https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/us/politics/mueller-report.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage
Partisan as any other political witch hunt. Trump is a morlock ... but then Hillary is a witch. Shall we resume the witch hunting of 1645? That was a time of paranoid virtue signaling. And the witch hunters ... were frauds. Eventually, once people higher up the social ladder were accused of witchcraft ... the authorities stopped tunring a blind eye to the scalawags who executed mentally ill old women.
No, the Mueller Report has not actually been released. A 4 page summary of the report has been released by Attorney General Barr as he interprets it. The accuracy of that summary can be questioned, as can Barr's claim that only he is allowed to interpret Mueller's Report.
It is up to Congress to decide what to do the the facts Mueller has presented in his report.
Quote from: Cavebear on March 25, 2019, 02:58:07 AM
No, the Mueller Report has not actually been released. A 4 page summary of the report has been released by Attorney General Barr as he interprets it. The accuracy of that summary can be questioned, as can Barr's claim that only he is allowed to interpret Mueller's Report.
It is up to Congress to decide what to do the the facts Mueller has presented in his report.
They did, under the previous Republican House ;-)
The current attorney general can't be trusted, anymore than the prior Dem attorney generals. But the redacted parts, Congress won't have access (GB won't allow it). Also the millions? of pages of testimony won't be accessible. Material still relevant to a grand jury, won't be public. The indictments and all official papers of course will be available to all members of Congress. Unless you want to claim that Mueller is a Republican/Russian/traitor. They can ask Mueller why he didn't think the indictment didn't rise to the level of an indictment. They asked Comey why he didn't recommend that the felony, that Hillary committed with her email server, didn't rise to the level of an indictment (ah ... it is an attorney general who does that, not the FBI ... a Dem attorney general determined that).
Quote from: Baruch on March 25, 2019, 03:00:57 AM
They did, under the previous Republican House ;-)
The current attorney general can't be trusted, anymore than the prior Dem attorney generals. But the redacted parts, Congress won't have access (GB won't allow it). Also the millions? of pages of testimony won't be accessible. Material still relevant to a grand jury, won't be public. The indictments and all official papers of course will be available to all members of Congress. Unless you want to claim that Mueller is a Republican/Russian/traitor. They can ask Mueller why he didn't think the indictment didn't rise to the level of an indictment. They asked Comey why he didn't recommend that the felony, that Hillary committed with her email server, didn't rise to the level of an indictment (ah ... it is an attorney general who does that, not the FBI ... a Dem attorney general determined that).
I hardly know where to begin to reply. Very Trumpian, as all you say is rather vague and suggestive.
So let's deconstruct your statements one by one...
1. "They did, under the previous Republican House".
They did not under the previous House because the Republican House Of Representatives refused to consider the question of whether the Trump campaign dealt with the Russian Government.
2. "The current attorney general can't be trusted, anymore than the prior Dem attorney generals".
Your broad-based claim that neither Republican not Democratic Attorney Generals is insulting to a democracy AND some have been entirely honest and fair. And I will even say that Barr should be assumed fair unless proven otherwise by events.
3. "But the redacted parts, Congress won't have access (GB won't allow it)"
I'm not sure what "GB" is. It might be obvious in full words. But you may not realize what information-gathering power the Legislative Branch has. They will get all information they have the collective will to demand. THe question is what they will demand.
4. "Unless you want to claim that Mueller is a Republican/Russian/traitor".
That seems to be a new line promoted on Fox. Now that Mueller has not overtly suggested indicting Trump, he is becoming a hero to Fox again (as he once was for his legalistic standards).
5. "They asked Comey why he didn't recommend that the felony, that Hillary committed with her email server, didn't rise to the level of an indictment"
I find it amusing that Republicans try to conflate Hillary Clinton's mere personal use of emails for Government business with proven accusations of Trump&Family dealing with the Russian Government to affect the election outcome, directly asking them for help, sending family members and representatives to talk to Russian Government members about the election, and more than a dozen of Trump's associates confessing to crimes of conspiracy and illegal business dealings they all say were ordered by Trump himself.
