If Democrats in Congress subpoena documents illegal to release is that a criminal conspiracy?

[Born Free]

No one knows what is in the report by the AG and Muellar. Let's review it and judge for ourselves what it contains. After the abuse the FBI and Muellar have taken at the hands of Trump, I doubt if either of them would allow a coverup to occur. Sooner or later, the report will be made public. I never really thought Trump was going down for this because I think he is an unwilling dupe but I was certain his son would be indicted or at least interviewed. We shall see. Given the impact this entire investigation has had on his first two years, I am thankful it happened because it kept Trump and the GOP from strong arming the nation even more. The investigations into Trump and his business though are still ongoing. I would be willing to bet they find plenty of crimes.

Sure we know, the AG put out a summary that exonerates collusion and obstruction, unless your calling the AG a liar.

Yeah you were 100% certain Crooked Hillary would win. You were also 100% certain Kavanagh was guilty of being a gang leader rapist, by the claim of thee nut job woman that could not corroborate one thing they said. Last you are still 100% certain Trump is guilty of collusion and obstruction.

Yeah more investigations into his tax records for the last 20 yrs. and investigate all his business dealings for the last 20 yrs and if they don't find anything then go back another 20 yrs. However Trump is not easy to roll over, he will fight every subpoena and I'll bet he may win. For the House to go on a fishing expedition with no basis, would not fly with public opinion or with a federal judge. The lawyers will tie it up for years.

 

[tecoyah]

(X) No, subpoena and viewing the documents for review is not the same as releasing them.

 

[uptower]

Sure we know, the AG put out a summary that exonerates collusion and obstruction, unless your calling the AG a liar.

He might yet be. I'm more than happy to call the president a liar, so why not?

I'd take Liam Neeson's advice in times like these

Stay focused, hold it together
Go into the next bedroom
Get under the bed
Calm down
Now the next part is very important,
They're going to release the report

 

[Born Free]

He might yet be. I'm more than happy to call the president a liar, so why not?

That being the case you'll keep your dream alive that Trump colluded with the Russians and obstructed. That way you might prevent from seriously injuring yourself.

 

[JasperL]

It's my understanding that it's Barr's decision how much to release and to whom. Nagler and Schiff's threats notwithstanding. IOW, by law he gets to decide. You heard different?

But the POTUS said to release it all. Why not just do it? He can order the AG to release it, so I'm sure you agree Trump should do that.

 

[JasperL]

What criminal conduct. Try posting up some facts. As for facts, Trump has been exonerated of Collusion and Obstruction

Those are not facts. As to collusion, the letter quotes the SC as saying, “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”1 So they didn't meet the bar for prosecution, which isn't to say they were "exonerated." There's one helluva lot of ground between, "we found no evidence that" and "our investigation did not establish that."

For obstruction, Barr writes, "The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.....The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

and you say "this small potential ray of light". Christ you liberals for over 2 years were 100% certain Trump was guilty of Colluding with the Russians, and you had all this factual evidence. Your bubble has been busted.

You libs were 100% certain Crooked Hillary was going to win the election. You lost. Then you were 100% certain Kavanagh was a leader of gang rape and spiked the punch so the woman could be easley raped. You lost. Then you were 100% certain for over 2 yrs that Trump colluded with the Russians. You lost again. I would suspect you're getting a little tired of losing.

To pretend it never happened, yeah Trump never colluded with the Russians nor was anyone connected with Trump's campaign. Not Manafort, Flynn or any of the people that were indicted for other crimes.

But I will say you libs will pretend that Trump colluded with Russian no matter what. Hell you've been telling us for over 2 years Trump was guilty of collusion. You are the pretenders.

I think what most people want is to see the report so we can read for ourselves what the SC did and didn't find. So far we have Barr's summary, which is pretty much nothing.

 

[bubbabgone]

But the POTUS said to release it all. Why not just do it? He can order the AG to release it, so I'm sure you agree Trump should do that.

For one thing, don't you think it would at least have to be cleared with the grand jury witnesses who thought their testimony would remain secret, as is the practice?

 

[bubbabgone]

Those are not facts. As to collusion, the letter quotes the SC as saying, “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”1 So they didn't meet the bar for prosecution, which isn't to say they were "exonerated." There's one helluva lot of ground between, "we found no evidence that" and "our investigation did not establish that."

For obstruction, Barr writes, "The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.....The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”



I think what most people want is to see the report so we can read for ourselves what the SC did and didn't find. So far we have Barr's summary, which is pretty much nothing.

There is? What would be the reason a violation of Law can't be established? Because _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ couldn't be found to support the charge. Really only an 8 letter piece of ground. Not a helluva lot.

Right. It was up to the DOJ to decide and they did.

