Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Is everyone happy now ... ?

[quote]Attorney General Bill Barr publicly cleared Donald Trump of obstructing justice at a rushed press conference on the Mueller report– as he explained Trump's conduct by saying the 'frustrated' president was acting out of a belief that the probe was undermining his presidency.[/quote]

[b]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6936383/Attorney-General-Bill-Barr-reveals-redacted-Mueller-report.html[/b]
AbbeyRhode · F
Asif. The Democrats were drooling for two years, anticipating the Mueller report to produce some dirt. When it became apparent that it wouldn't, they denounced it before even hearing it. Now they will shift their focus to new lies, and new idiotic "investigations".
Nimbus · M
@AbbeyRhode Wtf!
It never ends.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Nimbus · M
@calnative Good point.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@Nimbus Being frustrated is not a reason to act out or prohibit others from doing their jobs.
Fernie · F
@calnative trump has one redeeming quality and that is that he is profoundly self defeating
katielass · F
No president has come under fire as this one has and yet he still gets the job done. No wonder the dumtards are so pissed.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
I have. You’re cooked. Wait until Mueller skewers pencil Dick Schiff at schiff’s own hearing

@HerKing
HerKing · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson I'm cooked? What's the new found Mueller love? Is it what your orange cult leader told you to say? 😂

I have to say, you're a perfect disciple, unquestioning loyalty and supine allegiance to Trump, no matter what. 😉
HerKing · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson 37 times in the report he said he couldn't remember...yet on his campaign he said he had the best memory of anyone he knew...weird eh?
windinhishair · 61-69, M
THE FIX IS ON. Apologist General Barr issued his carefully-worded narrative to protect the president.
Nimbus · M
@windinhishair Or he knew the truth?
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@Nimbus It was clear Barr wasn't telling the truth from his statement. For example, he discussed how cooperative the White House was in providing everything that was requested by Mueller. He left out the part that Trump refused to testify, which is the biggest action he could have undertaken to exonerate himself. Also, he made a point that there was no "illegal" cooperation with the Russians, because to be charged, someone would have had to do both the hacking AND the dissemination of the hacked information. What do you want to bet that Trump operatives WERE involved in distributing this information, while the Russians did the hacking? No, THE FIX IS ON.
Happy?

Not exactly, but I am pleased that Barr articulated better his rationale for finding insufficient evidence to support a corruption charge.

Essentially, although he still hasn't explained what his specific differences were with Mueller over the law with regard to some of the alleged acts, he says that they didn't make a difference, because there was insufficient evidence of corrupt intent, and specifically cited to evidence which he felt weighed against a finding of corrupt intent, before concluding:

[quote]
Apart from whether the acts were obstructive, this evidence of non-corrupt motives weighs heavily against any allegation that the President had a corrupt intent to obstruct the investigation.

[/quote]

Where I disagree with Barr is how the evidence he cites is relevant to corrupt [i]intent[/i].


[quote]
In assessing the President's actions discussed in the report, it is important to bear in mind the context. President Trump faced an unprecedented situation. As he entered into office, and sought to perform his responsibilities as President, federal agents and prosecutors were scrutinizing his conduct before and after taking office, and the conduct of some of his associates. At the same time, there was relentless speculation in the news media about the President's personal culpability. Yet, as he said from the beginning, there was in fact no collusion. And as the Special Counsel's report acknowledges, there is substantial evidence to show that the President was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.


[/quote]

This part, IMO, should not be relevant to the issue of whether the President [b]intended[/b] to obstruct. Neither the the lack of sufficient evidence of an underlying collusion offense nor the fact that he was angry and frustrated by the investigation and its sequella have any bearing as to whether he intended that any act he took might impede the investigation, etc.


[quote]
Nonetheless, the White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel's investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the President took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation.
[/quote]

Likewise, this is really evidence that the President didn't commit other acts of obstruction which he might have. That's great, I'm happy he didn't, but I don't see where it's so especially relevant to what his intent was with regard to any of the alleged ten acts.
Nimbus · M
@MistyCee 👍️
Fernie · F
I could not watch not listen to him this morning. It's all so predictable now
Nimbus · M
@Fernie I get like that hearing about Manchester United ;)
HerKing · 61-69, M
[quote]as he explained Trump's conduct by saying the [b]'frustrated' president[/b] was acting out of a belief that the probe was undermining his presidency.[/quote]

That isn't a legal defence. Obstruction is obstruction. If you ever get tugged by the police and try and cover up something, try using 'frustration' as your defence...tell us how it goes.
Carla · 61-69, F
This press conference was an excercise to get in front of the report. Tell the base what the president wanted them to hear. I will lay odds that 80% of that base will not read the report, nor care what is kept out. They will believe what they are told to believe.
No matter. Collusion was never going to be anything that would hurt trump. His troubles will be in his finances. Wait for it....
HerKing · 61-69, M
@Carla Trump and his cult haven't yet worked out that collusion isn't in itself a crime...Barr does know, which pretty much proves that Barr was speaking to an audience of one because Trump only thinks in simple terms.
Nimbus · M
@Carla 👍️
cherokeepatti · 61-69, F
The left isn’t, the media keeps pulling stuff out of their butts to spin about it.
Nimbus · M
@cherokeepatti On and on it goes!
HerKing · 61-69, M
I'm curious as to how Barr concluded Trump's explanation when Trump refused to be interviewed. How does he know?
HerKing · 61-69, M
It seems the selective part of the full sentence Barr quoted has context (Who knew?)...Mueller said that if Trump could be shown to have not obstructed justice, the report would say so.. And although it doesn't conclude Trump committed a crime, it doesn't exonerate him either. That was because according to the report, there was so much lying in the Trump circle it was very difficult to work out the truth.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
[image deleted]
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
You won’t change your tune until cnn tells you to. @HerKing
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
[image deleted]@HerKing
Nimbus · M
@jackjjackson Up to date ;)
pennynoodles · 56-60, F
Oh thank goodness for that, finally I can sleep tonight.
Nimbus · M
@pennynoodles You can always think about Brexit ;)
Niburu · 51-55, M
don't bother, it's like talking to a wall, none of your anti-Trump respondents are going to budge from their preconceived positions
Fernie · F
@Niburu shouldn't that be: "don't bother, it's like talking to a wall, none of your Trump supporters are going to budge from their delusional positions"
Niburu · 51-55, M
While I heartily agree with you that the other side of the political spectrum is stuck in their position too, that was not the point I was making.

I do thank you two for providing such a good example though of the non flexibility of thought from political zealots on SW.
Fernie · F
@Niburu 😂...aren't you adorable
Carla · 61-69, F
@HerKing thats what trump wanted in sessions. His own personal ag. There to carry out trumps vengeful wishes.
HerKing · 61-69, M
@Carla Trump has ranted against all law officials since before he was elected. He implied the judge who oversaw the university scandal was biased. It's what he has always done, it's never him who is the crook, it's others who have the temerity to hold him to account for it. How dare they investigate him, just because he's a mob boss.
Human1000 · M
Barr is a pathetic stooge.
HerKing · 61-69, M
@Human1000 Barr wrote a 19 page memo/resume so it was no surprise he'd get the job and continue to pledge his allegiance to Trump rather than the Constitution.
katielass · F
@Human1000 That would make little roddy rosenstein and mueller are stooges as well. No, I'm afraid you're just speaking out of frustration and hate. Have a nice day.
Human1000 · M
The Mueller report nails Trump on obstruction for Congress to follow-up. We’re just getting started.

 
Post Comment