Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:27 PM, David Dennison said:

From the Special Counsel's office, yes.

From other jurisdictions, no.

 

Expand  

Yup, believe this is right.

Also:

  Quote

"I am reviewing this report and anticipate that I may be in a position to advise you of the Special Counsel's principal conclusions as soon as this weekend," Barr wrote in a letter on Friday to a group of lawmakers on the House and Senate judiciary committees.

Expand  

That indicates to me that it is, indeed, a comprehensive report.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:27 PM, David Dennison said:

From the Special Counsel's office, yes.

From other jurisdictions, no.

 

Expand  

Would that mean obstruction is off the table or does that come from a jurisdiction other than the special counsel? I suppose if the rule is you can’t indict a president then he could say the president obstructed in the report but there is no indictment?

Posted

I guess what I’m feeling is that short of having some very explicit assertions in the report it seems that Jr. isn’t a target anymore in the scope of a russia investigation and neither is kushner or page.  Now if they have other crimes that were passed off to NY or something that’s a different matter? Mueller had no problem indicting others as the process went along, why would he wait until after the report to indict more?

Posted

5pm on the Friday of March Madness...

 

There is nothing in it then. Especially after announcing nothing will be release regarding anyone not indicted 

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:10 PM, Mojo Hand said:

Barr statement says there are no instances in which he is rejecting an inappropriate request of the special counsel, or whatever that provision says. 

Expand  

From this I think we can fairly assume that there is no sealed indictment of the President.  His report should (and likely does) in great detail explain whatever rationale supported his decision to decline to prosecute him (either as a matter of lack of sufficent evidence or based on the DOJ policy of presidential immunity from indictment while in office).

  • Like 2
Posted

It’s unfortunate that this isn’t released to the public at the same time as it could be to the senate/house. Now both sides are going to politicize the thing when they subpoena mueller to testify before the committees. 

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:27 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t know, maybe.  

Expand  

So how many of the sealed indictments in DC are from the SCO?  And when do they get unsealed?

I'm also curious about the mystery company subpoena.  The SCO is still pursuing that but is somehow in a position to release the report anyway.  Does that mean that they have sufficient info to indict or release a conclusion about whoever was tangled up in that mess, and they're just pursuing info from the foreign govt. to put an extra nail in that person's coffin?  

Posted

This is just the beginning.  If true, the reports that Barr is going to brief congress over the weekend indictes Barr, Rosenstein, and Mueller had a plan in place and they are executing it.  

Not sure how to read the swiftness being good for Trump.

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:44 PM, Gap03 said:

So how many of the sealed indictments in DC are from the SCO?  And when do they get unsealed?

I'm also curious about the mystery company subpoena.  The SCO is still pursuing that but is somehow in a position to release the report anyway.  Does that mean that they have sufficient info to indict or release a conclusion about whoever was tangled up in that mess, and they're just pursuing info from the foreign govt. to put an extra nail in that person's coffin?  

Expand  

Now it's just a principle of law, I guess.  Pretty clearly the evidence not critical to the investigation.

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:47 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is just the beginning.  If true, the reports that Barr is going to brief congress over the weekend indictes Barr, Rosenstein, and Mueller had a plan in place and they are executing it.  

Not sure how to read the swiftness being good for Trump.

Expand  

 If it in anyway exonerates him they'll want to get that out as soon as possible. 

Posted

I’m pumped for this to be wrapped up but Hugo you have been a master of spin in this thread. Not one bit of news, even when you are wrong about things, has been seen as “good for trump” through your eyes. You should sit back and enjoy the fireworks rather than comment on every little happening. That’s how you end up with egg on your face. 

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:47 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is just the beginning.  If true, the reports that Barr is going to brief congress over the weekend indictes Barr, Rosenstein, and Mueller had a plan in place and they are executing it.  

Not sure how to read the swiftness being good for Trump.

Expand  

Eh.  I think the plan was just to follow 28 CFR 600.  Depending on whether the report is 60 or 600 pages, maybe Barr had some advance notice of the contents.

Also, I think this is probably the last great hope for articles of impeachment.  The congress lacks the competence, much less the political will, in my opinion, to develop a case for impeachment.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted

Can you imagine how many MAGA people will come out of the woodwork if there is nothing damaging to the president in the report (other jurisdictions be damned). Dude may win 2020 +10.

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:50 PM, bad_teammate said:

the republican cop delivering a report on a republican president to a republican attorney general

lol nothing is going to happen

Expand  

We finally have a path to resolution and conclusion and now the conspiracy theories start from the never-trumpers. Well done. 

Edited by Jhawk
Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:50 PM, Jhawk said:

I’m pumped for this to be wrapped up but Hugo you have been a master of spin in this thread. Not one bit of news, even when you are wrong about things, has been seen as “good for trump” through your eyes. You should sit back and enjoy the fireworks rather than comment on every little happening. That’s how you end up with egg on your face. 

Expand  

What news has been good for Trump?  

His campaign staff is going to prison. 

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:52 PM, David Dennison said:

There is going to be a ton of damaging information in this report.

 

Expand  

 

  On 3/22/2019 at 9:53 PM, Mojo Hand said:

CNN:   Mueller recommends no further indictments.

Expand  

and just like that it won't matter what else is out there because no new indictments. Of course the president wasn't going to be indicted anyway.

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:51 PM, SimonBolivar said:

Can you imagine how many MAGA people will come out of the woodwork if there is nothing damaging to the president in the report (other jurisdictions be damned). Dude may win 2020 +10.

Expand  

That’s pretty much why Mueller had to wrap this up early this year or wait until after 2020 otherwise it would look political. 

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:52 PM, David Dennison said:

There is going to be a ton of damaging information in this report.

 

Expand  

There's going to be a lot of information that should be damaging. We already know a ton of information that should be damaging to Trump. I'm highly skeptical that there will be anything in there so damaging that it actually moves the needle for people who are still supporting Trump at this point. I frankly don't know what that even could be.

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:56 PM, Thermos H. Christ said:

There's going to be a lot of information that should be damaging. We already know a ton of information that should be damaging to Trump. I'm highly skeptical that there will be anything in there so damaging that it actually moves the needle for people who are still supporting Trump at this point. I frankly don't know what that even could be.

Expand  

Image result for exactly gif

Posted
  On 3/22/2019 at 9:56 PM, Thermos H. Christ said:

There's going to be a lot of information that should be damaging. We already know a ton of information that should be damaging to Trump. I'm highly skeptical that there will be anything in there so damaging that it actually moves the needle for people who are still supporting Trump at this point. I frankly don't know what that even could be.

Expand  

Yeah, I don't care about any of that. This investigation has already been incredibly damaging to Donald Trump. 

All I really care about is that he loses in 2020 and I think he will. Bigly.



×
×
  • Create New...