Just sitting here watching Barrs testimony.

[Enoch07]

Instead, to you this is all just "funny", but to me it's all just "sad".

You don't think its funny?

Here is one of YOUR representatives at Barrs testimony.

And you think this is acceptable politics?!?

 

[tytlyf]

Not really it's just for political show. His report is what matters.

His report was 'summarized' poorly according to Mueller. Misrepresentation. It's important for Mueller to testify.

es it was. Mueller could not come to a conclusion on obstruction based on the evidence he found. So he handed it over to Barr to make the call, and he did.

Mueller did not leave it up to Barr to make a conclusion on obstruction. Another reason you'll hate Mueller testifying and clearing that RW fake news up.

Congress makes law, they do not enforce them. It is the legislative branch, not the judiciary. Learn how your government works before spewing nonsense.

The Mueller report has 10 individual instances the President obstructed justice. And you think it's up to Barr to make the final conclusion on the matter. Barr admitted he didn't even read the report and the evidence contained when he came to his 'summary.'

I never said collusion.

That's Dems term they used for the past 3 years.

The report clears Trump of conspiracy and obstruction.

Correct, collusion isn't a crime. Conspiracy and coordination are. It's pretty obvious Donnie and his campaign colluded.

The report clears Donnie of criminal conspiracy, not collusion. The report does not clear Donnie of obstruction.

Change your information sources.

 

[Enoch07]

His report was 'summarized' poorly according to Mueller. Misrepresentation. It's important for Mueller to testify.

Incorrect, Mueller said Barrs summary was accurate but the media had misrepresented it.

Mueller did not leave it up to Barr to make a conclusion on obstruction. Another reason you'll hate Mueller testifying and clearing that RW fake news up.

Yes he did. It was Muellers call to make, and he did bot have enough evidence to prosecute, so he handed it off to Barr to look at. Barr concurred and the matter is settled.

The Mueller report has 10 individual instances the President obstructed justice. And you think it's up to Barr to make the final conclusion on the matter. Barr admitted he didn't even read the report and the evidence contained when he came to his 'summary.'

Incorrect, or else charges would be filed.

The report clears Donnie of criminal conspiracy, not collusion. The report does not clear Donnie of obstruction.

Change your information sources.

Obviously it does or else charges would have been filed.

 

[tytlyf]

Incorrect, Mueller said Barrs summary was accurate but the media had misrepresented it.

No he didn't, that's what Fox told you. Something about "concerned how the media was reporting it" and not "the accuracy" right?

Yes he did. It was Muellers call to make, and he did bot have enough evidence to prosecute, so he handed it off to Barr to look at. Barr concurred and the matter is settled.

It was never Muellers intent to bring charges on obstruction.....wait for it.....because you can't indict a sitting president. Lot's of obstruction evidence in Volume #2, you should read it.

Incorrect, or else charges would be filed.

See above, Mueller didn't have the power to indict a sitting president.

Obviously it does or else charges would have been filed.

See above. Mueller didn't have the power to indict a sitting president. The obstruction road map was laid out pretty thoroughly for congress to act upon. Which will happen.

Like I said, it's not wise to get your information from opinion/entertainment sources.

 

[Enoch07]

No he didn't, that's what Fox told you. Something about "concerned how the media was reporting it" and not "the accuracy" right?

No, it's what the Mueller said about Barr's summary.

Lot's of obstruction evidence in Volume #2, you should read it.

No prosecutable evidence.

The obstruction road map was laid out pretty thoroughly for congress to act upon. Which will happen.

Congress is not the judicial branch. It is the legislative.branch.

 

[tytlyf]

No, it's what the Mueller said about Barr's summary.

No he didn't.
"There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations."— The letter from Mueller to Barr reads, according to the Post"
Mueller told AG William Barr that his summary failed to "fully capture" Russia probe findings

No prosecutable evidence.

Barr didn't read all the evidence in the report, how can you make a call without reviewing the evidence?
Barr says he didn't review underlying evidence of Mueller report before making obstruction call

Congress is not the judicial branch. It is the legislative.branch.

It was left to congress by Mueller. That's made clear in the report.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[Enoch07]

There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. T

Yes due to the media misrepresenting the summary.

It was left to congress by Mueller. That's made clear in the report.

Really, where?

Barr didn't read all the evidence in the report, how can you make a call without reviewing the evidence?

Nope, he accepted Muellers findings as true without reviewing them, and yet they did not constitute charges.

 

[tytlyf]

Yes due to the media misrepresenting the summary.

