1AM - Mueller team wrote for PUBLIC release. Actual evidence "alarming & significant"

Centerleftfl

Verified User
1AM - Mueller team wrote for PUBLIC release. Actual evidence "alarming & significant"

Worth a mention, WAPO didn't put this under National or Politics, they put it under National Security. That's interesting. BARR IS FUCKING WITH THE REPORT AND US!

These are some very salient 'pullouts' from the article, further down. The team WROTE IT FOR RELEASE, already 'redacted' or requiring minimum more editing.


The report was prepared “so that the front matter from each section could have
been released immediately — or very quickly,” the official said. “It was done in a way
that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself.”


Mueller’s team assumed the information was going to be made available to the public,
the official said, “and so they prepared their summaries to be shared in their own words
— and not in the attorney general’s summary of their work, as turned out to be the case.”


Limited information Barr has shared about Russia investigation frustrated some on Mueller’s team

By Ellen Nakashima , Carol D. Leonnig and Rosalind S. Helderman

April 4 at 1:01 AM

Members of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s team have told associates they are frustrated with the limited information Attorney General William P. Barr has provided about their nearly two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether President Trump sought to obstruct justice, according to people familiar with the matter.

The displeasure among some who worked on the closely held inquiry has quietly begun to surface in the days since Barr released a four-page letter to Congress on March 24 describing what he said were the principal conclusions of Mueller’s still-confidential, 400-page report.

In his letter, Barr said that the special counsel did not establish a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. And he said that Mueller did not reach a conclusion “one way or the other” as to whether Trump’s conduct in office constituted obstruction of justice.

Absent that, Barr told lawmakers that he concluded the evidence was not sufficient to prove that the president obstructed justice.

But members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant.
“It was much more acute than Barr suggested,” said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity.

VE54JTSWQ4I6TDXT7PKBULHE2U.jpg

Attorney General William P. Barr has promised to provide Congress with a
redacted version of Mueller’s report by mid-April. (Erik S Lesser/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)


The New York Times first reported that some special counsel investigators feel that Barr did not adequately portray their findings.
Some members of the office were particularly disappointed that Barr did not release summary information the special counsel team had prepared, according to two people familiar with their reactions.

There was immediate displeasure from the team “There was immediate displeasure from the team when they saw how the attorney general had characterized their work instead,” according one U.S. official briefed on the matter...




https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...2f46684196e_story.html?utm_term=.e182ad0cabfb
 
Rachel said it best...

“You mean to tell me when the newly-installed Trump Attorney General decided to sit on the Mueller report and not release to it anyone — not a single page?” she asked. “And instead the White House and Congressional Republicans and conservative media tried to claim total vindication for the president in Mueller’s report based just on attorney general Barr’s odd, vague characterization of what he says Mueller concluded — which the A.G. then later said shouldn’t even be taken as a summary of what Mueller concluded.”

“You mean to tell me that maybe the Mueller report isn’t as exactly as exciting and positive and exculpatory for the president as the Trump administration and conservative media and Congressional Republicans would have you believe?” Maddow asked. “Really? Who could have seen this coming?”

“Hope you’ve enjoyed your victory laps,” she added.
 
JFChrist. RIGHT IN THE NYTIMES ARTICLE https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html

However, the special counsel’s office never asked Mr. Barr to release the summaries soon after he received the report, a person familiar with the investigation said. And the Justice Department quickly determined that the summaries contain sensitive information, like classified material, secret grand-jury testimony and information related to current federal investigations that must remain confidential, according to two government officials.
TDS hysteria :whoa:
 
Rachel said it best...

“You mean to tell me when the newly-installed Trump Attorney General decided to sit on the Mueller report and not release to it anyone — not a single page?” she asked. “And instead the White House and Congressional Republicans and conservative media tried to claim total vindication for the president in Mueller’s report based just on attorney general Barr’s odd, vague characterization of what he says Mueller concluded — which the A.G. then later said shouldn’t even be taken as a summary of what Mueller concluded.”

[FONT=&]“You mean to tell me that maybe the Mueller report isn’t as exactly as exciting and positive and exculpatory for the president as the Trump administration and conservative media and Congressional Republicans would have you believe?” Maddow asked. “Really? Who could have seen this coming?”[/FONT]

[FONT=&]“Hope you’ve enjoyed your victory laps,” she added.[/FONT]

Then bring your boy Mullet in for a hearing and questioning and hear it from the horse's mouth.
Get over it.
 
Good to see you Anatta :cool: Not much has changed.......Toxic TDS still spewing forth around here.
hi there! .ya they're in various stages of frothing...if they wanted to really get more answers,
they could just call Bob Mueller .But Bob's not what they want.

they want to gin up some spin fragments in the report to create obstruction

Good to see you as well
 
Worth a mention, WAPO didn't put this under National or Politics, they put it under National Security. That's interesting. BARR IS FUCKING WITH THE REPORT AND US!

These are some very salient 'pullouts' from the article, further down. The team WROTE IT FOR RELEASE, already 'redacted' or requiring minimum more editing.


The report was prepared “so that the front matter from each section could have
been released immediately — or very quickly,” the official said. “It was done in a way
that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself.”


Mueller’s team assumed the information was going to be made available to the public,
the official said, “and so they prepared their summaries to be shared in their own words
— and not in the attorney general’s summary of their work, as turned out to be the case.”


Limited information Barr has shared about Russia investigation frustrated some on Mueller’s team

By Ellen Nakashima , Carol D. Leonnig and Rosalind S. Helderman

April 4 at 1:01 AM

Members of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s team have told associates they are frustrated with the limited information Attorney General William P. Barr has provided about their nearly two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether President Trump sought to obstruct justice, according to people familiar with the matter.

