Special counsel Robert Mueller

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

We are still waiting for the textual quotes from the report, which are in conflict with AG Barr's letter. Barr stated there was no collusion with Russia, is he wrong. Point out the text in the report that states the finding there was collusion between a U.S. citizen, the campaign or the President with Russia.

Also, Barr stated Mueller did not come to a conclusion on obstruction of justice. Mueller's report does not contain a conclusion on the obstruction issue.

Mueller's report has been out since Good Friday, so quote the findings which disagree with AG Barr.

Prove Barr's misrepresentation you speak of by quoting factual findings of Mueller's report which show there was collusion by a U.S. citizen, the campaign, or the President and that Mueller made a definite finding on obstruction?

I've responded to all of this.

I'm not doing it again... continually repeating yourself is not a successful tactic. Rendering of judgement was not handed to Barr. Mueller made that clear in his report.

I've quoted it several times. I'm not quoting it again.

Don't believe me... read the second letter Mueller sent to Barr on the matter... still don't believe me... wait until Mueller testifies.

Its pretty obvious to a lay-person and I look forward to dancing on your hill.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

I've responded to all of this.

I'm not doing it again... continually repeating yourself is not a successful tactic. Rendering of judgement was not handed to Barr. Mueller made that clear in his report.

I've quoted it several times. I'm not quoting it again.

Don't believe me... read the second letter Mueller sent to Barr on the matter... still don't believe me... wait until Mueller testifies.

Its pretty obvious to a lay-person and I look forward to dancing on your hill.

Yes, you responded with your personal opinions and not facts supported by the reports actual findings of fact. Yet you still persist in treating your opinions as facts.

I've already addressed your opinion about the issue of rendering of judgment about obstruction about not being handed to AG Barr. The DoJ has the sole power to make prosecutorial decisions. The only person Mueller could render, the prosecutorial decision about obstruction is to AG Barr.

Again, Mueller's authority to investigate comes from the DoJ, as does Mueller's authority to prosecute. There is no other person than the AG to whom the decision falls to.

As I said before, I am looking forward to Mueller's testimony about his and his staff's incompetence and his logically conflicting statement regarding the factual finding the President did not commit a crime.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Yes, you responded with your personal opinions and not facts supported by the reports actual findings of fact. Yet you still persist in treating your opinions as facts.

I've already addressed your opinion about the issue of rendering of judgment about obstruction about not being handed to AG Barr. The DoJ has the sole power to make prosecutorial decisions. The only person Mueller could render, the prosecutorial decision about obstruction is to AG Barr.

Again, Mueller's authority to investigate comes from the DoJ, as does Mueller's authority to prosecute. There is no other person than the AG to whom the decision falls to.

As I said before, I am looking forward to Mueller's testimony about his and his staff's incompetence and his logically conflicting statement regarding the factual finding the President did not commit a crime.

No I didn't.

I quoted Mueller's letter explicitly stating the AG got it wrong. Also the sections of the Report confirming their thinking vs. his.

You just refuse to acknowledge it.


This is false.

See Separation of Powers in the Report and also in the Constitution.

Mueller on the issue did not want to Preempt existing checks to addressing Presidential misconduct.

I quoted it.

You ignored it.


Mueller makes and accepts the argument that the DOJ does not have the authority to indict nor prosecute the Executive.

The discussion ends there unless Barr chooses to insert himself which he does... this where the issue of misrepresentation begins.


Whatever floats your boat man.

You arguing Mueller and Barr didn't disagree when Mueller wrote copy proving they did.

You wish to accept the AG's conclusions on a report when the author of said report disagrees with him. Then you trash the author of the report.

Its both-wayism at its finest.

I can't really help ya there.

[woodtoo]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

No I didn't.

I quoted Mueller's letter explicitly stating the AG got it wrong. Also the sections of the Report confirming their thinking vs. his.

You just refuse to acknowledge it.


This is false.

See Separation of Powers in the Report and also in the Constitution.

Mueller on the issue did not want to Preempt existing checks to addressing Presidential misconduct.

I quoted it.

You ignored it.


