What legal standing does Barr have to NOT release Mueller's report to Congress?

[Uncensored2008]

Maybe if I went around "grabbing pussies" you'd like me more???.............LMAO

I always imagined that you DO go around grabbing yourself...



Look, I'd call you a kunt, but you lack the warmth and depth.

 

[candycorn]

With the appropriate caveat to members of Congress that names and methods of classified investigations NOT be revealed to the general public, what is the legal standing for Barr to not release the report? (of course, with the exception that Barr IS a Trump stooge appointed SPECIFICALLY to protect his cult leader.)

So, I ask again.....since Mueller's report was authorized by republicans and fully funded by all of us tax payers, what is the LEGAL PRECEDENT for the report to not be FULLY disclosed?

None.

Start’s Report was released almost immediately.

It’s time to decouple the DOJ from the Executive branch.

The laws have changed since then.

Link?

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/5558083/mueller-report-release-starr/?amp=true

So it’s up to the discretion of the AG how much gets released...0-100%, correct?

 

[Uncensored2008]

With the appropriate caveat to members of Congress that names and methods of classified investigations NOT be revealed to the general public, what is the legal standing for Barr to not release the report? (of course, with the exception that Barr IS a Trump stooge appointed SPECIFICALLY to protect his cult leader.)

So, I ask again.....since Mueller's report was authorized by republicans and fully funded by all of us tax payers, what is the LEGAL PRECEDENT for the report to not be FULLY disclosed?

None.

Start’s Report was released almost immediately.

It’s time to decouple the DOJ from the Executive branch.

The laws have changed since then.

Link?

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/5558083/mueller-report-release-starr/?amp=true

So it’s up to the discretion of the AG how much gets released...0-100%, correct?

So Hamas gurl, what does that have to do with the LEGAL obligation to keep grand jury testimony secret?

Fucking Stalinists.....

 

[Faun]

So if it’s about sex, It can be released to the public but if it’s about national security the public should be kept in the dark?

Oh...

You are simply too dumb to understand what I posted, I actually think the Starr investigation was wrong and unnecessary.

Here it is again that you must have skimmed over:

"For one thing the Grand Jury Testimony was not with Trump himself, but with others who are NOT likely charged with Election tampering, another thing are those classified sections in it, that are classified for a reason. Neither part can be released to the public since this report is about Trump and his campaign members. Meanwhile Clinton the SAME DAY of his Grand Jury testimony talked to the nation about it, which of course means he places no restriction on it being released in the Starr report, having already talked to the nation about it.

The Starr report was delivered straight to congress who sat on it for a couple days before releasing it to the public by overwhelming bipartisan yes vote. There was nothing in it to be legally required to be blanked out, which is why the whole report was released to the public."

They are NOT comparable investigations which you apparently know is true since you didn't dispute it.

Huh? What in your post indicated you actually think the Starr investigation was wrong and unnecessary?

I read parts of it years ago, which is why I think the whole thing was unnecessary, but here it is for YOU to read:

The Starr Report

LINK

I didn’t ask you if you think it was unnecessary, nor did I ask you for s link to it.

I asked you what in your previous post (#654) indicated you think it was unnecessary?

You replied to post 658, with your question, thus you got my answer. Now say it was about post 654, which you earlier failed to specifically mention.

As I pointed out to YOU, that I read it years ago which is WHY I think the investigation was unnecessary. That was my answer to YOU, not to her, for I answered her differently for a reason that eludes you... apparently since it was a statement in itself.

"You are simply too dumb to understand what I posted, I actually think the Starr investigation was wrong and unnecessary."

The rest of the post doesn't talk about why I thought the Star report was unnecessary it was about the difference between two investigations.

Neither me or her argued if the Starr report was necessary, thus you are the one looking for something that didn't transpire between me and her.

And my question was what was in post #654 that indicated you think Starr’s investigation was wrong and unnecessary.

Clearly, you gave no such indication.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Still not a fan of Trump, and STILL finding you more ignorant and more crass than he is.

Maybe if I went around "grabbing pussies" you'd like me more???.............LMAO

Unlike Mr. Trump, YOUR physical contact with women is unwanted . . . and kinda nauseating.

 

[Cecilie1200]

To which the only reply need be, "It's coming.

NO dimwit.......the ISSUE here is WHAT "is coming".....Sure something will be coming...but it CANNOT be what Trump's stooges determine we should know of the report.....

The quicksand will be when Barr is subpoenaed before a House committee

So your position is that any official appointed to a position is automatically disqualified from holding that position by virtue of having been appointed, because said appointment makes him a "stooge".

Or is it just that you think being a Republican should be an automatic disqualification from everything?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Again...nothing precludes a full release to Congress other than asking for the Grand Jury stuff to be released from the judge.

Releasing that to Congress is unremarkable and common.

