Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 84

Thread: Barr to testify before House Judiciary Committee

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,467
    Thanks
    180
    Thanked 317 Times in 255 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 116 Times in 112 Posts

    Default

    Barr is not Trump 's personal lawyer!

  2. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    81,260
    Thanks
    96,669
    Thanked 18,198 Times in 15,267 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,900 Times in 2,642 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anne Frank View Post
    Barr is not Trump 's personal lawyer!
    Eric Holder: “I’m still enjoying what I’m doing, there’s still work to be done,” I’m still the President’s wing-man, so I’m there with my boy.”
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē



  3. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    8,002
    Thanks
    4,854
    Thanked 5,547 Times in 3,727 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 187 Times in 185 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    The arrangement comes as Democrats have demanded answers about Barr's apparent intervention in the sentencing of President Donald Trumpís longtime ally Roger Stone, who was convicted last year on charges that he lied to congressional investigators and threatened a witness.

    On Wednesday morning, Trump hailed Barr for "taking charge" of the matter, confirming suggestions that it was the attorney general himself who intervened.

    Barr's appearance before the committee will bring him face to face with some of Trump's fiercest political adversaries, including Chairman Jerry Nadler, who subpoenaed the Justice Department last year to obtain Mueller's underlying evidence and has gone to court to overrule Barr's refusal to share the grand jury evidence Mueller collected.

    Democrats have a long list of issues they're likely to press Barr on, including his involvement in decisions surrounding Trump's decision to withhold military funds from Ukraine last year, and his handling of a whistleblower complaint about the episode that DOJ determined should be withheld from Congress, overruling an intelligence community inspector general.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...mmittee-114601
    Hope it's televised. It'd be a hoot watching Barr BITCH SLAP THE POLITBURO....
    TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE .


    De Oppresso Liber

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Grokmaster For This Post:

    Truth Detector (02-12-2020)

  5. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    19,683
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 9,195 Times in 5,875 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1,493 Times in 1,391 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Your first paragraph describes the Mullet investigation lol.

    Never could quite find that collusion in spite of the endless innuendos.

    I’ll stop short of predictions, but there’s enough ‘there, there’ that it should give Democrats at least some pause. Maybe not with the rank and file that tune into Maddow but I’m confident the big wigs see a potential train wreck coming in the Durham report.

    For example, Mullet uncovered no underlying crime in his investigation. It’s plausible the whole thing was a ruse intended to provoke Trump into an obstruction trap. What did House Democrats hope to hang on Trump at the conclusion of the Mullet investigation? It wasn’t a criminal conspiracy with the Russians—they wanted to charge him with obstruction.

    Barr gives the appearance of ‘being on to it’. Maybe it’s a dry hole—but if it’s not, it’s going to get very ugly. Historically, ugly.

    There’s an explanation for Mullet’s bizarre behavior that has nothing to do with his brain slowing down or whatever: Mullet may be a man who knows he’s been caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Recall that he seemed to ‘not know’ what was in his own report.

    Did he know Russian collision was a dry hole when he signed on? Maybe Durham will want to see ‘the state of the evidence’ the day Mullet was appointed. Probably a dumb question, actually.

    Democrats, their media arm and some other people are watching this very carefully. Stone is the sideshow. Nadler wants rid of Barr to either get control of Durham or even better, get rid of him.

    Of course, they are going to investigate Barr. They have nothing to lose.
    Mueller didn't prosecute what he found cause of the nebulous legal understanding of what is collusion and the fact that Dept of Justice guidelines said you couldn't indite a sitting President

    None of it is going to effect the Democrats, it wasn't the Democrats who appointed Mueller, rather Trump's own Justice Department, how is this going to touch the Democrats, and why would any care given it has little relevance in 2020

    And given the Judiciary Committee's responsibility is to oversee the Justice Dept questioning Barr is normal, it has been requested before but Billy declined citing the whole executive privilege stuff

  6. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    8,002
    Thanks
    4,854
    Thanked 5,547 Times in 3,727 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 187 Times in 185 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Makes one wonder why, everybody knows Barr will lie his ass off to cover Trump, you are going to see a lot of Barr's usual, "repeat the question," "I don't understand the question," "what does suggest mean," "I don't remember," and of course the predictable Executive privilege catch all, waste of time

    Also, don't be suprised if Trump kills his appearance, from experience, the last thing Trump wants is any of his ass kissers taking questions under oath, even Barr


    THE WITCH HUNT HAS BEEN DEXPOSED AS ILLEGAL ALREADY....THIS IS ITS DYING BREATH..UNTIL WEISSMAN GETS HIS ASS HANDED TO HIM IN APRIL, by CONCORD...
    TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE .


    De Oppresso Liber

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Grokmaster For This Post:

    Truth Detector (02-12-2020)

  8. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    8,002
    Thanks
    4,854
    Thanked 5,547 Times in 3,727 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 187 Times in 185 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anne Frank View Post
    Barr is not Trump 's personal lawyer!

    HOLDER WAS OBAMA'S "WING MAN"....ASK HIM.

    THE USAG IS THE LEAD ATTORNEY FOR THE ADMINISTRATION...TAKE CIVICS CLASS.
    TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE .


    De Oppresso Liber

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Grokmaster For This Post:

    Truth Detector (02-12-2020)

  10. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    19,683
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 9,195 Times in 5,875 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1,493 Times in 1,391 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Eric Holder: “I’m still enjoying what I’m doing, there’s still work to be done,” I’m still the President’s wing-man, so I’m there with my boy.”
    Haven't been thru this before, yet you still can not produce one example where Holder ever acted as Obama's personal attorney, with Barr, the same isn't true as I showed you previously with the New York case, meaning you are just running with cliches

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to archives For This Post:

    christiefan915 (02-12-2020)

  12. #23 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    81,260
    Thanks
    96,669
    Thanked 18,198 Times in 15,267 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,900 Times in 2,642 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grokmaster View Post
    Hope it's televised. It'd be a hoot watching Barr BITCH SLAP THE POLITBURO....
    So true.
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē



  13. #24 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    81,260
    Thanks
    96,669
    Thanked 18,198 Times in 15,267 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,900 Times in 2,642 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Mueller didn't prosecute what he found cause of the nebulous legal understanding of what is collusion and the fact that Dept of Justice guidelines said you couldn't indite a sitting President

    None of it is going to effect the Democrats, it wasn't the Democrats who appointed Mueller, rather Trump's own Justice Department, how is this going to touch the Democrats, and why would any care given it has little relevance in 2020

    And given the Judiciary Committee's responsibility is to oversee the Justice Dept questioning Barr is normal, it has been requested before but Billy declined citing the whole executive privilege stuff
    There is nothing nebulous about collusion. WTF are you bloviating about? The rest of your drivel is the usual MSNBC bullshit.
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē



  14. #25 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    19,683
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 9,195 Times in 5,875 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1,493 Times in 1,391 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Why would Barr have to lie?



    I am never surprised by how wrong you always are and a shitty speller too.
    "Why does Barr have to lie," let's see, that is a tough one, ah, probably to cover Trump's ass, what in the hell did you think Trump appointed him to do

    And yeah, I don't worry about spelling, never was that anal retentive, besides, the keyboard is too small

  15. #26 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    81,260
    Thanks
    96,669
    Thanked 18,198 Times in 15,267 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,900 Times in 2,642 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Haven't been thru this before, yet you still can not produce one example where Holder ever acted as Obama's personal attorney, with Barr, the same isn't true as I showed you previously with the New York case, meaning you are just running with cliches
    Those are his very words you dumb, low IQ hack.

    YOU can't produce one example where Barr is acting as Trump's personal attorney shit-for-brains.
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē



  16. #27 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    81,260
    Thanks
    96,669
    Thanked 18,198 Times in 15,267 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 2,900 Times in 2,642 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    "Why does Barr have to lie," let's see, that is a tough one, ah, probably to cover Trump's ass, what in the hell did you think Trump appointed him to do
    Name a lie then you clueless hack.

