Barr Increasingly Appears Focused on Undermining Mueller Inquiry

[OpportunityCost]

There is rancor between the parties because Donald Trump, unlike any president in history, TROLLS democrats every day, and acts like a stupid **** moron, he's an embarrassment, and the fact that republicans picked this guy, well, excuse dems for not being warm and fuzzy about this asshole.

Everything I've posted has been in the news over the last three years, articles written, citations given, documents provided. I don't make **** up.

Secret Money: How Trump Made Millions Selling Condos To Unknown Buyers

Report: Trump Panama Tower ‘Riddled’ With Drug, Mob Money

Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes as He Reaped Riches From His Father - The New York Times

Report: Trump Organization Bilking Taxpayers, Lying About It

Republican crime organization:

View attachment 67275110
View attachment 67275111

And there are the republicans, harping endlessly about Biden, and Hillary, the hypocrisy of them is beyond the pale.

I spoke the truth. Again, the above is scratching the surface, I just don't have the time and there is a 5000 character limitation. But, a few good books have been written.

Link one is entirely supposition. There is no evidence; there are a lot of "may's" or "could be's".

Link two is sourced by Global Witness. They are asserting, among other things, that brokers and Trump himself are supposed to know who buyers are buried in shell companies that even the government doesn't know who owns them without a warrant. Again, tons of supposition and things Trump should know that nobody could possibly know.

Link three is the times and there are so many quotes and accusations, its so slanted as to be laughable as a factual source. They allege illegality that they even state fines were paid on and they cannot prove. Its a plain, old fashioned hit piece.

Link four is a never-Trumper of long standing, I'm not even reading that brand of bull****. Jonathan Chait is wrong entirely too often and speculates entirely too much about things he calls facts that turn out to be false later.

All your charts prove is that Democrats have a tighter grip on their AGs than Republicans do. One could argue that Democrats hide their scandals better because guess what...the media covers for them relentlessly. We know Reno and Holder committed enormous cover ups during their tenures.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Hell, he has to cover for his Boss Trump.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Then share your source for that. What's the big secret?

The IG himself. No admittance of political bias means what?

 

[NWRatCon]

The IG himself. No admittance of political bias means what?

No evidence of political bias means nothing to you, unless the shoe is on the democratic foot. That is what is so obvious and so preposterous about this entire series of posts. If a Republican is accused, "innocent until proven guilty, and even then it was because of bias and untrue...", but a Democrat, and "guilt by innuendo and spurious allegations" is just peachy. It's pretty silly, actually, and exceedingly annoying.

 

[OpportunityCost]

No evidence of political bias means nothing to you, unless the shoe is on the democratic foot. That is what is so obvious and so preposterous about this entire series of posts. If a Republican is accused, "innocent until proven guilty, and even then it was because of bias and untrue...", but a Democrat, and "guilt by innuendo and spurious allegations" is just peachy. It's pretty silly, actually, and exceedingly annoying.

The emails between Page and Strozk are evidence of bias. Determining bias from investigative actions is amongst the hardest things to prove. An admittance is damn near the only way to prove it, but there was plenty of evidence.

 

[OscarLevant]

Link one is entirely supposition. There is no evidence; there are a lot of "may's" or "could be's".

Link two is sourced by Global Witness. They are asserting, among other things, that brokers and Trump himself are supposed to know who buyers are buried in shell companies that even the government doesn't know who owns them without a warrant. Again, tons of supposition and things Trump should know that nobody could possibly know.

Link three is the times and there are so many quotes and accusations, its so slanted as to be laughable as a factual source. They allege illegality that they even state fines were paid on and they cannot prove. Its a plain, old fashioned hit piece.

Link four is a never-Trumper of long standing, I'm not even reading that brand of bull****. Jonathan Chait is wrong entirely too often and speculates entirely too much about things he calls facts that turn out to be false later.

All your charts prove is that Democrats have a tighter grip on their AGs than Republicans do. One could argue that Democrats hide their scandals better because guess what...the media covers for them relentlessly. We know Reno and Holder committed enormous cover ups during their tenures.