Nope, Barr misrepresenting the conclusions found by Mueller. Maybe you can help me find the part where you said "Mueller said Barr's summary was accurate"
Read: Robert Mueller letter to Attorney General William Barr - CNNPolitics

Really, where?

Here you go
“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state,” according to the report. “Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment.”
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Nope, he accepted Muellers findings as true without reviewing them, and yet they did not constitute charges.

Here you go
"Some of the confusion over Mueller’s intent was fed by Barr’s assertion in a letter to Congress last month that Mueller closed his probe “without reaching any legal conclusions” on obstruction.
That wasn’t accurate.
Mueller always planned to follow a Justice Department policy that says a sitting president can’t be indicted, according to people familiar with his investigation. Had he been able to reach a conclusion that Trump didn’t obstruct justice, he would have said so."
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[Enoch07]

Nope, Barr misrepresenting the conclusions found by Mueller. Maybe you can help me find the part where you said "Mueller said Barr's summary was accurate"

Mueller Did Not Think Barr's Report Summary Was Inaccurate, Complains About Misleading Media Coverage

. Had he been able to reach a conclusion that Trump didn’t obstruct justice, he would have said so."

He did so, as Barr concurred.

 

[tytlyf]

Mueller Did Not Think Barr's Report Summary Was Inaccurate, Complains About Misleading Media Coverage

You're talking about a phone call or hearsay. Did Mueller respond to that claim about the phone call with Barr? Has Mueller even acknowledged that this phone call took place?

Attorney General William Barr refuses to hand over notes of phone call with special counsel Robert Mueller about complaints in 'snitty' letter

He did so, as Barr concurred.

If Mueller didn't find evidence of obstruction, he would have said that in the report. Which he did not.

 

[Enoch07]

You're talking about a phone call or hearsay. Did Mueller respond to that claim about the phone call with Barr? Has Mueller even acknowledged that this phone call took place?

Barr also said it under oath. So unless you can prove he lied. Then you have to accept he is telling the truth.

If Mueller didn't find evidence of obstruction, he would have said that in the report. Which he did not.

He didn't suggest obstruction charges be filed so it equates to the same thing.

 

[tytlyf]

Barr also said it under oath. So unless you can prove he lied. Then you have to accept he is telling the truth.

Yes, we'll see what Mueller says. The 4-page letter was accurate (according to Mueller), but the context and principle conclusions weren't.

He didn't suggest obstruction charges be filed so it equates to the same thing.

Mueller can't suggest obstruction charges. You cannot indict a sitting president. What the report said was that Mueller would have concluded "no obstruction" if no evidence of obstruction was found.
Mueller had the power according to law to conclude absolutely 'no obstruction.' Mueller didn't have the power to indict the president. Which is why all the evidence was laid out for congress to pursue.

 

[Enoch07]

Yes, we'll see what Mueller says. The 4-page letter was accurate (according to Mueller), but the context and principle conclusions weren't.

Incorrect, Barr explained this in his testimony.

Mueller can't suggest obstruction charges. You cannot indict a sitting president. What the report said was that Mueller would have concluded "no obstruction" if no evidence of obstruction was found.
Mueller had the power according to law to conclude absolutely 'no obstruction.' Mueller didn't have the power to indict the president. Which is why all the evidence was laid out for congress to pursue.

Incorrect, Barr explained this in his testimony.

 

[Woberts]

Because there is an ongoing investigation. I am not gonna point it out so you or the media can spin it. If you want to spin it read the entire 450 page document.

So you're lying. Excellent.

 

[Watchmen]

The more Dems dig into this stuff, the more 2020 will slip through their fingers.

I remember when GW Bush won his second term. The Dems I knew were in utter disbelief and didn’t understand. I expect the same to happen again.

 

[Enoch07]

So you're lying. Excellent.

You'll find out shortly.

 

[tytlyf]

Incorrect, Barr explained this in his testimony.

Incorrect, Barr explained this in his testimony.

Fix your reading comprehension. Barr's opinion is irrelevant.

 

[Enoch07]

Fix your reading comprehension. Barr's opinion is irrelevant.

Correct, but he did not give his opinion.

He stated facts, based on the law.

 

[tytlyf]

Correct, but he did not give his opinion.

He stated facts, based on the law.

Riiight, which is why Mueller isn't happy with Barr's 'facts.'

 

[Enoch07]

Riiight, which is why Mueller isn't happy with Barr's 'facts.'

Mueller has never disputed Barr's facts, because they are one in the same.