 

[Vadinho]

Sure we know, the AG put out a summary that exonerates collusion and obstruction, unless your calling the AG a liar.

Yeah you were 100% certain Crooked Hillary would win. You were also 100% certain Kavanagh was guilty of being a gang leader rapist, by the claim of thee nut job woman that could not corroborate one thing they said. Last you are still 100% certain Trump is guilty of collusion and obstruction.

Yeah more investigations into his tax records for the last 20 yrs. and investigate all his business dealings for the last 20 yrs and if they don't find anything then go back another 20 yrs. However Trump is not easy to roll over, he will fight every subpoena and I'll bet he may win. For the House to go on a fishing expedition with no basis, would not fly with public opinion or with a federal judge. The lawyers will tie it up for years.

As has been noted, the conclusion Barr made to exonerate his boss was predictable given his opinions on the matter while auditioning for the AG job. The rest of the world just wants to see the full report and data so we can decide for ourselves. The investigation led to several indictments and guilty pleas along with exposing vital information about key players in his administration and campaign. We shall see if Barr made the right decision. As for the liar claim, an incorrect decision does not imply a lie, it is simply an incorrect decision.

 

[jimbo]

They are concerned it will be highly censured by Trump's hand picked Attorney General. That can be avoided by the complete report being submitted to Congress.

I think you mean censored. But this reminds me of the tax thing. Nothing more than a focal point. The AG said there's nothing there. Mueller never indicated there is anything there. But nevertheless when you have nothing, you must cling to the hope that there's something there.

 

[Sampson Simpson]

All the summary does is prove Barr's already trying to run interference. Congress is having that report, they are legally permitted to request it and the DOJ can only stall so long. They can subpoena Mueller and his team to hear first hand anyway and the DOJ and the president cannot stop them. The facts are getting out whether his supporters like it or not.

And it's telling that the people who were screaming Trump's innocence a few days ago, and who are championing the scant information we have now as PROOF TM, are also still insisting the report should not be made public or even shown to congress. What are they afraid of?

it's expected, these people have no shame. No intelligence, no honesty, just compete and utter hacks. not surprising at all, the right are scumbags, have proven that for years now.

 

[JasperL]

There is? What would be the reason a violation of Law can't be established? Because _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ couldn't be found to support the charge. Really only an 8 letter piece of ground. Not a helluva lot.

You forget I guess we're STILL, YEARS LATER, DEBATING BUTHEREMAILS. If Comey had delivered a report to AG Lynch and she wrote a letter like Barr, it would have looked something like this one. So, yes, there is a lot of ground between nothing and not enough to charge with a crime.

Right. It was up to the DOJ to decide and they did.

Yes, every charge in this whole thing has been up to "the DOJ." What the person claimed was the SC "exonerated" Trump on obstruction and what tiny snippets we got in the Barr letter directly contradict that assertion. The SC said, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

You cannot claim the report "exonerates" Trump on that charge, when the SC says the opposite.

 

[JasperL]

For one thing, don't you think it would at least have to be cleared with the grand jury witnesses who thought their testimony would remain secret, as is the practice?

I'm not going to get into the details about what CAN legally be released, but you understood the point well enough, which is the details, the report itself, should be made public to the greatest possible extent. And there's really no reason the entire report isn't made available to Gang of Eight at a minimum.

I also have to laugh at the newfound concern from the GOP about keeping what is traditionally secret fro public view. Does anyone not remember the FISA warrant debates and what the GOP voted to do, with Trump's enthusiastic support, which was for the first time in history reveal the details of those warrant requests? The GOP set the bar here and lowered it considerably. Democrats should demand and will get IMO to use the same standard.

BTW, anyone wondering what the Democrats are doing investigating this stuff when we already had the SC doing an investigation has their answer. Now we're told the juicy details will remain under wraps, so there's no alternative but for the House to try and get those same details now hidden from us by AG Barr, and grand jury rules.

 

[JasperL]

I think you mean censored. But this reminds me of the tax thing. Nothing more than a focal point. The AG said there's nothing there. Mueller never indicated there is anything there. But nevertheless when you have nothing, you must cling to the hope that there's something there.

Reminds me of something......BUTHEREMAILS!!! :roll:

More than anything, what the public wants is to see the report. It's like the "taxes thing." Sure, we don't know what his taxes will show, so show them. Sunlight is a great thing in politics. If we had the report in as much detail as legally possible, Republicans can point to the report and say, see, they looked into that, here's the explanation about why that's not enough to establish coordination or a conspiracy, or that Trump was compromised in some way, and we can all debate based on facts. As is, we have a guy who auditioned for AG almost promising to not find a problem, and who didn't find a problem, so Democrats rationally do not trust Barr's summary, top line conclusions to tell even a sliver of the story.