Not even in the same category of "crime".
6. To put it as briefly as possible, the Republicans remain incensed that Hillary Clinton stored her emails on a secure computer with no apparent consequences, but that Trump and his family dealt in business immediately before, during, and after his election with Russians and other dictators around the world does not bother you and most Republicans.
SHAME!
No, you Dems should just .. go around assassinating people you don't like? Worked in 1865.
The "didn't exonerate" isn't legalese .. it is an editorial regarding the description of the yet unreleased redacted report. I haven't been exonerated of being a Russian spy, and neither have you.
Shame!
Al Capone could not be indicted on any charges other than tax evasion. Why do you think Trump won't release his tax returns?
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 25, 2019, 01:42:24 PM
Al Capone could not be indicted on any charges other than tax evasion. Why do you think Trump won't release his tax returns?
True ... but that is because Al Capone was innocent ;-)
Today, under that same rule, every American is an organized crime figure. You can give power to the government, but not take it back.
But some here, regard all businessmen as class enemies. Such "european view" folks (in the US anyway) should be viewed as enemies of the State, sans culottes.
This may become known as "the exoneration exaggeration."
Trump claims he was exonerated, but Barr's letter specifically said that he was not exonerated. If Barr did mischaracterize Mueller's report, then you can be damn sure no one will ever see the actual report.
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 27, 2019, 04:56:26 PM
This may become known as "the exoneration exaggeration."
Trump claims he was exonerated, but Barr's letter specifically said that he was not exonerated. If Barr did mischaracterize Mueller's report, then you can be damn sure no one will ever see the actual report.
Only the Deep State will see the report, because they machinated everything since Jan 2016, all to their liking, and still do.
Quote from: Baruch on March 27, 2019, 06:33:52 PM
Only the Deep State will see the report, because they machinated everything since Jan 2016, all to their liking, and still do.
"ONLY" since Jan 2016? Are you saying that you DIDN'T believe in "The Deep State" before that?
Quote from: Cavebear on March 29, 2019, 12:20:26 AM
"ONLY" since Jan 2016? Are you saying that you DIDN'T believe in "The Deep State" before that?
Of course, but are you claiming that Allen Dulles and J Edgar Hoover planned the 2016 election? ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on March 29, 2019, 03:19:07 AM
Of course, but are you claiming that Allen Dulles and J Edgar Hoover planned the 2016 election? ;-)
I will let your words speak for themselves...
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 25, 2019, 01:42:24 PM
Al Capone could not be indicted on any charges other than tax evasion. Why do you think Trump won't release his tax returns?
That is because J Edgar Hoover was a trannie. The G men could have simply shot Capone, and never faced any consequences, like they did with Dillinger.
Quote from: Cavebear on March 29, 2019, 12:51:21 PM
I will let your words speak for themselves...
So you give me a date then. General George Washington was our first "spymaster".
Apparently, Barr's summary was not a summary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHcOYhWOIgo
When is it ever? Nixon said "I am not a crook". Cheney said "So".
Some minority on the Intelligence Committees will be able to see the unreacted report ... the rest will only see the redacted version. I hope you enjoy wasting your time (as you probably will) reading the sad three ring circus of the last 3 years, all over again ;-(
Quote from: Baruch on March 29, 2019, 07:13:57 PM
That is because J Edgar Hoover was a trannie. The G men could have simply shot Capone, and never faced any consequences, like they did with Dillinger.
Dillinger was shot because he drew a gun on the arresting officers. That was quickly ruled a justifiable homicide. Capone was never that stupid. He surrendered and faced trial for tax evasion and was convicted. Medical reports say he died of STDs in jail in January 1947.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 01, 2019, 10:49:43 PM
Dillinger was shot because he drew a gun on the arresting officers. That was quickly ruled a justifiable homicide. Capone was never that stupid. He surrendered and faced trial for tax evasion and was convicted. Medical reports say he died of STDs in jail in January 1947.