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    And yeah, I don't worry about spelling, never was that anal retentive, besides, the keyboard is too small
    ^Tranlsation; too stupid to use spell check.
    Page 173 V I: Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

    Eric Holder: ďIím still enjoying what Iím doing, thereís still work to be done,Ē Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy.Ē



  17. #28 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    8,002
    Thanks
    4,854
    Thanked 5,547 Times in 3,727 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 187 Times in 185 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Haven't been thru this before, yet you still can not produce one example where Holder ever acted as Obama's personal attorney, with Barr, the same isn't true as I showed you previously with the New York case, meaning you are just running with cliches

    OTHER THAN THE BLATANT COVERUPS of FAST N FURIOUS, URANIUM ONE, THE SUBSEQUENT ILLEGAL RUSSIAN EXPORTING OF YELLOWCAKE AFTER URANIUM ONE, THE IRS TARGTING, THE HILLARY CRIMES, BENGHAZI, , ETC., ETC.. YEAH, SURE...
    TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE .


    De Oppresso Liber

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Grokmaster For This Post:

    Truth Detector (02-12-2020)

  19. #29 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    19,683
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 9,195 Times in 5,875 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1,493 Times in 1,391 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    There is nothing nebulous about collusion. WTF are you bloviating about? The rest of your drivel is the usual MSNBC bullshit.
    Why do I always have to explain the obvious to "truthie?"

    "Allegations of “collusion” were not “proven false” in the Mueller investigation, nor was the issue of “collusion” addressed in the report.
    The report makes clear the investigation did not assess whether “collusion” occurred because it is not a legal term."
    https://apnews.com/f9c0ab20229140f18ea34e1f15a9f597

    "Trump critics pointed to multiple instances of those contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russia as evidence of “collusion,” a term that Mueller points out in his report has no legal application, but nevertheless colloquially encompasses the kinds of possible violations he examined."
    https://www.rollcall.com/2019/04/18/...nd-doesnt-say/

    "The term, “collusion” is not a legal term and the report made no finding on that issue, one way or the other"
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevede.../#18ff1e937836

    Billy Barr lied, which is why he had to get out infront of the public review of the report

  20. #30 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    8,002
    Thanks
    4,854
    Thanked 5,547 Times in 3,727 Posts
    Groans
    129
    Groaned 187 Times in 185 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Why do I always have to explain the obvious to "truthie?"

    "Allegations of “collusion” were not “proven false” in the Mueller investigation, nor was the issue of “collusion” addressed in the report.
    The report makes clear the investigation did not assess whether “collusion” occurred because it is not a legal term."
    https://apnews.com/f9c0ab20229140f18ea34e1f15a9f597

    "Trump critics pointed to multiple instances of those contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russia as evidence of “collusion,” a term that Mueller points out in his report has no legal application, but nevertheless colloquially encompasses the kinds of possible violations he examined."
    https://www.rollcall.com/2019/04/18/...nd-doesnt-say/

    "The term, “collusion” is not a legal term and the report made no finding on that issue, one way or the other"
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevede.../#18ff1e937836

    Billy Barr lied, which is why he had to get out infront of the public review of the report

    TOTAL "WORD DANCE BULLSHIT.

    MUELLER FOUND NO COOPERATION BETWEEN ANYONE IN THE ADMINISTRATION and the RUSSIANS.

    OF COURSE, HE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHO "FUSION GPS" IS, OR HE SURE AS HELL WOULD HAVE FOUND SOME.

    BARR WILL.
    TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE .


    De Oppresso Liber

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Grokmaster For This Post:

    Truth Detector (02-12-2020)

Similar Threads

  1. House Judiciary Committee announces first impeachment hearing
    By anatta in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-27-2019, 02:13 AM
  2. Move to remove Nadler from House Judiciary Committee.
    By Dark Soul in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-25-2019, 10:19 PM
  3. BREAKING: Nadler to have Mueller testify in front of Judiciary Committee
    By reagansghost in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 04-12-2019, 03:42 PM
  4. HOUSE JUDICIARY CHAIR CALLS ON MUELLER TO TESTIFY BEFORE COMMITTEE
    By reagansghost in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-08-2019, 03:04 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-22-2018, 01:58 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •