Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 9:08:10 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2019 14:55:04 GMT
Everything this president touches becomes a first class shitshow. And as citizens of this country we should be embarrassed.
Its come to the point that after 2 years as the most tight lipped committee in history of DC, the Mueller Team have had to resort to leaking information to get the truth out. The reason? The Attorney General of the United States is stonewalling Congress and the American People from finding out what, good or bad, is in the report.
|
|
|
|
Post by thundergal on Apr 5, 2019 15:01:17 GMT
I have absolutely no expectations about how all of this will play out.
And I anticipate the only shock I will feel would be IF the report is made public, and then IF anyone is held accountable. Especially Lord Fuckweasel and his family members.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 9:08:10 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2019 20:50:54 GMT
This isn’t going to go away.
Newsweek...
“MUELLER REPORT 'MORE DAMAGING' FOR TRUMP THAN AG BARR REVEALED IN SUMMARY, SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATORS SAY: REPORT”
“Some members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team told associates that Attorney General William Barr’s four-page summary of their investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election did not fully represent their findings, according to a New York Times report published Wednesday.
Government officials and other sources familiar with the special counsel team's work revealed to The Times that Mueller’s nearly 400-page report would be more damaging for President Donald Trump than what Barr had set out late last month.
"The officials and others interviewed declined to flesh out why some of the special counsel’s investigators viewed their findings as potentially more damaging for the president than Mr. Barr explained," The Times reported. The investigators also told The Times they had concerns that Barr’s narrative of the findings would have hardened public perception by the time the full report became public.
The special counsel's investigators said they thought Barr should have included more details of their findings in his letter, which was delivered on March 24, barely 48 hours after Mueller submitted his completed report.
A person familiar with the probe told The Times that Mueller’s office had never requested that Barr release the report so soon. Two officials with knowledge of Barr’s thinking suggested that in writing his summary, Barr was cautious about deviating from a Justice Department practice to “not disclose derogatory details in closing an investigation,” The Times reported. The decision was informed by former FBI director James Comey's widely criticized move to harshly criticize 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton for her email practices while not recommending that she be charged.
Meanwhile, Barr and his advisers were frustrated by Mueller’s decision not to draw a conclusion on whether Trump obstructed justice, two government officials told The Times. The result was for the attorney general to write that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had concluded that the evidence was not sufficient to establish that the president had "committed an obstruction-of-justice offense."
The White House and Justice Department did not immediately respond to Newsweek’s request for comment about the report.
The completion of Mueller’s investigation was announced last month. Barr’s summary said the “special counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election.” But on the question of whether Trump had obstructed justice, Barr said that the special counsel's investigation neither exonerated nor indicted the president. Barr indicated in his summary that he saw no reason to press a criminal charge against the president.
Demands for the full report to be made public have ramped up in recent weeks. Barr, in a letter dated March 29, told lawmakers that he would make the Mueller report public by mid-April, but with "the redactions that are required." According to reports, the almost 400-pages of findings, not including exhibits, will be heavily redacted when released.
Despite Trump’s initially enthusiastic calls for the Mueller report to be released in full, the president appeared to backpedal his position. On Tuesday, he tweeted that he condemned Democrats for wanting to see it. “In 1998, Rep.Jerry Nadler strongly opposed the release of the Starr Report on Bill Clinton. No information whatsoever would or could be legally released,” the president tweeted. “But with the NO COLLUSION Mueller Report, which the Dems hate, he wants it all. NOTHING WILL EVER SATISFY THEM! @foxandfriends”
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Apr 5, 2019 20:59:47 GMT
I have absolutely no expectations about how all of this will play out. And I anticipate the only shock I will feel would be IF the report is made public, and then IF anyone is held accountable. Especially Lord Fuckweasel and his family members. Same here. <iframe width="22.960000000000036" height="4.180000000000007" style="position: absolute; width: 22.960000000000036px; height: 4.180000000000007px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_36573197" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="22.960000000000036" height="4.180000000000007" style="position: absolute; width: 22.96px; height: 4.18px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1089px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_86946130" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="22.960000000000036" height="4.180000000000007" style="position: absolute; width: 22.96px; height: 4.18px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 148px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_91678803" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="22.960000000000036" height="4.180000000000007" style="position: absolute; width: 22.96px; height: 4.18px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1089px; top: 148px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_11339630" scrolling="no"></iframe> I had a feeling that the Orange Slime King would come out of this generally unscathed, and that it would fire up his base even further. We need to focus less on this issue now and more on the upcoming election. |
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817 
|
Post by pyccku on Apr 5, 2019 21:13:35 GMT
The problem is that some people just keep digging deeper in the hopes of covering things up. When it all comes out (and eventually it ALL comes up) it ends up being much worse.
