Whom do you believe....Mueller or Barr???

[EGR one]

They may well have to instigate an impeachment investigation just to get their hands on all the raw data. That will be leaked in the most incriminating manner possible, a bit at a time, in an effort to push down Trump's reelection chances.

If Trump is "innocent"....what the **** do you and your ilk care?

(......of course if Trump is NOT innocent.......then have your diapers handy......lol.)

Just when I was beginning to believe you were an intelligent poster.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Are their impartial jurors in the Senate? Do you think that Republican senators are capable of hearing the evidence and rendering a fair verdict?

Only if those senators read and understand the House indictments. Otherwise, the rulings will be rendered by senate jurors who act out of political expedience rather than faithfulness to the constitution.

If I may just add this.........

When the House hears witnesses and subpoena records, the job is to convince the PUBLIC or guilt or innocence since senators....like all politicians.....put their finger up to the wind to save their own sorry asses.

Exactly.
History is our guide.
How the Watergate crisis eroded public support for Richard Nixon

 

[Jitss617]

Mueller: "We couldn't prove Trump didn't obstruct the scam investigation launched to cover up the Obama administration's illegal conspiracy to undermine Trump's campaign and presidency." I'm paraphrasing, of course.

Go back to bed.....eternal moron.....(but thanks for the bump.)

Who’s your president? Lol

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Of course, Trump should be taken out of the equation as to who one should believe.......Trump's infamy for lying is beyond debate......

But, we are faced with the "choice" of who should be believed from a legal standpoint...that is, AG Barr, or investigating prosecutor, Mueller.........

From yesterday's brief monologue by Mueller, it is crystal CLEAR that these two republican lawyers are NOT on the same page.

Of course our biases come quickly into play when making the choice as who of these two should be believed.

So, we are left with the needed expose' that BOTH these folks need to openly testify before a House committee and.....

Either verbally repeat what was written in the report ....which is what Mueller will have to do......OR

Explain verbally how what is written in Mueller's report could EVER be "summarized" and "interpreted" as Barr did....which is also what Barr will have to do.

There is NO DOUBT......NONE...... that Mueller's ultimate intent is for Congress to settle the issue of "obstruction of justice" as the Article One responsibility of Congress.

Barr has witnesses and probably recordings.
Mueller is the liar.

But whatever happened to "Total Exoneration"?

I am sure the Senate will fulfill its Article One responsibility and totally exonerate the President if it gets that far. Mueller surely realized there was no way the Senate or any court would convict on this kind of evidence. So, instead of being the target of the left for the rest of his life, he kicked it to Congress to take the heat.

The Democrats in congress have no desire, and no intention of impeaching President Trump. What they want to do is to drag out this comedy act as far into the election process as possible.

They may well have to instigate an impeachment investigation just to get their hands on all the raw data. That will be leaked in the most incriminating manner possible, a bit at a time, in an effort to push down Trump's reelection chances.

There probably isn't enough time left to open formal impeachment proceedings anyway.
That shouldn't stop them from holding hearings though. If Trump stays on then they can act formally. If not, then good luck with those indictments Mr. Trump.

 

[Dana7360]

Of course, Trump should be taken out of the equation as to who one should believe.......Trump's infamy for lying is beyond debate......

But, we are faced with the "choice" of who should be believed from a legal standpoint...that is, AG Barr, or investigating prosecutor, Mueller.........

From yesterday's brief monologue by Mueller, it is crystal CLEAR that these two republican lawyers are NOT on the same page.

Of course our biases come quickly into play when making the choice as who of these two should be believed.

So, we are left with the needed expose' that BOTH these folks need to openly testify before a House committee and.....

Either verbally repeat what was written in the report ....which is what Mueller will have to do......OR

Explain verbally how what is written in Mueller's report could EVER be "summarized" and "interpreted" as Barr did....which is also what Barr will have to do.

There is NO DOUBT......NONE...... that Mueller's ultimate intent is for Congress to settle the issue of "obstruction of justice" as the Article One responsibility of Congress.