The displeasure among some who worked on the closely held inquiry has quietly begun to surface in the days since Barr released a four-page letter to Congress on March 24 describing what he said were the principal conclusions of Mueller’s still-confidential, 400-page report.

In his letter, Barr said that the special counsel did not establish a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. And he said that Mueller did not reach a conclusion “one way or the other” as to whether Trump’s conduct in office constituted obstruction of justice.

Absent that, Barr told lawmakers that he concluded the evidence was not sufficient to prove that the president obstructed justice.

But members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant.
“It was much more acute than Barr suggested,” said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity.

VE54JTSWQ4I6TDXT7PKBULHE2U.jpg

Attorney General William P. Barr has promised to provide Congress with a
redacted version of Mueller’s report by mid-April. (Erik S Lesser/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)


The New York Times first reported that some special counsel investigators feel that Barr did not adequately portray their findings.
Some members of the office were particularly disappointed that Barr did not release summary information the special counsel team had prepared, according to two people familiar with their reactions.

There was immediate displeasure from the team “There was immediate displeasure from the team when they saw how the attorney general had characterized their work instead,” according one U.S. official briefed on the matter...




https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...2f46684196e_story.html?utm_term=.e182ad0cabfb
It appears that Barr's summary is an attempt to obstruct justice.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Then bring your boy Mullet in for a hearing and questioning and hear it from the horse's mouth.
Get over it.

There will be no getting over it lol.

The problem with the obstruction theory, unlike the collusion theory, is that so much of it is public knowledge. There could conceivably have been secret cloak and dagger meetings between Russians and Trump’s people that have yet to come out.

But Comey was fired by Trump for all the world to see. Some of the ‘evidence’ of intent came from a freaking interview on cable news for crying out loud.

From a legal standpoint an obstruction case would be iffy just based on Trump’s *unassailable* authority to fire FBI Directors as Chief Executive. Federal prosecutors didn’t get a 90% conviction rate by bringing iffy indictments so the only reason Mullet would bring this one would be if he were desperate. Which is entirely plausible, since he’s obviously working on behalf of the Resistance.

But the bigger issue is Rosenstein. One explanation for the nonsensical ‘non-exoneration’ is that Mullet felt that there WAS case for obstruction but that case would be tainted by Rosenstein’s patently glaring conflict of interest.

The whole thing was an ill-conceived cluster F* from the get-go. Time to move on, for crying out loud.
 
Last edited:
How could President Trump obstruct an investigation into a crime that did not exist (collusion)? Of course collusion isn't a crime so the investigation was about a crime that wasn't a crime and never happened.
 
OMG you triggered nut-bags

you will get to see what Mr. BArr allows you to se, nothing more, nothing less

what part of this are you not understanding? :rofl2:
 
First nut-bag nation wanted to show, based their entire existence on Mueller finding there was "collusion"
Mueller found no collusion, now nut-bag nation still can not move on

what a waste of space your lives must be
go outside and get some fresh air
 
How could President Trump obstruct an investigation into a crime that did not exist (collusion)? Of course collusion isn't a crime so the investigation was about a crime that wasn't a crime and never happened.

Mullet could go that route but it would be political toxin for House democrats to do it. A ‘non-finding’ validates Trump’s Witch Hunt rhetoric.

Particularly, if indictments against some of the actors who instigated the investigation start coming out.

But House democrats would do it anyway. They literally can’t help themselves.
 
Hello Centerleftfl,

Worth a mention, WAPO didn't put this under National or Politics, they put it under National Security. That's interesting. BARR IS FUCKING WITH THE REPORT AND US!

These are some very salient 'pullouts' from the article, further down. The team WROTE IT FOR RELEASE, already 'redacted' or requiring minimum more editing.


The report was prepared “so that the front matter from each section could have
been released immediately — or very quickly,” the official said. “It was done in a way
that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself.”


Mueller’s team assumed the information was going to be made available to the public,
the official said, “and so they prepared their summaries to be shared in their own words
— and not in the attorney general’s summary of their work, as turned out to be the case.”


Limited information Barr has shared about Russia investigation frustrated some on Mueller’s team

By Ellen Nakashima , Carol D. Leonnig and Rosalind S. Helderman

April 4 at 1:01 AM

Members of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s team have told associates they are frustrated with the limited information Attorney General William P. Barr has provided about their nearly two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether President Trump sought to obstruct justice, according to people familiar with the matter.

The displeasure among some who worked on the closely held inquiry has quietly begun to surface in the days since Barr released a four-page letter to Congress on March 24 describing what he said were the principal conclusions of Mueller’s still-confidential, 400-page report.

In his letter, Barr said that the special counsel did not establish a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. And he said that Mueller did not reach a conclusion “one way or the other” as to whether Trump’s conduct in office constituted obstruction of justice.

Absent that, Barr told lawmakers that he concluded the evidence was not sufficient to prove that the president obstructed justice.

But members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant.
“It was much more acute than Barr suggested,” said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity.

VE54JTSWQ4I6TDXT7PKBULHE2U.jpg

Attorney General William P. Barr has promised to provide Congress with a
redacted version of Mueller’s report by mid-April. (Erik S Lesser/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)


The New York Times first reported that some special counsel investigators feel that Barr did not adequately portray their findings.
Some members of the office were particularly disappointed that Barr did not release summary information the special counsel team had prepared, according to two people familiar with their reactions.

There was immediate displeasure from the team “There was immediate displeasure from the team when they saw how the attorney general had characterized their work instead,” according one U.S. official briefed on the matter...




https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...2f46684196e_story.html?utm_term=.e182ad0cabfb

No big surprise.
 
Back
Top