Mueller makes and accepts the argument that the DOJ does not have the authority to indict nor prosecute the Executive.

The discussion ends there unless Barr chooses to insert himself which he does... this where the issue of misrepresentation begins.


Whatever floats your boat man.

You arguing Mueller and Barr didn't disagree when Mueller wrote copy proving they did.

You wish to accept the AG's conclusions on a report when the author of said report disagrees with him. Then you trash the author of the report.

Its both-wayism at its finest.

I can't really help ya there.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

No I didn't.

I quoted Mueller's letter explicitly stating the AG got it wrong. Also the sections of the Report confirming their thinking vs. his.

You just refuse to acknowledge it.


This is false.

See Separation of Powers in the Report and also in the Constitution.

Mueller on the issue did not want to Preempt existing checks to addressing Presidential misconduct.

I quoted it.

You ignored it.


Mueller makes and accepts the argument that the DOJ does not have the authority to indict nor prosecute the Executive.

The discussion ends there unless Barr chooses to insert himself which he does... this where the issue of misrepresentation begins.


Whatever floats your boat man.

You arguing Mueller and Barr didn't disagree when Mueller wrote copy proving they did.

You wish to accept the AG's conclusions on a report when the author of said report disagrees with him. Then you trash the author of the report.

Its both-wayism at its finest.

I can't really help ya there.

Actually the letter's verbiage was the AG's summary did not convey the context, nature and substance. Reading the actual report there is no factual findings found in Mueller's report that contradict the AG's letter.

What is false that the DoJ and not congress has the power to investigate crimes and make prosecutorial decisions?

The DoJ has the authority to determine if a crime has been committed. The OLC opinion does not preclude the DoJ from concluding that the sitting President committed a crime.

I am not arguing if Barr and Mueller disagree about the standard for obstruction of justice, which they may. However, Mueller had the right and power to make a decision if obstruction had been committed, a decision he failed to make.

[Tom]

Point us to the posts were you allege you quoted the report.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Actually the letter's verbiage was the AG's summary did not convey the context, nature and substance. Reading the actual report there is no factual findings found in Mueller's report that contradict the AG's letter.

More lies... though I should expect nothing less...

I've listed them. You've ignored them.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

More lies... though I should expect nothing less...

I've listed them. You've ignored them.

You missed the 2nd sentence, of the paragraph that clearly contain the words the context, nature and substance of the Office's work.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

You missed the 2nd sentence, of the paragraph that clearly contain the words the context, nature and substance of the Office's work.

You missed the part about conclusions...

[Tom]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

More lies... though I should expect nothing less...

I've listed them. You've ignored them.

This is not in the report.
It is a letter and is an opinion.
It has no bearing on anything.

READ THE REPORT!

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

You missed the part about conclusions...

No I didn't. I am sure Mueller feels what ever summary he prepared accurately reflects his conclusions. So sad if Mueller's feelings were hurt if AG Barr wrote his own summary of Mueller's report. Mueller's emotions don't count, facts do.

AG Barr's account is in agreement with Mueller's written report in substance. No evidence of collusion and no determination, for whatever reason, by Mueller concerning the President and obstruction.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

AG Barr's account is in agreement with Mueller's written report in substance. No evidence of collusion and no determination, for whatever reason, by Mueller concerning the President and obstruction.

His testimony is going to be hilarious to me...

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

His testimony is going to be hilarious to me...

I am happy for you.

[woodtoo]

All this Dem questioning of Barr is being done for one reason and one reason only.

To discredit and sully his reputation ahead of the upcoming indictments and trials coming later this year against "the small group" inside FBI and DOJ. Of course and where ever else up the chain of command it takes them.

Elys, Burls and other total hang up over this nothingburger is pure unadulterated headfake actions as none of this now matters.

Mueller was unable to create a crime nor could he locate one.

So now they begin investigating the investigators where real crime s will be easy to find. Just wait til they start turning on each other
it will be dog eat dog.

Mueller completed his investigation and that part is over.

[davew]

So Mueller was mad the media mischaracterized the report or Barrs' letter?