And there's little reason to preserve secrecy of grand jury testimony AFTER an investigation is closed. If Barr tries it, the motivation will be clear. protect the fat asses asses.

Really? What are the reasons grand jury proceedings are sealed, and why are they invalid the instant the investigation is closed, Clarence Darrow? Please share the "wisdom" of your vast legal knowledge with us.

 

[hadit]

With the appropriate caveat to members of Congress that names and methods of classified investigations NOT be revealed to the general public, what is the legal standing for Barr to not release the report? (of course, with the exception that Barr IS a Trump stooge appointed SPECIFICALLY to protect his cult leader.)

So, I ask again.....since Mueller's report was authorized by republicans and fully funded by all of us tax payers, what is the LEGAL PRECEDENT for the report to not be FULLY disclosed?

None.

Start’s Report was released almost immediately.

It’s time to decouple the DOJ from the Executive branch.

The laws have changed since then.

Link?

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/5558083/mueller-report-release-starr/?amp=true

So it’s up to the discretion of the AG how much gets released...0-100%, correct?

I'm sure that will be wrangled out in the courts. The democrats will demand 100% and Barr will demand something less, and the whole thing won't be resolved until mid way through Trump's second term. The bottom line, though, is Barr has more influence than the democrats want, because of Bubba.

 

[candycorn]

None.

Start’s Report was released almost immediately.

It’s time to decouple the DOJ from the Executive branch.

The laws have changed since then.

Link?

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/5558083/mueller-report-release-starr/?amp=true

So it’s up to the discretion of the AG how much gets released...0-100%, correct?

I'm sure that will be wrangled out in the courts. The democrats will demand 100% and Barr will demand something less, and the whole thing won't be resolved until mid way through Trump's second term. The bottom line, though, is Barr has more influence than the democrats want, because of Bubba.

If I'm the Democrats, I'm almost as happy to have the political football in the press for the next year or so.

 

[nat4900]

With the appropriate caveat to members of Congress that names and methods of classified investigations NOT be revealed to the general public, what is the legal standing for Barr to not release the report? (of course, with the exception that Barr IS a Trump stooge appointed SPECIFICALLY to protect his cult leader.)

So, I ask again.....since Mueller's report was authorized by republicans and fully funded by all of us tax payers, what is the LEGAL PRECEDENT for the report to not be FULLY disclosed?

None.

Start’s Report was released almost immediately.

It’s time to decouple the DOJ from the Executive branch.

The laws have changed since then.

Link?

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/5558083/mueller-report-release-starr/?amp=true

So it’s up to the discretion of the AG how much gets released...0-100%, correct?

Barr is NOT the AG for the U.S.A......Barr is turning out to be the AG for the Trump regime.

In business, Trump surrounded himself with people that would do his bidding (and "fix" his indiscretions)......So, take a look at the people he has hired in both the WH and cabinet........STOOGES.

 

[Markle]

Then why did Donald say he was OK releasing it?
You're inferring that Donald doesn't know what he's talking about.
And I'd agree with you.


I'm just fucking with you. You're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.

It is being released, what is your problem?

Really? How much? When?

No idea?

No kidding

 

[nat4900]

So your position is that any official appointed to a position is automatically disqualified from holding that position by virtue of having been appointed, because said appointment makes him a "stooge".

No, eternal moron...You have the reading comprehension of a 6 years old.........

When Barr wrote an UNSOLICITED memo telling everyone that he...Barr....thought that a president is ABOVE the LAW as long as he sits in the oval office.........THAT was an audition for Trump to say...."I WANT THAT GUY TO BE MY (not the country's) ATTORNEY GENERAL........HE IS GOING TO PROTECT MY SORRY< FAT ASS"......................LOL

 

[Markle]

Gosh, do you know what a grand jury proceeding is? You know that much of the Mueller report is grand jury material, right? And you know that a good chunk of the Mueller report is grand jury material, right? Who do you think classified the Mueller report?

And YOU know that getting it released to Congress has been done numerous times including Watergate

JULY 29, 2011 / 12:55 PM / 8 YEARS AGO
Nixon's secret Watergate testimony ordered released
James Vicini

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth granted a request by historian Stanley Kutler, who has written several books about Nixon and Watergate, and others to unseal the testimony given on June 23 and 24 in 1975.

Nixon was questioned about the political scandal during the 1970s that resulted from the break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington.

The scandal caused Nixon to leave office on August 9, 1974, the only resignation of a U.S. president. The scandal also resulted in the indictment, trial, conviction and imprisonment of a number of his top officials.

Lamberth ruled in the 15-page opinion that the special circumstances, especially the undisputed historical interest in Nixon’s testimony, far outweighed the need to keep the records secret. Grand jury proceedings typically remain secret.

Nixon's secret Watergate testimony ordered released - Reuters

My highlight above.

