• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mueller report summary sent to Congress

Chomsky said:
Depending on how well Dem rank & file believe Barr's conclusions on things like obstruction, it could rally the Dems.
Click to expand...

It is. It will continue to do so. Trump himself is not the problem. The problem is how did we get him.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Evidence.

As there is a reasonable demand for transparency upon the circumstances of how the investigation ended, there ought be transparency in how it began.
Click to expand...
I have problem with shedding as much transparency, as can be provided. I abhor the idea of "secret" courts; they seem to go against the very heart of egalitarian democracy.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Which is preposterous. As Barr argues, such a standard must mean all the prosecutors in the DOJ are at risk of being accused of obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...
Interesting. So Barr is saying Trump is the top prosecutor, and that is his rationale as to why Trump cannot obstruct? It is an interesting argument, if that's what you're claiming. And it would provide understanding as to why Trump removed Session to put Barr in charge; with that, he have just immunized himself against obstruction.
 
Harshaw said:
Perhaps that should have been your focus since November 2016, rather than the continual failed attempts to undo the election.

You know, find a better candidate and better argument and win the next election.

Instead, your record has been accusation after accusation which has failed to bear fruit, and you've been torpedoing your credibility again and again and again by crying wolf, thus going into 2020 crippled by self-inflicted wounds.
Click to expand...

Don't forget just plain eating their own. The democrats have been a burning, dumpster fire for the last few months with that kind of crap.
 
TamleeB said:
Do not make the assumption that all conservatives did not believe in the Mueller investigation. How about you, did you believe in the investigation and how about the results?
Click to expand...

I've been saying for a long time now that it would most likely stain Mueller's reputation. Especially if the right kind of report did not get sent out and the democrats were not in any way happy about it.
 
austrianecon said:
All charges from against Trump while in office has to come from DoJ. SDNY and so forth.. won't matter as they have no power to do this. State of New York has no power. Only way they get Trump from now on is after he is President.
Click to expand...

If Trump is guilty of a crime, he need not actually be charged to actually take on lethal political damage. If he has one or more pending indictments against him by state or federal authorities, he may be impeached or he may simply be dead weight in 2020. Let the truth come out for all to know. If it comes down to a political determination in 2020, so be it.

Mueller didn't recommend new indictments. What it could mean for Trump

Why One of Trump’s Biggest Legal Threats Is New York’s Attorney General | FiveThirtyEight

At this point we do not know just how scathing the Mueller report actually is. We have only heard a filtered summary.
 
Slyfox696 said:
"the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other - as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.

...

while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him"

Source: Read the Mueller report findings: Barr’s letter to Congress | Fox News


Mueller specifically did not make a determination.
Click to expand...

This would appear to be true, based on what we know up to the moment. So there's common ground here. Building on your apparently accurate statement, I would add that we need to hear from Mueller directly. So I'd say further the House committees talking about possibly calling in Mueller should proceed with it. Trump has spoken so we've heard from the horse's ass and now it's time to hear it from the mouth of the workhorse, i.e., Mueller himself.





apdst said:
Mueller made no "conclusion" because he didn't have the evidence to support such a conclusion.
Click to expand...

You'd need to document where and when Mueller said this directly in a public statement on the record. The only place we might possibly see any such thing is in the report.

If you have the report and have read any such direct statement by Mueller himself kindly share it with us thx. If not, then you'd be relying on Barr and his lawyer's narrative as Trump's AG, not on any direct specific statement by Mueller to include Mueller's supporting reasoning and rationale.

Barr did say outright Mueller's report does not exonerate Trump. So thx for playing because we know that if we don't see the report all we would have is the word of Barr, Trump and you.
 
Mach said:
Cuckoo.
Click to expand...

Isn't that why Rosenstein sought to put on a wire and secretly record Trump? Because he felt he needed to save the country from the man he considered to be repulsive and unfit for office? Why do democrats trash their opponents for things they praise in themselves? It makes no sense.
 
Tangmo said:
This would appear to be true, based on what we know up to the moment. So there's common ground here. Building on your apparently accurate statement, I would add that we need to hear from Mueller directly. So I'd say further the House committees talking about possibly calling in Mueller should proceed with it. Trump has spoken so we've heard from the horse's ass and now it's time to hear it from the mouth of the workhorse, i.e., Mueller himself.