You asked for links from reasonable sources, and I did. If you wanted forensic evidence from the FBI, well, you didn't ask for it and it would be unreasonable for anyone on a debate forum to provide it.

You obviously didn't read the entire articles. They weren't making **** up.

The only thing you prove is that if Trump were video'd shooting someone on 5th avenue, you'd argue that article 2 gives him the right to do it.

There really is no point in debating someone like you.

 

[OpportunityCost]

You asked for links from reasonable sources, and I did. If you wanted forensic evidence from the FBI, well, you didn't ask for it and it would be unreasonable for anyone on a debate forum to provide it.

You obviously didn't read the entire articles. They weren't making **** up.

The only thing you prove is that if Trump were video'd shooting someone on 5th avenue, you'd argue that article 2 gives him the right to do it.

There really is no point in debating someone like you.

A never-Trumper opinion piece, the NYTimes (who has had numerous factual errors about Trump and the Trump investigation), an article with a thousand suppositions and maybes and may haves are sources, they aren't reasonable.

If there is no point you can run along, you aren't contributing anything but rumor/smears anyway.

 

[eman623]

Do the Dems think the 2020 election is going to turn on a year-old report that even Trump opponents admit did not show any collusion?

The American people don't care about that. Not anymore. Just like they don't care about Joe's idiot son getting getting a bribe/sinicure from the Ukranians. It's not relevant to their lives.

 

[Harshaw]

This, my friend, is a conflation of two different ideas under the same rubric. You are correct that one interpretation is that "unitary executive" means that all executive authority ultimately resides in the President as the Chief Executive. But, it would be inaccurate to assert that that is the only interpretation extant.

What I said is the actual definition of "unitary executive." What other nonsense people ignorantly come up with isn't my problem, nor is it the problem of the concept.

Just because someone erroneously ascribes something to "unitary executive theory," it doesn't mean it's correct. I'm not responsible for any ignorance, however widespread it may be. TONS of people think "you can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater" is some accurate statement of First Amendment law, too, but no matter how many people think it and use it as an argument, it doesn't make it true.

 

[US&THEM]

The IG himself. No admittance of political bias means what?

Not what he stated

 

[Mach]

The IG himself. No admittance of political bias means what?

So you come to debate and make an obviously bogus claim.
You get corrected, and you cite "arrogance" and "nuh uh" as your defense.
You restate your unfounded and refuted original claim.
And now you randomly claim the IG himself has stated that the only way the determine political bias, is through the person admitting it? link? lol. And how would that refute what I wrote?

Tell me this isn't your A-game. Life is important, don't you want to be on the correct side for a change? Put a little effort in, it doesn't take much.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

So you come to debate by making a bogus claim.
You get corrected, and you cite "arrogance" and "nuh uh" as your defense.
You restate your unfounded and refuted original claim.
And now you randomly claim the IG himself has stated that the only way the determine political bias, is through the person admitting it?

Tell me this isn't your A-game. Life is important, don't you want to be on the correct side for a change? Put a little effort in, it doesn't take much.

That is, indeed, the A-game you asked about.

 

[OpportunityCost]

So you come to debate and make an obviously bogus claim.
You get corrected, and you cite "arrogance" and "nuh uh" as your defense.
You restate your unfounded and refuted original claim.
And now you randomly claim the IG himself has stated that the only way the determine political bias, is through the person admitting it? link? lol. And how would that refute what I wrote?

Tell me this isn't your A-game. Life is important, don't you want to be on the correct side for a change? Put a little effort in, it doesn't take much.

Made a mistake, between Strozk, Comey, Page and the numerous leaks from all over the investigation its hard to remember all of them.

Life is important, but if you think this place is life...it isn't.

 

[OpportunityCost]

That is, indeed, the A-game you asked about.

And the peanut gallery of trolling chimes in. Go away.

 

[Mach]

Made a mistake, between Strozk, Comey, Page and the numerous leaks from all over the investigation its hard to remember all of them.
Life is important, but if you think this place is life...it isn't.