 

[jimbo]

Reminds me of something......BUTHEREMAILS!!! :roll:

More than anything, what the public wants is to see the report. It's like the "taxes thing." Sure, we don't know what his taxes will show, so show them. Sunlight is a great thing in politics. If we had the report in as much detail as legally possible, Republicans can point to the report and say, see, they looked into that, here's the explanation about why that's not enough to establish coordination or a conspiracy, or that Trump was compromised in some way, and we can all debate based on facts. As is, we have a guy who auditioned for AG almost promising to not find a problem, and who didn't find a problem, so Democrats rationally do not trust Barr's summary, top line conclusions to tell even a sliver of the story.

You'll get the report soon enough. As soon as it gets vetted to insure that it's legally permissable to release it in full. National security and privacy issues for two. But it won't matter. The left will then say it's those very issues that we really wanted to see.

Funny how a few weeks ago, the talking point was you just wait. Mueller will prove President Trump should be impeached by 4:00 this afternoon. It didn't. Now it's but something else. It will always be something else.

 

[JasperL]

You'll get the report soon enough. As soon as it gets vetted to insure that it's legally permissable to release it in full. National security and privacy issues for two. But it won't matter. The left will then say it's those very issues that we really wanted to see.

Funny how a few weeks ago, the talking point was you just wait. Mueller will prove President Trump should be impeached by 4:00 this afternoon. It didn't. Now it's but something else. It will always be something else.

I guess if/when it's released we'll see what "the left" says.

As far as the 'talking point' I've never claimed the report would lead to Trump's impeachment, because I didn't claim to know what it would conclude. We still don't have a clue what the SC found, just that what evidence they did find wasn't sufficient to support a prosecution of conspiracy or coordination.

 

[American]

They are concerned it will be highly censured by Trump's hand picked Attorney General. That can be avoided by the complete report being submitted to Congress.

All AG's are hand picked. :lol: Every ****ing one of them.

 

[American]

The summary of the Mueller report makes it very clear it is criminally illegal to release grand jury matters, citing the statute. Despite this, many Democrats in Congress (nearly all lawyers) said they are going to vote to subpoena those prohibited documents.

Would that be a criminal conspiracy by them? If they voted to have someone assassinated, are they protected because they are in Congress? If they try to organize a vote to have documents made public that are illegal to see, have or divulge, isn't that a criminal conspiracy and if they actually vote to do so haven't they then committed a crime?

Your options are overly-absolute.

 

[Born Free]

Those are not facts.

Got it, there is no criminal conduct by Trump. No facts to support such a wild claim

As to collusion, the letter quotes the SC as saying, “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

So they didn't meet the bar for prosecution, which isn't to say they were "exonerated." There's one helluva lot of ground between, "we found no evidence that" and "our investigation did not establish that."

The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government. And you take that statement as being 99% certains that all conspired with the Russians. They just needed one little piece of evidence to Convict everyone of conspiracy

For obstruction, Barr writes, "The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.....The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Here you go

Special counsel Robert Mueller did not find that President Donald Trump was guilty of obstruction of justice. It didn’t find him innocent, either. Mueller did not make a decision either way, he shoved that decision to the AG and Rosenstein’s.

Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein have concluded that “the evidence is not sufficient” to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. But as a letter written by Barr to the House Judiciary Committee Sunday (summarizing the still-confidential Mueller report submitted to Barr and the Department of Justice on Friday) makes clear, that was Barr and Rosenstein’s decision — not Mueller’s.

I think what most people want is to see the report so we can read for ourselves what the SC did and didn't find. So far we have Barr's summary, which is pretty much nothing.

Of course Barr's summary is pretty much nothing because he destroyed your DREAM that Trump was guilty of collusion with the Russians and committed Obstruction. You lost and we're arty partying

 

[Born Free]

As has been noted, the conclusion Barr made to exonerate his boss was predictable given his opinions on the matter while auditioning for the AG job. The rest of the world just wants to see the full report and data so we can decide for ourselves. The investigation led to several indictments and guilty pleas along with exposing vital information about key players in his administration and campaign. We shall see if Barr made the right decision. As for the liar claim, an incorrect decision does not imply a lie, it is simply an incorrect decision.

Which no one who Mueller indicted had anything to do with Trump and the Russian, they were all exonerated along with Trump, You lost and I'm arty partying.

 

[jimbo]

I guess if/when it's released we'll see what "the left" says.

As far as the 'talking point' I've never claimed the report would lead to Trump's impeachment, because I didn't claim to know what it would conclude. We still don't have a clue what the SC found, just that what evidence they did find wasn't sufficient to support a prosecution of conspiracy or coordination.