That's easy.

Mueller.

barr is a known and proven liar. Mueller isn't.

Once I know someone has lied to me, I stop believing most of what they say. I usually just tune them out and ignore them.

 

[anynameyouwish]

Of course, Trump should be taken out of the equation as to who one should believe.......Trump's infamy for lying is beyond debate......

But, we are faced with the "choice" of who should be believed from a legal standpoint...that is, AG Barr, or investigating prosecutor, Mueller.........

From yesterday's brief monologue by Mueller, it is crystal CLEAR that these two republican lawyers are NOT on the same page.

Of course our biases come quickly into play when making the choice as who of these two should be believed.

So, we are left with the needed expose' that BOTH these folks need to openly testify before a House committee and.....

Either verbally repeat what was written in the report ....which is what Mueller will have to do......OR

Explain verbally how what is written in Mueller's report could EVER be "summarized" and "interpreted" as Barr did....which is also what Barr will have to do.

There is NO DOUBT......NONE...... that Mueller's ultimate intent is for Congress to settle the issue of "obstruction of justice" as the Article One responsibility of Congress.

Mueller.

Barr is a traitor to America.

At this point it is pretty obvious that everyone who supports trump is a traitor to America,

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mueller reaffirmed that there was No Collusion and No Obstruction in his No Collusion No Obstruction Report

FIRE your incompetent GED teacher as soon as possible......

Yeah tell us again how "Its Mueller Time!"

 

[Crixus]

Of course, Trump should be taken out of the equation as to who one should believe.......Trump's infamy for lying is beyond debate......

But, we are faced with the "choice" of who should be believed from a legal standpoint...that is, AG Barr, or investigating prosecutor, Mueller.........

From yesterday's brief monologue by Mueller, it is crystal CLEAR that these two republican lawyers are NOT on the same page.

Of course our biases come quickly into play when making the choice as who of these two should be believed.

So, we are left with the needed expose' that BOTH these folks need to openly testify before a House committee and.....

Either verbally repeat what was written in the report ....which is what Mueller will have to do......OR

Explain verbally how what is written in Mueller's report could EVER be "summarized" and "interpreted" as Barr did....which is also what Barr will have to do.

There is NO DOUBT......NONE...... that Mueller's ultimate intent is for Congress to settle the issue of "obstruction of justice" as the Article One responsibility of Congress.

Barr.

 

[Tehon]

The special counsel did its job, which was to investigate links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of Donald Trump. It apparently found none.

It's over. Move on.

if THAT is what you "comprehended" from this whole issue......find someone to help you with directions on how to open a can of soda

This is not an issue. It's a soap opera for partisans.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Of course, Trump should be taken out of the equation as to who one should believe.......Trump's infamy for lying is beyond debate......

But, we are faced with the "choice" of who should be believed from a legal standpoint...that is, AG Barr, or investigating prosecutor, Mueller.........

From yesterday's brief monologue by Mueller, it is crystal CLEAR that these two republican lawyers are NOT on the same page.

Of course our biases come quickly into play when making the choice as who of these two should be believed.

So, we are left with the needed expose' that BOTH these folks need to openly testify before a House committee and.....

Either verbally repeat what was written in the report ....which is what Mueller will have to do......OR

Explain verbally how what is written in Mueller's report could EVER be "summarized" and "interpreted" as Barr did....which is also what Barr will have to do.

There is NO DOUBT......NONE...... that Mueller's ultimate intent is for Congress to settle the issue of "obstruction of justice" as the Article One responsibility of Congress.

It has nothing to do with ‘believing’ anyone – the evidence justifying removing Trump from office via the impeachment process is documented in the Mueller report; the problem is far too Americans will bother to read it.

 

[lantern2814]

Are their impartial jurors in the Senate? Do you think that Republican senators are capable of hearing the evidence and rendering a fair verdict?

Only if those senators read and understand the House indictments. Otherwise, the rulings will be rendered by senate jurors who act out of political expedience rather than faithfulness to the constitution.

If I may just add this.........

