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

Jarod said:
Barr could and would legally release the entire report next week if Trump publicly asked him to do so. If the report exonerated Trump, no question he would not only ask, he would demand.
Click to expand...

Why would the intel sources and names of the innocent be okay to expose you dishonest dunce?
 
Brad said:
Barr could and would legally release the entire report next week if Trump publicly asked him to do so.
Click to expand...

Who told you that, Brad?

House Judiciary chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) is refusing to accept the report that the FBI, DOJ, and "Moscow" Mueller are preparing for release to Congress.

There are good reasons why prosecutors generally don’t release grand jury information.

In his letter to Congress, Attorney General William Barr specifically cited Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), which provides that government attorneys and the jurors themselves, among others, “must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury.”

Barr didn’t make this rule up, it’s not obscure or optional, and Nadler knows it. Barr stated in a letter to Nadler and the judiciary committee that the special counsel’s office is assisting in identifying portions that are grand-jury testimony or relate to ongoing investigations or prosecutions.

But back in 1998, as a member of the same committee, Nadler opposed the release of the Starr Report, saying that “as a matter of decency and protecting people’s privacy rights, people who may be totally innocent third parties, what must not be released at all. “It’s grand jury material! It represents statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses," Nadler said. "Salacious material. All kinds of material that it would be unfair to release.”

Watch the hypocrite here: https://charlierose.com/videos/9548


http://tinyurl.com/DEMOCRAT-hypocrisy
 
Centerleftfl said:
The INVESTIGATORS themselves were telling reporters that THEY wrote summaries for release. I know it's DIFFICULT for the TDS (Trump Defense Sycophants) to understand it, but it is a difference with one helluva distinction.
Click to expand...
cite - i see no such claim, besides who cares what investigators tell reporters?
The summaries are internal summaries of the section of interest covered in the report.
They will come out when the report is redacted as well
 
Centerleftfl said:
The INVESTIGATORS themselves were telling reporters that THEY wrote summaries for release. I know it's DIFFICULT for the TDS (Trump Defense Sycophants) to understand it, but it is a difference with one helluva distinction.
Click to expand...

The Mueller Report is required by law to be reviewed by the Attorney General and released per US laws and J/D rulers and policies. Not by "investigators."

Judge Andrew Napolitano has weighed in on the forthcoming release of the Mueller report, providing a legal explanation for why it's paramount that Attorney General William Barr keep some elements of the investigation private.

The Fox News senior judicial analyst made the case as Democrats are planning to subpoena the unredacted Mueller report, which will put the Attorney General in a position with several options.

"When the subpoena arrives, the Attorney General can ignore it. Knowing him, I don't think he will," Judge Nap said Tuesday morning on "Fox & Friends."

"He will say 'We're not going to comply,' or he will move to a federal judge to cross the subpoena and the whole thing will go from Congress to a federal judge."

He added that under United States law, there are certain details of the report that Barr is prohibited from revealing, including details about individuals connected to the investigation who have not been charged with any crime."

This has been explained over and over and over. Move on.
 
reagansghost said:
redacted down to a 4 page cartoon like before?

nope, keep swinging at the fences desperado

the coming leaks from multiple prosecutors are gonna rock your world lol
Click to expand...
you have a difficult time understanding process.
The Barr summary was written without redactions-it was written for public relese
 
Centerleftfl said:
The INVESTIGATORS themselves were telling reporters that THEY wrote summaries for release. I know it's DIFFICULT for the TDS (Trump Defense Sycophants) to understand it, but it is a difference with one helluva distinction.
Click to expand...

Who were they? Names? I know it is difficult for liberal morons devoted to false narratives and lies to understand it, but using UNNAMED ANONYMOUS sources does not make you morons look less stupid.

For two years we were subject to the same speculative bullshit on the Mueller Report. Then when it comes out as a massive NOTHING burger, you go back to the same jackass playbook and believe that we are all just as stupid and gullible as you are.
 
Truth Detector said:
Who were they? Names? I know it is difficult for liberal morons devoted to false narratives and lies to understand it, but using UNNAMED ANONYMOUS sources does not make you morons look less stupid.

For two years we were subject to the same speculative bullshit on the Mueller Report. Then when it comes out as a massive NOTHING burger, you go back to the same jackass playbook and believe that we are all just as stupid and gullible as you are.
Click to expand...

Aren't "anonymous sources" a frequent ploy used by leftist liars when they have no evidence, TD?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top