WaPo - Mueller complained that Barr’s letter did not capture ‘context’ of probe
23 replies, posted
Mueller complained that Barr’s letter did not capture ‘context’ of Trump probe
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-complained-that-barrs-letter-did-not-capture-context-of-trump-probe/2019/04/30/d3c8fdb6-6b7b-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.eee2368a48fe
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III wrote a letter in late March complaining to Attorney General William P. Barr that a four-page memo to Congress describing the principal conclusions of the investigation into President Trump “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s work, according to a copy of the letter reviewed Tuesday by The Washington Post.
At the time the letter was sent on March 27, Barr had announced that Mueller had not found a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian officials seeking to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. Barr also said Mueller had not reached a conclusion about whether Trump had tried to obstruct justice, but Barr reviewed the evidence and found it insufficient to support such a charge.
“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions,” Mueller wrote. “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”
Absolutely cannot wait for Robert Mueller to testify publicly in front of congress.
and then nothing will get done because Democrats believe wanting impeachment is "too far left" and care more about getting reelected than justice.
Bob, I'm afraid that was entirely their intention.
Biden said impeachment has to happen if the orange continues to obstruct
Did I get infected with something or does this guy's name have a bunch of parentheses around it for everyone else??
It's probably ironic humor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_parentheses
he's using the echoes on purpose, according to his words, in solidarity to people who get targeted by anti-semitic harassment. it's a "yes, I am jewish, so what?"
Impeachment isn't even the removal of Trump from office, its the beginnings of the process to start the removal. It's leveling charges, not removing someone. After they throw the charges up, that then has to go through the legal fight, and then from there the decision to remove him will proceed.
And like it or not, impeachment could even help Trump. All it would do is serve as a rally cry and 'proof' that he's just being falsely blamed. That will give him an edge with voters.
What I want to see is him lose his presidency and get indicted immediately. I want him to be charged with all of this shit. It'll be far easier to kill him in votings than to try to remove him by force.
You have to remember something here too; there is no way GOP will remove him from office. If you think they're going to cooperate you are a complete ignoramus. They don't give a single fuck.
The only thing that will get him out of office is a waterstupidgate moment. Impeachment without that bombshell is simply too tedious. Especially now that the media shit themselves over the course of 2 years and then proceeded to suck up everything Barr said without question. This gives GOP a really good cover story and it gives Trump the perfect leverage for a PR spin, which is likely since so far everything has bounced off of him.
Ignoring this entirely too, if we impeach him, and fail, all that will do is embolden him to triple down. He'll think he's literally untouchable and will go even harder than ever before. That's not something I'd want to gamble, personally.
As a note, yes, I want to see him removed, and prosecuted, however that's very tedious and tricky and I don't see it being realistic. If there was a clear sign that it would go smoothly I'd entirely agree, and with the many investigations into him it's actually amazing to me I'm even saying any of this. This is such a ridiculous situation, it's just stupid
We have a Watergate moment. Nixon was impeached for obstructing justice. That's exactly what Trump did and it's flagrantly obvious. The problem is we have a congress that's run by a party that doesn't give a fuck about upholding the rule of law.
I guess so. But I also didn't experience that in real time, and I'm not exactly a historian. Trump has obviously obstructed justice, but there are much bigger matters as well.
I really hope I'm 100% wrong and he gets his ass canned. If I'm WRONG, there's no words to eat for me, just joy.
My problem with this reluctance on impeachment is that if the Democrats don't even try, then they're setting the precedent that the behavior exhibited by Trump and his administration is acceptable as long as the president holds office. That's not how the rule of law works, and it will absolutely be taken advantage of by someone smarter and even more malicious if this is allowed to stand. If the Democrats try to impeach and fail then so be it, but I'm unconvinced it will hurt the polls AND it will send a message that this bullshit cannot be the course of future administrations.
It really is sad, but this is also very true as well I feel.
You don't know what'll happen until you give a genuine try. The dems however are too pussy-faced to even try to begin with. And if they did try they'd just fuck it up somehow. But if they don't it will set an example too, and set the example that they're too afraid to try.
and then there's my thoughts as well, it's a very complicated situation, even though the answer should be very obvious.
They've tried dude, the Democrats have been trying for 3 years to convince a republican Congress that Trump is inept but Republicans just keep covering their ears and going "LALALALA", Democrats haven't really stopped yet either, they want the full report and are doing all these subpoenas for a reason.
Unfortunately that's how the US system works, I guess no one expected the president's party and a population that supports that party to be so behind a president's bullshit that they wouldn't want to complain to get his party to impeach him when the system was created.
An impeachment process failing will just help republicans convince people that the president did nothing wrong, "if he did bad then why wasn't he impeached?" is the rethoric Republicans will be using and it will definitely affect polls, every little bit of fuel to use against Democrats will be used, Trump won by a relatively small margin of votes, every small sway in votes can get Republicans another win.
Ooooooooooooooooops
As if there wasn't enough to have him locked up for contempt already, now there's enough to jail him for perjury as well
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OzednKplncI/UbuQr3drHJI/AAAAAAAAAfc/lDvV9VyelRE/s1600/lyingcongressionalstyler01.jpg
seems like Barr might have spent more time reading this than the report.
from a legal perspective that's not really a lie, those are two different things
Mueller complaining about lack of sufficient context technically =\= disagreeing about the actual conclusion that Barr made (that the actions undertaken do not constitute obstruction, because, in Barr's view, the president can't obstruct justice).
It's slippery but that's not a lie.
And watch absolutely nothing come of it.
Christ almighty I hope something happens. I’m fucking losing hope here.
That's not the lie though, Barr's saying he didn't know what Mueller's opinion was, but apparently Mueller sent him a letter stating what he thought of the summary, so Barr must have known.
I believe Democrats will not impeach because if he is charged now Pence will be guaranteed to pardon him.
The question posed to him wasn't about the summary. It's about the conclusion of whether the president can be charged.
Barr said he didn't know Mueller's view on his conclusion on whether the president can be charged.
Mueller's view on missing context does not have anything to do with Barr's ultimate conclusion. It has to do with context, delivery, and the characterization of the report's findings. Not on whether the President can be charged with obstruction.
They're different questions.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