When the House hears witnesses and subpoena records, the job is to convince the PUBLIC or guilt or innocence since senators....like all politicians.....put their finger up to the wind to save their own sorry asses.

Exactly.
History is our guide.
How the Watergate crisis eroded public support for Richard Nixon

See your problem here is you don't pay attention. You haven't done anything to Trump's approval rating. The public still backs him and according to a recent Harvard poll, over 60% of the public says drop it and move on. So much for Dems listening to the people.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Barr. Anyone who believes Mueller just wants to be duped.

Though, I would take Mueller more seriously than Nat right now.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Are their impartial jurors in the Senate? Do you think that Republican senators are capable of hearing the evidence and rendering a fair verdict?

Only if those senators read and understand the House indictments. Otherwise, the rulings will be rendered by senate jurors who act out of political expedience rather than faithfulness to the constitution.

If I may just add this.........

When the House hears witnesses and subpoena records, the job is to convince the PUBLIC or guilt or innocence since senators....like all politicians.....put their finger up to the wind to save their own sorry asses.

Exactly.
History is our guide.
How the Watergate crisis eroded public support for Richard Nixon

See your problem here is you don't pay attention. You haven't done anything to Trump's approval rating. The public still backs him and according to a recent Harvard poll, over 60% of the public says drop it and move on. So much for Dems listening to the people.

Well, the hearings haven't happened yet. Americans need to hear from these witnesses for themselves. You can see already what effect just ten minutes with Mueller has had.

 

[Nosmo King]

Of course, Trump should be taken out of the equation as to who one should believe.......Trump's infamy for lying is beyond debate......

But, we are faced with the "choice" of who should be believed from a legal standpoint...that is, AG Barr, or investigating prosecutor, Mueller.........

From yesterday's brief monologue by Mueller, it is crystal CLEAR that these two republican lawyers are NOT on the same page.

Of course our biases come quickly into play when making the choice as who of these two should be believed.

So, we are left with the needed expose' that BOTH these folks need to openly testify before a House committee and.....

Either verbally repeat what was written in the report ....which is what Mueller will have to do......OR

Explain verbally how what is written in Mueller's report could EVER be "summarized" and "interpreted" as Barr did....which is also what Barr will have to do.

There is NO DOUBT......NONE...... that Mueller's ultimate intent is for Congress to settle the issue of "obstruction of justice" as the Article One responsibility of Congress.

Barr has witnesses and probably recordings.
Mueller is the liar.

But whatever happened to "Total Exoneration"?

I am sure the Senate will fulfill its Article One responsibility and totally exonerate the President if it gets that far. Mueller surely realized there was no way the Senate or any court would convict on this kind of evidence. So, instead of being the target of the left for the rest of his life, he kicked it to Congress to take the heat.

Mueller said he would not charge Trump because he does not have that authority. The DoJ cannot indict a sitting president.

Rather, Mueller compiled the evidence and submitted his report.

According to our constitution, the only body that has the authority to charge a sitting president with high crime and misdemeanors is the House of Representatives. They act as a Grand Jury. Their indictments with supporting evidence is then submitted to the Senate where a trial, judged by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is held.

Are their impartial jurors in the Senate? Do you think that Republican senators are capable of hearing the evidence and rendering a fair verdict?

Only if those senators read and understand the House indictments. Otherwise, the rulings will be rendered by senate jurors who act out of political expedience rather than faithfulness to the constitution.

Would you rather have the constitution diluted by political motives, or have that constitution respected and followed? I wonder what those who claim to be 'originalists' believe?

So often Crashes nservatives wrap the constitution around themselves like a security blanket saying the founding fathers intentions must be upheld. Does that sntimentmapply in this case? Or will political considerations wipe all that 'originalist' ethic aside? So many other ethical considerations have been eroded in the age of Trump.

The words of the Constitution are "high crimes and misdemeanors" not politics and bullcrap. If the House Democrats do impeach the President, it will be political grandstanding, and nothing more. Of course the Senate will not convict.