I wasn't referring to you specifically. Lots of the left were looking to the Mueller report to provide that one last smoking bb to finally start charges. Now that it hasn't, it's interesting to hear the walk backs and excuses. And the multiple new investigations because the Mueller must be wrong and there must be something.

Hopefully the left can keep this up until after the elections. The public has a short memory. They'll need a constant reminder.

 

[bubbabgone]

You forget I guess we're STILL, YEARS LATER, DEBATING BUTHEREMAILS. If Comey had delivered a report to AG Lynch and she wrote a letter like Barr, it would have looked something like this one. So, yes, there is a lot of ground between nothing and not enough to charge with a crime.



Yes, every charge in this whole thing has been up to "the DOJ." What the person claimed was the SC "exonerated" Trump on obstruction and what tiny snippets we got in the Barr letter directly contradict that assertion. The SC said, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Sorry, but if evidence of collusion was there Mueller would have noted it. "Can't be established" is like saying "Just don't see it"
If it was inconclusive he would have done something similar to what he did with obstruction.

You cannot claim the report "exonerates" Trump on that charge, when the SC says the opposite.

I didn't claim that.
The day Barr's letter came out I made that distinction.
But the fact remains the AG did review what Mueller reported and he and Rosenstein concluded there wasn't enough to charge obstruction.
If there was, Mueller would have recommended it himself unless he left it open for another reason.
You'll have to decide what that might be.

 

[bubbabgone]

I'm not going to get into the details about what CAN legally be released, but you understood the point well enough, which is the details, the report itself, should be made public to the greatest possible extent. And there's really no reason the entire report isn't made available to Gang of Eight at a minimum.

I also have to laugh at the newfound concern from the GOP about keeping what is traditionally secret fro public view. Does anyone not remember the FISA warrant debates and what the GOP voted to do, with Trump's enthusiastic support, which was for the first time in history reveal the details of those warrant requests? The GOP set the bar here and lowered it considerably. Democrats should demand and will get IMO to use the same standard.

BTW, anyone wondering what the Democrats are doing investigating this stuff when we already had the SC doing an investigation has their answer. Now we're told the juicy details will remain under wraps, so there's no alternative but for the House to try and get those same details now hidden from us by AG Barr, and grand jury rules.

Forget the gang of 8. Schiff was talking to the media before his hearings ended. He above all can't be trusted. He's one of the most dishonest in a bunch noted for dishonesty.
The important details of the report should be released to everyone.
FISA warrants aren't grand jury testimony and I suspect you'll be seeing why certain ones are problematic after the IG issues his report.
The democrats are anxious to see the report because they need something to distort on the campaign trail, as is their wont.
Remember where you heard it.

 

[JasperL]

The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government. And you take that statement as being 99% certains that all conspired with the Russians. They just needed one little piece of evidence to Convict everyone of conspiracy

No, I didn't say that. If you want to address my actual comment, that would be nice. TL/DR we don't know really anything except that the high bar for prosecution was not reached.

Here you go

Special counsel Robert Mueller did not find that President Donald Trump was guilty of obstruction of justice. It didn’t find him innocent, either. Mueller did not make a decision either way, he shoved that decision to the AG and Rosenstein’s.

Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein have concluded that “the evidence is not sufficient” to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. But as a letter written by Barr to the House Judiciary Committee Sunday (summarizing the still-confidential Mueller report submitted to Barr and the Department of Justice on Friday) makes clear, that was Barr and Rosenstein’s decision — not Mueller’s.

Why did you ignore the language of the letter, which I quoted, in favor of what looks like an article that you didn't cite? You said the SC "exonerated" Trump on obstruction. The SC said very explicitly their investigation did NOT "exonerate" Trump on that charge. It's very simple - your claim was wrong. I understand AG Barr declined to charge his boss. That's fine, but declining to charge his boss is also not an "exoneration."

Of course Barr's summary is pretty much nothing because he destroyed your DREAM that Trump was guilty of collusion with the Russians and committed Obstruction. You lost and we're arty partying

No, it's 'nothing' because it sheds light on nothing. We've had years of stories on this investigation, tons of suspicious contacts, such as the June meeting and Manafort's meetings, and we know nothing about what Mueller's people found related to those meetings, just for starters. Why the lies and the coverups? We don't know.

 

[JasperL]

I wasn't referring to you specifically. Lots of the left were looking to the Mueller report to provide that one last smoking bb to finally start charges. Now that it hasn't, it's interesting to hear the walk backs and excuses. And the multiple new investigations because the Mueller must be wrong and there must be something.

Hopefully the left can keep this up until after the elections. The public has a short memory. They'll need a constant reminder.

The Democrats will keep it up, especially if Barr sits on the report.