Yep. I think shooting him without justification (as often done by police and Black youth) would have been fine. You think that habit is a recent invention?
Quote from: Baruch on April 02, 2019, 02:03:30 AM
Yep. I think shooting him without justification (as often done by police and Black youth) would have been fine. You think that habit is a recent invention?
Did you miss the part where Dillinger drew an actual gun on the arresting officers? Not a cell phone, not a wallet to identify himself, an actual gun?
Quote from: Cavebear on April 02, 2019, 04:30:37 AM
Did you miss the part where Dillinger drew an actual gun on the arresting officers? Not a cell phone, not a wallet to identify himself, an actual gun?
They didn't read him his Miranda rights ... awww.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 01, 2019, 10:49:43 PM
Medical reports say he died of STDs in jail in January 1947.
I don't know what reports you've seen, but apparently he got out of prison before he died of syphilis:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/infectious-disease-sprung-al-capone-alcatraz
QuoteCapone was released on Nov. 16, 1939 on the grounds of “good behavior†and, more cogently, his medical condition.
Capone’s life back “on the outside†was hardly a picnic. His physical and mental health continued to deteriorate and his syphilis worsened with each passing year until his death in Florida, of heart failure, on Jan. 25, 1947. He was only 48.
Mr Shkreili was caught operating his business from behind bars using a contraband cell phone, then thown into solitary.
Was Mr Capone doing the same thing, without a cell phone. They say ... other mafia figures have done so.
https://allthatsinteresting.com/carmine-persico
How? Carrier pigeons?
Quote from: Minimalist on April 02, 2019, 08:52:27 PM
How? Carrier pigeons?
You don't have the imagination to be a criminal, apparently. Is that a bad thing?
Mueller report may be more damaging than Trump toadie let on (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html)
Well, color me shocked.
Quote from: Hydra009 on April 03, 2019, 11:43:09 PM
Mueller report may be more damaging than Trump toadie let on (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html)
Well, color me shocked.
Quote from: Baruch on April 03, 2019, 12:43:33 AM
You don't have the imagination to be a criminal, apparently. Is that a bad thing?
Or president either, it seems!
Quote from: Minimalist on April 04, 2019, 01:57:26 AM
Or president either, it seems!
You can't be a politician without being a criminal ... of sorts. Lying and fraud and stealing are their modus operandi.
Quote from: Baruch on April 02, 2019, 07:08:50 AM
They didn't read him his Miranda rights ... awww.
Raised actual gun... Shoot... No Miranda rights at the time, or needed in that situation.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 07, 2019, 05:24:09 AM
Raised actual gun... Shoot... No Miranda rights at the time, or needed in that situation.
If you are against crime, drop all civil rights. Otherwise you hurt the cops and help the mob.
Quote from: Baruch on April 07, 2019, 09:06:35 AM
If you are against crime, drop all civil rights. Otherwise you hurt the cops and help the mob.
Well, that's an easily falsiable statement. You have constitutionally-protected-rights that do not impede the police or support illegal mob activity. Though Trump might offer you a job at the Dept of Justice.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 07, 2019, 03:17:09 PM
Well, that's an easily falsiable statement. You have constitutionally-protected-rights that do not impede the police or support illegal mob activity. Though Trump might offer you a job at the Dept of Justice.
You prove my point. Rights and law enforcement depend on partisan political membership.
Quote from: Baruch on April 07, 2019, 04:23:26 PM
You prove my point. Rights and law enforcement depend on partisan political membership.
Not quite. But "Rights and law enforcement" can be suborned at high levels... Which is why there are 3 branches of government here that can check the others if they have the will.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 07, 2019, 04:30:10 PM
Not quite. But "Rights and law enforcement" can be suborned at high levels... Which is why there are 3 branches of government here that can check the others if they have the will.
All the guys named Bill are excluded for that reason ;-)
QuoteWilliam Barr, Donald Trump's attorney general has recently hidden the Mueller Report resulting in widespread criticism. But it turns out Republican Attorney Generals, like Bill Barr, have a long history of covering up republican crimes, from Nixon to Trump.
Historian Lamar Waldron joins the program to expose the history of corrupt Republican politicians, conspiracies and cover-ups.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cbdWylNw_Y&t=137s
This guy Barr has been around the block a few times!
Thought you claimed Mr Barr had been in the Nixon administration. My bad.
I think the most recent D-party attorney generals were pretty awful ... Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch for example ;-(
Yeah, Holder was found to be in contempt of congress, but I don't blame him - congress is worthy of nothing but contempt.
https://www.politico.com/story/2012/06/holder-held-in-contempt-of-congress-077988
You just like guys who are "Fast & Furious". So meeting Lynch on some airport tarmac isn't sexy?
QuoteRep. Charlie Crist, D-Fla., asked U.S. Attorney General William Barr to explain what he meant when he wrote in his letter to Congress that special counsel Robert Mueller's report does not exonerate President Donald Trump on the question of obstruction of justice. Barr demurred, saying: "That's a statement made by the special counsel." Barr said he couldn't comment further until the report has been released. What Mueller meant by exonerate "is really a question that I can't answer," Barr said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3-tnTKLv64
Barr doesn't know what "does not exonerate" means?
Government contracting = lowest bidder
Government employee = lowest intelligence?
The Republican "base" is aptly named, because they are "base" - not following or in accordance with standards of honor and decency: contemptible, currish, despicable, detestable, dirty, dishonorable, execrable, ignoble, ignominious, low, low-down, low-minded, mean, nasty, paltry, snide, sordid, vile, wretched. Hillary Clinton was being nice when she called them "a basket of deplorables."
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 09, 2019, 05:44:28 PM
The Republican "base" is aptly named, because they are "base" - not following or in accordance with standards of honor and decency: contemptible, currish, despicable, detestable, dirty, dishonorable, execrable, ignoble, ignominious, low, low-down, low-minded, mean, nasty, paltry, snide, sordid, vile, wretched. Hillary Clinton was being nice when she called them "a basket of deplorables."
Give all the Dems a French passport and time travel to Madame Tussaudes.
The wax museum?
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 10, 2019, 01:53:56 PM
The wax museum?
I prefer the little wax bottles with Coke in them.
Quote from: Baruch on April 08, 2019, 07:22:09 PM
Thought you claimed Mr Barr had been in the Nixon administration. My bad.
I think the most recent D-party attorney generals were pretty awful ... Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch for example ;-(
For doing "what"?
Quote from: Cavebear on April 14, 2019, 02:19:13 AM
For doing "what"?
Democrats ... angels from heaven. Including LBJ. Keep smoking those weeds you grow in your garden.
There is no news except DNC virtue signaling.
Quote from: Baruch on April 14, 2019, 05:06:07 AM
Democrats ... angels from heaven. Including LBJ. Keep smoking those weeds you grow in your garden.
There is no news except DNC virtue signaling.
Nonsense like that is why I had you on "ignore" for a year. Don't keep it up.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 14, 2019, 05:17:23 AM
Nonsense like that is why I had you on "ignore" for a year. Don't keep it up.
My party ... demi-gods.
Your party ... recently evolved slime mold.
Fair and balanced, right?
You only read what you want to read. Same as I do. Being two different people, we also come to different conclusions even if we read the same stuff, even though we have some similarity demographically. Both are not surprising observations. Real reality is pretty obvious if we don't interpret. Interpretation isn't facts. Raw data, with no interpretation is what is factual. Like with economic indexes. How many shoes were made last month is real. It can be objectively verified. The GDP, less so, since it is primarily a political fiction.
Quote from: Baruch on April 14, 2019, 05:19:45 AM
My party ... demi-gods.
Your party ... recently evolved slime mold.
Fair and balanced, right?
You only read what you want to read. Same as I do. Being two different people, we also come to different conclusions even if we read the same stuff, even though we have some similarity demographically. Both are not surprising observations. Real reality is pretty obvious if we don't interpret. Interpretation isn't facts. Raw data, with no interpretation is what is factual. Like with economic indexes. How many shoes were made last month is real. It can be objectively verified. The GDP, less so, since it is primarily a political fiction.
That's where you get it all wrong. I listen to facts supported by day/date/source references. At Faux News, all you get are unsubstantiated claims.
I'm not sure why you mentioned shoes, but if there were 100,000 shoes made in the US last year, Trump would say, and Faux News report, that it was the most ever! And other sources would report that it was lower than average and declining, giving number of shoes produced on the past 20 years, while showing charts and govt data to support the claim.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 14, 2019, 05:29:41 AM
That's where you get it all wrong. I listen to facts supported by day/date/source references. At Faux News, all you get are unsubstantiated claims.
I'm not sure why you mentioned shoes, but if there were 100,000 shoes made in the US last year, Trump would say, and Faux News report, that it was the most ever! And other sources would report that it was lower than average and declining, giving number of shoes produced on the past 20 years, while showing charts and govt data to support the claim.
Sorry, never been a Repubican't. Don't watch Fox News (though Tucker Carlson is OK with me, since he inflames Progressives). Just because Republican'ts are dishonest (business marketing practice) doesn't mean that Democraps should do the same. Or double down on sucking NYC financial d***s or warmongering.
Quote from: Baruch on April 14, 2019, 05:35:57 AM
Sorry, never been a Repubican't. Don't watch Fox News (though Tucker Carlson is OK with me, since he inflames Progressives). Just because Republican'ts are dishonest (business marketing practice) doesn't mean that Democraps should do the same. Or double down on sucking NYC financial d***s or warmongering.
OK, this is where I stop paying attention.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 14, 2019, 05:45:26 AM
OK, this is where I stop paying attention.
You are saying that D-party religion is a kind of atheism? Really? It wasn't just LBJ, past Dems and even present Dems are torn from the same toilet paper role.
Of course you yourself are not like that. Not claiming you are. But to be honest with myself, faced with some of the same dilemmas politicians face, and since I don't virtue signal (judeo-paganism has nothing to do with morality) ... I have to admit I would commit atrocities. Thus I keep hoping I am never put in that position.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcBkvr_PGaY
And this is even though I admire her. Totally unlike the current PM.
I wish young generations could have 'known' her, lol. She's run the UK for 11 years. That's my childhood! Sometimes, it still takes me a moment to remember that she is dead, which is weird, thinking that's how we all became sure, she was human. :p
Quote from: drunkenshoe on April 14, 2019, 06:52:12 AM
I wish young generations could have 'known' her, lol. She's run the UK for 11 years. That's my childhood! Sometimes, it still takes me a moment to remember that she is dead, which is weird, thinking that's how we all became sure, she was human. :p
There were times when US voters would have chosen Thatcher (or Blair) over their Democratic or Republican candidates...
Quote from: Cavebear on April 14, 2019, 07:09:35 AM
There were times when US voters would have chosen Thatcher (or Blair) over their Democratic or Republican candidates...
Blair would have been a bad choice I am afraid. Brits still hate him. He is a neo-lib like Bill Clinton. And a Euro-phile.
I thought Blair was a witch.
Barr has more of a history than we knew:
QuoteRachel Maddow looks back at how William Barr in 1989 as assistant attorney general, declared documents sought by Congress to be confidential and offered his personal summary instead, only to have his ruse exposed years later when the real document was released.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpopr1qkk0M
FBI Gets OK for Overseas Arrests (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1989-10-13-mn-138-story.html)
QuoteLaw: The Justice Department's decision allows U.S. law officers to act without the consent of foreign states. That ruling could apply to efforts to bring Panama's Noriega to trial in Florida.
Wow, that is the style now. Everyone! Unbeliever 60 years ago got mad at his mom and crapped in his diaper, deliberately!!
See, character assassination is bad. What will you do when we double down to real assassination?