If they had owned up to Russian contacts from the beginning, it would be ethically questionable, but not necessarily criminal. But they lied, and then lied some more. And now the truth is there, and someone knows it, but their guy is trying to cover it up. I don't think it will stay covered up. They were hoping it would go away, but it's not. People are just getting angrier. And now Barr has gotten himself involved in it, by doing what he was hired to do.
Everything Trump touches dies. Everything. Every single one of these guys thinks they are special, that they will do the big job for the boss and he will reward them. Except they all end up destroying their careers, putting a lifetime of reputation on the line in order to get noticed by their god-emperor. And in the end, it always ends up the same - they leave in shame and scandal, forever to be known as "the guy who _________ for Trump."
|
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Apr 5, 2019 22:49:28 GMT
on the question of whether Trump had obstructed justice, Barr said that the special counsel's investigation neither exonerated nor indicted the president. Barr indicated in his summary that he saw no reason to press a criminal charge against the president. The president was not indicted by Mueller because the DOJ says a sitting president canNOT be indicted. But Congress can vote to impeach(not that they should at this point) IF they are given the gathered information! |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 9:08:10 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2019 0:02:18 GMT
on the question of whether Trump had obstructed justice, Barr said that the special counsel's investigation neither exonerated nor indicted the president. Barr indicated in his summary that he saw no reason to press a criminal charge against the president. The president was not indicted by Mueller because the DOJ says a sitting president canNOT be indicted. But Congress can vote to impeach(not that they should at this point) IF they are given the gathered information! And one day it will be challenged in court if a sitting president can or can’t be indicted. The fact the DOJ decided this means some other guy or guys in the DOJ can decide yup, based on our interpretation of whatever, a sitting president can be indicted. Then what. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Apr 6, 2019 0:41:14 GMT
And one day it will be challenged in court if a sitting president can or can’t be indicted. The fact the DOJ decided this means some other guy or guys in the DOJ can decide yup, based on our interpretation of whatever, a sitting president can be indicted. Then what. Of course, and should be addressed ASAP after this sh''show! |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Jun 3, 2021 20:18:53 GMT
Did we know about this ? 06/03/2021 Politico Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards admitted to conspiring to violate the Bank Secrecy Act by disclosing what prosecutors said were more than 2,000 “suspicious activity reports.” NEW YORK — A former senior Treasury Department official was sentenced Thursday to six months in prison for leaking thousands of confidential reports on suspect financial transactions. The disclosures from Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards, 42, fueled reports in BuzzFeed on issues related to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, as well as a series by news organizations across the globe last September examining why banks around the world continued to do business with clients who regularly engaged in suspicious activity. The sentencing in a high-profile leak case came just hours after the Justice Department disclosed that it seized phone records and sought email metadata from four New York Times journalists as part of a series of leak investigations initiated during the Trump administration. U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Woods satisfied prosecutors’ request that Edwards receive a minimum of six months in prison. “A meaningful sentence is needed in order to respond to the crime,” said Woods, echoing similar language from the prosecution. Edwards' defense attorney, Stephanie Carvlin, had asked for a sentence of “time served” — apparently referring to the day or so Edwards spent in custody following her arrest in Virginia in 2018. Edwards pleaded guilty last year to conspiring to violate the Bank Secrecy Act by disclosing what prosecutors said were more than 2,000 “suspicious activity reports” or SARs that banks and other financial institutions confidentially file with the Treasury Department office Edwards worked for, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN. “The colossal, mammoth effect of this defendant’s crime is unparalleled in the history of FinCEN,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Kimberly Ravener told the court. “You have an individual who acted indiscriminately to disclose confidential government information." Edwards delivered a largely unrepentant eight-minute statement to the court, saying she “could not stand by aimlessly” in the face of misconduct she saw at Treasury. She also suggested FBI agents violated her rights by questioning her after she asked for an attorney. Only at the very end of her statement did she offer a brief note of contrition. “I understand and accept that a lot of information was made available to the public. I do apologize for that, your honor,” she said. Speaking in a forceful voice and reading from notes as she stood at the defense table, Edwards opened her statement by discussing her Native American roots. “I am an indigenous, matriarch warrior whose spirit cannot be broken,” she said. Edwards' attorney, Stephanie Carvlin, said Edwards blew the whistle on two problematic situations: the fact that due to a system issue for a time Treasury officials did not have access to other agencies’ intelligence and that a Treasury office was not properly handling intelligence information about U.S. citizens and residents. www.politico.com/news/2021/06/03/treasury-official-sentenced-491781 |
|