If you were presented with actual evidence of obstruction of justice, would you believe it?

 

[anynameyouwish]

Barr has witnesses and probably recordings.
Mueller is the liar.

But whatever happened to "Total Exoneration"?

I am sure the Senate will fulfill its Article One responsibility and totally exonerate the President if it gets that far. Mueller surely realized there was no way the Senate or any court would convict on this kind of evidence. So, instead of being the target of the left for the rest of his life, he kicked it to Congress to take the heat.

Mueller said he would not charge Trump because he does not have that authority. The DoJ cannot indict a sitting president.

Rather, Mueller compiled the evidence and submitted his report.

According to our constitution, the only body that has the authority to charge a sitting president with high crime and misdemeanors is the House of Representatives. They act as a Grand Jury. Their indictments with supporting evidence is then submitted to the Senate where a trial, judged by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is held.

Are their impartial jurors in the Senate? Do you think that Republican senators are capable of hearing the evidence and rendering a fair verdict?

Only if those senators read and understand the House indictments. Otherwise, the rulings will be rendered by senate jurors who act out of political expedience rather than faithfulness to the constitution.

Would you rather have the constitution diluted by political motives, or have that constitution respected and followed? I wonder what those who claim to be 'originalists' believe?

So often Crashes nservatives wrap the constitution around themselves like a security blanket saying the founding fathers intentions must be upheld. Does that sntimentmapply in this case? Or will political considerations wipe all that 'originalist' ethic aside? So many other ethical considerations have been eroded in the age of Trump.

The words of the Constitution are "high crimes and misdemeanors" not politics and bullcrap. If the House Democrats do impeach the President, it will be political grandstanding, and nothing more. Of course the Senate will not convict.

If you were presented with actual evidence of obstruction of justice, would you believe it?

As trump noted.....he could kill someone on 5th avenue and NOT lose a single supporter.....

and his supporters would blame obama or hillary for the murder......

 

[nat4900]

As trump noted.....he could kill someone on 5th avenue and NOT lose a single supporter.....

.....basically....the very definition of the mentality that exists within a CULT

 

[Dale Smith]

Of course, Trump should be taken out of the equation as to who one should believe.......Trump's infamy for lying is beyond debate......

But, we are faced with the "choice" of who should be believed from a legal standpoint...that is, AG Barr, or investigating prosecutor, Mueller.........

From yesterday's brief monologue by Mueller, it is crystal CLEAR that these two republican lawyers are NOT on the same page.

Of course our biases come quickly into play when making the choice as who of these two should be believed.

So, we are left with the needed expose' that BOTH these folks need to openly testify before a House committee and.....

Either verbally repeat what was written in the report ....which is what Mueller will have to do......OR

Explain verbally how what is written in Mueller's report could EVER be "summarized" and "interpreted" as Barr did....which is also what Barr will have to do.

There is NO DOUBT......NONE...... that Mueller's ultimate intent is for Congress to settle the issue of "obstruction of justice" as the Article One responsibility of Congress.

Mueller is part of the swamp. How can you obstruct over a manufactured accusation fraught with corruption, criminality and political bias while TOTALLY overlooking the crimes committed by the DNC and the Hildebeast and giving them a TOTAL free pass?

 

[Dale Smith]

As trump noted.....he could kill someone on 5th avenue and NOT lose a single supporter.....

.....basically....the very definition of the mentality that exists within a CULT

The leftardism practically defines what a "cult" is.....

 

[tyroneweaver]

Before this is over Barr will have sacrificed every last bit of credibility he ever had. I have to wonder what he is getting in return.

Like for Trump and other former stars....the "reward" is notoriety.....even if it is infamy.

I thought this thread was about Barr and mueller
But you’re easily misled....which explains a lot.

 

[Lesh]

See your problem here is you don't pay attention. You haven't done anything to Trump's approval rating. The public still backs him and according to a recent Harvard poll, over 60% of the public says drop it and move on. So much for Dems listening to the people.

"The public"...does NOT back him. His approval is at 41%...right where it's been for over a year