Nut case: I will blow up the world unless Trump wins in 2016 or I will blow up the world unless Hillary wins in 2016 ... now that is nihilist on a massive scale. Mephistophiles approves!
Sounds like you've been doing some methistophiles...
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 17, 2019, 06:35:36 PM
Sounds like you've been doing some methistophiles...
I worry about MikeCL sometimes. I think you still have irony and humor.
And yes, tomorrow they release the "redacted" Mueller report. If I were Barr I would have told Congress, I won't bother to summarize it for you, because you are just going to fuck me over with the summary anyway. Wait until Saint Mueller releases the real thing. And then the Senate/House select committees can sign "nondisclosure" papers and see what was redacted. Same as things usually work with legality and intel in DC.
I expect the redacted report to look like a rainbow of colored stripes. I expect more to be redacted than unredacted. Maybe if we had some of those special glasses from the comic books we could read it?
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 17, 2019, 06:55:41 PM
I expect the redacted report to look like a rainbow of colored stripes. I expect more to be redacted than unredacted. Maybe if we had some of those special glasses from the comic books we could read it?
Maybe, wait and see. If there is a lot of redacted material, that could be mostly grand jury evidence currently being evaluated. That could be a bad thing for Republics or Democrats, just saying. I doubt that there is all that much classified in it.
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 17, 2019, 02:37:58 PM
Barr has more of a history than we knew:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpopr1qkk0M
FBI Gets OK for Overseas Arrests (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1989-10-13-mn-138-story.html)
Rachel Maddow nailed him. He came in with us thinking he had some integrity from a past job, but now we learn that he's a weasel-worded deceptionist and has done this before.
I am not shocked. Trump has a good eye for the kinds of people who will support him. I AM a bit disappointed though. Sometimes I hope Trump will accidentally annoint a honest person. Silly me...
His reputation is completely shot now...
Rachel Mad-cow? You really are blue pilled ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on April 18, 2019, 10:39:58 AM
Rachel Mad-cow? You really are blue pilled ;-)
Not being a druggie since 25, I have to ask what a blue bill is... I tried some "white crosses", really mild stuff "back then", but all those did was made me talk a lot...
Quote from: Cavebear on April 18, 2019, 10:43:09 AM
Not being a druggie since 25, I have to ask what a blue bill is... I tried some "white crosses", really mild stuff "back then", but all those did was made me talk a lot...
The Matrix. Blue pill - continue to believe media BS. Red pill - break free of media BS and see the ugly truth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE7PKRjrid4
Newest slang ... Black pill ... a Red pill without any hope. I am not Black pilled, I just play that part in theater, not in real life.
Neo is scifi Jesus. The black guy is scifi John the Baptist. In the third Matrix movie, Neo dies for the common good aka Christ.
I am old school ... here is the original scifi come to Jesus moment ... UN style ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASsNtti1XZs
Quote from: Baruch on April 18, 2019, 10:49:36 AM
The Matrix. Blue pill - continue to believe media BS. Red pill - break free of media BS and see the ugly truth.
Newest slang ... Black pill ... a Red pill without any hope. I am not Black pilled, I just play that part in theater, not in real life.
Neo is scifi Jesus. The black guy is scifi John the Baptist.
Never saw the movie... So, what did the pills do?
Quote from: Cavebear on April 18, 2019, 10:53:44 AM
Never saw the movie... So, what did the pills do?
You need to step back one step. You responded reactively. My post is complete now.
Quote from: Baruch on April 18, 2019, 10:54:36 AM
You need to step back one step. You responded reactively. My post is complete now.
OK, congrats, I looked it up. I woukdn't take either. Drug-pushers lie. I would rather join Alice and wing it...
Quote from: Cavebear on April 18, 2019, 01:11:40 PM
OK, congrats, I looked it up. I woukdn't take either. Drug-pushers lie. I would rather join Alice and wing it...
You follow dressed up rabbits down a hole? And you think I am odd ;-) Unless you prefer to travel thru looking-glass.