 

[candycorn]

Earlier the House voted 420-0 to have the full Mueller report released.

House votes 420-0 for Mueller report to be made public

Then every republican on the judiciary committee voted against subpoenaing it.

House panel approves subpoena for Mueller report

 

[Markle]

Do you NOT believe that issues of National Security should be kept from all of Congress and all the public?

WTF? No I do NOT believe that National Security issues should be kept from Congress. That's a stupid claim

Wow, you really do hate our country. More so than even I thought.

 

[Sunsettommy]

There I pointed out that Nixon was out of the White House a year when he did the Grand Jury testimony. which was made available to the public THIRTY SIX YEARS LATER,

The Grand Jury Testimony was provided to Congress months before Nixon resigned. what are you talking about?

And yes...it was kept from the public for decades...which says that YES it can safely be released to Congress

I gave you the quote from the link that showed his Grand Jury Testimony was in June 1975, here is the PDF transcript of that time

Now here is the quote section:

"Content Details
Nixon Grand Jury Records

In May 1975, the Watergate Special Prosecution Force (WSPF) decided that it was necessary to question former President Richard M. Nixon in connection with various investigations being conducted by the WSPF. Mr. Nixon was questioned over the period of two days, June 23 and June 24, 1975, and the testimony was taken as part of various investigations being conducted by the January 7, 1974, Grand Jury for the District of Columbia (the third Watergate Grand Jury). Chief Judge George Hart signed an order authorizing that the sworn deposition of Mr. Nixon be taken at the Coast Guard Station in San Mateo, California with two members of the grand jury present."

See the date, it is for June 23-34 1975, I told you with evidence once, now this is second time I gave you the evidence, you going to continue to ignore the evidence I gave you?

Nixon RESIGNED on August 9, 1974.

Readers notice that Lesh NEVER backs up anything she claims, while I go to the government website to back up MY statements.

Stop fighting the evidence!

 

[Markle]

The laws have changed since then.

Link?

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/5558083/mueller-report-release-starr/?amp=true

So it’s up to the discretion of the AG how much gets released...0-100%, correct?

I'm sure that will be wrangled out in the courts. The democrats will demand 100% and Barr will demand something less, and the whole thing won't be resolved until mid way through Trump's second term. The bottom line, though, is Barr has more influence than the democrats want, because of Bubba.

If I'm the Democrats, I'm almost as happy to have the political football in the press for the next year or so.

We (Conservatives) can only hope! The longer this hangs in the air, the more foolish Progressives look. People do not care. It is only the far left that desperately keeps trying to make collusion an issue.

 

[Lesh]

Oh you mean I got the timing of the Grand Jury wrong?

Ok. fine. Bottom line it was released to Congress.THAT was the fucking point

I'm sure you have a point other than being a jerk off.

Let's hear it

 

[bripat9643]

Ac

To which the only reply need be, "It's coming.

NO dimwit.......the ISSUE here is WHAT "is coming".....Sure something will be coming...but it CANNOT be what Trump's stooges determine we should know of the report.....

The quicksand will be when Barr is subpoenaed before a House committee

Actually Barr will lie and obfuscate. I'd like to see Mueller testify.

He won't lie for Trump

Really? Then you are admitting the Mueller exonerated him?

 

[Markle]

There I pointed out that Nixon was out of the White House a year when he did the Grand Jury testimony. which was made available to the public THIRTY SIX YEARS LATER,

The Grand Jury Testimony was provided to Congress months before Nixon resigned. what are you talking about?

And yes...it was kept from the public for decades...which says that YES it can safely be released to Congress

I gave you the quote from the link that showed his Grand Jury Testimony was in June 1975, here is the PDF transcript of that time

Now here is the quote section:

"Content Details
Nixon Grand Jury Records

In May 1975, the Watergate Special Prosecution Force (WSPF) decided that it was necessary to question former President Richard M. Nixon in connection with various investigations being conducted by the WSPF. Mr. Nixon was questioned over the period of two days, June 23 and June 24, 1975, and the testimony was taken as part of various investigations being conducted by the January 7, 1974, Grand Jury for the District of Columbia (the third Watergate Grand Jury). Chief Judge George Hart signed an order authorizing that the sworn deposition of Mr. Nixon be taken at the Coast Guard Station in San Mateo, California with two members of the grand jury present."

See the date, it is for June 23-34 1975, I told you with evidence once, now this is second time I gave you the evidence, you going to continue to ignore the evidence I gave you?

Nixon RESIGNED on August 9, 1974.

Readers notice that Lesh NEVER backs up anything she claims, while I go to the government website to back up MY statements.

Stop fighting the evidence!

Lesh is simply a troll. He knows it and we know it. Facts are irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant. He throws things out there then sits back and watches the commotion. Mostly I laugh at him. He's a joke.