You'd need to document where and when Mueller said this directly in a public statement on the record. The only place we might possibly see any such thing is in the report.

If you have the report and have read any such direct statement by Mueller himself kindly share it with us thx. If not, then you'd be relying on Barr and his lawyer's narrative as Trump's AG, not on any direct specific statement by Mueller to include Mueller's supporting reasoning and rationale.

Barr did say outright Mueller's report does not exonerate Trump. So thx for playing because we know that if we don't see the report all we would have is the word of Barr, Trump and you.
Click to expand...

Until the report is released so every American who wants to can read it and examine the evidence that went into it, all we have is a highly partisan summary of Bill Barr which serves the interests of Trump.
 
LowDown said:
Maybe we should move this to the Conspiracy Theory forum.
Click to expand...

We see the Right's desperation still hasn't been eased by Barr's partisan narrative of the Mueller report which Barr and Trump continue to sit on. Trump has the authority as Potus to declassify the report and order its release to the general public. Until Trump does this his conman act and carnival show are only blue smoke and mirrors filling up the bigtop. Elephants marching trunk wrapped to tail is what you guys are.

The more desperate and worried you guys get the more you turn your nervous eyes to the CTF. It happens at least once per thread since this got going many moons ago. You guys type your post then cross your fingers and hope somebody salutes you back. It ain't happening cause this is real. Siberian Candidate is not the name of a movie.
 
Cardinal said:
There is a not-subtle silver lining in this cloud. The Mueller investigation sucked all of the oxygen out of the room and never moved the needle on public opinion anyway. There are roughly 16 other investigations keeping their heads down and pressing on, and letting them do so in peace is for the best.

In the meantime, Democrats no longer have to split their attention between Mueller and their own policy arguments, and we can move forward on those. Bear in mind that it was specifically policy that allowed us to retake the House. Next to none of it actually had anything to do with Russia.

Also keep in mind that this doesn't actually exonerate Trump on everything, just on one very narrow field. Other ongoing investigations will continue to address those other issues while Democrats focus on the best arguments for why the White House should go blue in 2020.
Click to expand...


If they are smart enough. We'll see.
 
haymarket said:
Until the report is released so every American who wants to can read it and examine the evidence that went into it, all we have is a highly partisan summary of Bill Barr which serves the interests of Trump.
Click to expand...
Remember the man that wanted to wear a wire on the President also had a hand in the report.
 
Chomsky said:
That's a fair point.

But here's what I'd do if I were the Dems:

Seeing as both the President and Barr can release the full report together, or independently, I'd run hard against Trump to release the report right into 2020. I'd make it personally about him (Trump).

"RELEASE THE REPORT!"

I think the above would be a winning move, when 80% of the public wants the report released.
Click to expand...


It will be nearly impossible to release the full report to the public without being redacted due to classified information and confidential procedures. Those waiting for that will be disappointed and a redacted report will not satisfy everyone.
 
Manc Skipper said:
When you run out of argument, reach for the xenophobia. Since Mueller found evidence of obstruction of justice, are you not even a little curious as to how bad it was?
Click to expand...

We already know. Trump fired Muellar and wrote mean tweets about the investigation.
 
Harshaw said:
Perhaps that should have been your focus since November 2016, rather than the continual failed attempts to undo the election.

You know, find a better candidate and better argument and win the next election.

Instead, your record has been accusation after accusation which has failed to bear fruit, and you've been torpedoing your credibility again and again and again by crying wolf, thus going into 2020 crippled by self-inflicted wounds.
Click to expand...

You post as if Putin were minding his own business which he is not doing.
 
Chomsky said:
Yes, I did see the above; but that is a separate from Barr believing a President cannot obstruct. Two seperate issues, Harshaw.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. I was discussing the one you brought up in your post, which wasn't the bolded part.
 
Oborosen said:
Don't forget just plain eating their own. The democrats have been a burning, dumpster fire for the last few months with that kind of crap.
Click to expand...

By all appearances, the Dem primaries are going to be a huge exercise of eating their own in a left-"progressive" purity contest.

Which they can do if they wish, but I think it's ill-advised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom