacts with them. How in the world could you have missed that, especially since that's the main theme in Mueller's 400 page report?
Click to expand...


:rolleyes:

Nice try.
 
Stanyon

Stanyon

WWMRD?
metis said:
Hillary's e-mails
Click to expand...

Do you think that Hillary's e-mails played a role in her loss in 2016?

If you answered yes to the above question, what was contained in the emails written by Clinton herself that voters found so repugnant that she lost an election over them?

Do you support transparency in government?
 
fantome profane

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
FragrantGrace said:
No, let me guess. You're a Liberal. :confused: Because that is an outright falsehood.
Click to expand...
As for tampering The Mueller Report specifically stated that there was. “The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion.”

And yes, it also concluded that no charges of conspiracy with the Trump campaign could be brought. I am definitely a liberal and I accept this.
 
FragrantGrace

FragrantGrace

If winning isn't everything why do they keep score
fantome profane said:
As for tampering The Mueller Report specifically stated that there was. “The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion.”

And yes, it also concluded that no charges of conspiracy with the Trump campaign could be brought. I am definitely a liberal and I accept this.
Click to expand...
What people who hate Trump don't get is there was no such thing attributed in any way to Trump, his family, nor any American citizen!
That is the point! That was the crux of the sham witch hunt Liberal sponsored "Mueller Investigation". The rabid Liberals that were all for that sham waste of money touted Mueller prior to its beginning as a great honorable reliable ethical man who would get to the bottom of things.

Now that he has and his investigation proved TRUMP nor anyone in his family, nor any American had ANYTHING to do with election tampering or any other offense, the Liberals are going nuts!
They're even trying to harass AG Barr to return again and again to the chamber to undergo more scrutiny over an issue that is OVER!

So, anyone that says Trump was found to have colluded with Russia or tampered with the investigation or evidence thereto is a bald faced liar.
That's what can be said about the final report of Mueller and his findings.
 
fantome profane

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
FragrantGrace said:
What people who hate Trump don't get is there was no such thing attributed in any way to Trump, his family, nor any American citizen!
That is the point! That was the crux of the sham witch hunt Liberal sponsored "Mueller Investigation". The rabid Liberals that were all for that sham waste of money touted Mueller prior to its beginning as a great honorable reliable ethical man who would get to the bottom of things.

Now that he has and his investigation proved TRUMP nor anyone in his family, nor any American had ANYTHING to do with election tampering or any other offense, the Liberals are going nuts!
They're even trying to harass AG Barr to return again and again to the chamber to undergo more scrutiny over an issue that is OVER!

So, anyone that says Trump was found to have colluded with Russia or tampered with the investigation or evidence thereto is a bald faced liar.
That's what can be said about the final report of Mueller and his findings.
Click to expand...
What some Trump supporters don’t get is that not everything is about Trump. Trump did not collude with the Russians. I get It. But that does not mean the Russians did not try to interfere with your election, and it does not make that Russian interference irrelevant. It happened in 2016, and they will try it again in 2020. That is the most important part of the Mueller Report and no one wants to address it.
 
FragrantGrace

FragrantGrace

If winning isn't everything why do they keep score
fantome profane said:
What some Trump supporters don’t get is that not everything is about Trump.
Click to expand...
We're not talking about everything. We're talking about the Mueller finding and Barr.

However, the Mueller investigation and inquiry WAS all about Trump. The false charge of Russia collusion in the 2016 election that Trump won is one of the reasons for its start. A fake dossier, paid for allegedly at the cost of $10 million dollars out of Hillary R. Clintons pocket, was full of lies and falsehoods. And it was perjury , swearing under oath to the dossier credibility, that allowed HRC and Barack Obama to spy on Donald Trump's campaign. This is all a fact.

So while not everything is about Trump, which is a red herring, what is actually being discussed in this thread is Barr, and the proceedings that are pursued, but not anymore since Barr volunteered to appear before the panel and answer questions about his synopsis of the hundreds of pages of Mueller findings and has no legal obligation to entertain their inane pursuit further, IS about Trump! The Mueller investigation and probe was all about Trump. And now the query of Barr, well the former query as he will not appear anymore to answer questions, good for him, was all about Trump. Because the Liberals in the House refuse to accept the findings of Mueller! After they were all for his probe and investigation before it culminated in finding there was no Russia collusion on Trump's part, nor on the part of his family, nor on the part of any American.

Trump didn't do it.
Liberals hate the truth of that.
 
FragrantGrace

FragrantGrace

If winning isn't everything why do they keep score
(Excerpt from page 10) https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.” In so doing, the Office recognized that the word “collud[e]” was used in communications with the Acting Attorney General confirming certain aspects of the investigation's scope and that the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation. But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law. In connection with that analysis, we addressed the factual question whether members of the Trump Campaign “coordinat[ed]”—a term that appears in the appointment order—with Russian election interference activities. Like collusion, “coordination” does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law. We understood coordination to require an agreement—tacit or express—between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other's actions or interests. We applied the term coordination in that sense when stating in the report that the investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
"In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.” In so doing, the Office recognized that the word “collud[e]” was used in communications with the Acting Attorney General confirming certain aspects of the investigation's scope and that the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation. But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law. In connection with that analysis, we addressed the factual question whether members of the Trump Campaign “coordinat[ed]”—a term that appears in the appointment order—with Russian election interference activities. Like collusion, “coordination” does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law. We understood coordination to require an agreement—tacit or express—between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other's actions or interests. We applied the term coordination in that sense when stating in the report that the investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."


Mueller Report Released: It's Official — No Collusion, No Proof of Obstruction
 
Shadow Link

Shadow Link

Active Member
metis said:
Actually it wasn't "spin" at all, as when Trump asked the Russians to release Hillary's e-mails at a campaign rally, which was recorded and can be seen, according to Mueller's report five hours later the Russians hacked into the DNC computers, later gradually releasing the e-mails.
Click to expand...
I think you mean the e-mails that would involve the coordination efforts with other Russians, Hillary had, to protest against Putin from 2011?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top