There it is folks OpportunityCost believes he's dead, while posting here, and we all are too. Or did you mean everything you post is fake? so many ways to take that absurd argument

So that's how you try to rationalize terrible choices espoused on this forum, and in the voting booth, no doubt.
They aren't real life? That's ****ing depressing, I'm sorry for you.

I'm real OC, and you revealed in reality, in real life, that your arguments are so weak that you have to act like "this doesn't matter", to justify your arguments being wrong.
It doesn't matter that you're wrong, because this isn't life.

Wow! Next time I see you pull that "but I try to debate and everyone is just mean!" victim bull****, I'll be quoting post #63.
In real life. You know, like reality. Not in person, and yet magically still "in life".

 

[US&THEM]

Made a mistake, between Strozk, Comey, Page and the numerous leaks from all over the investigation its hard to remember all of them.

Life is important, but if you think this place is life...it isn't.

Zero leaks from any of the agents involved on the Mueller team. If they had leaked then you’d have an argument.

 

[Bullseye]

Barr Increasingly Appears Focused on Undermining Mueller Inquiry

A judge’s criticism cast light on the first in a series of steps by the attorney general to take aim at the Russia investigation.

Barr has ordered an investigation into the FBI, is re-investigating the Micheal Flynn conviction, sent investigators to Ukraine to assist Rudy Giuliani with his conspiracy theories, and ordered a lighter sentence for Trump crony Roger Stone.

Barr is massively interfering with and undermining the DoJ to the benefit of President Access Hollywood.

Barr believes in the "unitary executive" ideology which views a President as a veritable king who answers to no one. Not to Congress and not to the courts.

Mueller already beat Barr to it. He produced nothing. found nothing and totally embarrassed himself in front of Congress.

 

[ecofarm]

Mueller already beat Barr to it. He produced nothing. found nothing and totally embarrassed himself in front of Congress.

Trump's campaign manager and cabinet members went to prison. There were ten documented cases of obstruction by Trump. Twenty five Russians were indicted, half of them intelligence agents.

 

[Moot]

Your statement is silly. Barr runs the DOJ, he's not an outside entity interfering with anything. Further, there is ample evidence that the F.B.I acted in bad faith and needs to be investigated.

There's a growing body of evidence that Barr acted and continues to act in bad faith, too.

 

[Bullseye]

Trump's campaign manager and cabinet members went to prison. There were ten documented cases of obstruction by Trump. Twenty five Russians were indicted, half of them intelligence agents.

Manafort was "campaign manager" for three months and went to prison for charged totally unrelated to the election. Flynn was sandbagged; convicted of lying in an interview that people conducting the interview said they believed them. The Russians indicted had no contact we Trumps campaign. Got any other lies you want corrected?

 

[ecofarm]

Manafort was "campaign manager" for three months and went to prison for charged totally unrelated to the election. Flynn was sandbagged; convicted of lying in an interview that people conducting the interview said they believed them.

Manafort is a money launderer for foreign entities. And he was Trump's campaign manager. Flynn met with Russian agents and lied about it. And let's not forget the Trump Tower Meeting.

Trump's money all comes from Russia. Only Russian money laundering banks are willing to give him loans. He is Putin's puppet.

 

[Moot]

Mueller already beat Barr to it. He produced nothing. found nothing and totally embarrassed himself in front of Congress.

Mueller produced and found quite a bit...he just didn't have the authority to indict a sitting president with a crime. But that doesn't mean Trump can't be indicted after he leaves office...





Nor did Mueller exonerate Trump....

 

[Bullseye]

Manafort is a money launderer for foreign entities. And he was Trump's campaign manager.

And he was fired. NEXT/

Flynn met with Russian agents and lied about it. And let's not forget the Trump Tower Meeting

And he was fired. And the FBI agents doing the interview didn't think he was lying. But then the interview reports were altered. NEXT.

Trump's money all comes from Russia. Only Russian money laundering banks are willing to give him loans. He is Putin's puppet.

Basic bull**** NEXT.

 

[ecofarm]

And he was fired...

And he was fired...

"I hire only the best people."

Best people for what?

 

[Bullseye]

"I hire only the best people."

Best people for what?

Best you can do? A haggard cliché' :roll: