The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Jograves 357]

His own AG appointed Mueller. 

[jimmyjazz 45,920]

Remember when #bothsides were almost unanimously praising the appointment of Mueller?

[triplehorn 2,664]

2 hours ago, Texas73 said:

Barr needs to be impeached and/or do some jail time.

Barr's time is coming. 

Recall this letter from May 3rd  where Reps Ted Lieu and Kathleen Rice detail Barr's misrepresentation and outright lying to Congress and the public:

 

WASHINGTON - Today, Congressman Ted W. Lieu (D-Los Angeles County) and Congresswoman Kathleen Rice (D-NY) urged the bar associations for Virginia and Washington, D.C. to investigate the conduct of William Barr, Attorney General of the United States. In the letter, Reps. Lieu and Rice, both former prosecutors, call for an ethics investigation into AG Barr following multiple instances where he misled Congress and the public.  

 

Quote

Dear Mr. Bodie and Mr. Fox:

We write regarding the disturbing conduct of William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States, who is a member of the state bars in Virginia and the District of Columbia. As Members of Congress and former prosecutors, we believe that respect for the rule of law and duty to honor the truth are of utmost importance. Given the recent release of a document written by Special Counsel Mueller to the Attorney General objecting to his severe mischaracterization of the Special Counsel’s report, it appears the Attorney General has at best misled Congress and the American people, and at worst perjured himself before the Senate and House. As such, we formally request an ethics investigation by the Virginia State Bar and the District of Columbia Bar into Mr. Barr’s conduct for review and possible disbarment.

In a letter to Congress on March 24th, 2019 characterizing the Special Counsel’s report, Mr. Barr stated: “In cataloguing the President’s actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgement, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent…” The Attorney General reiterated this sentiment during a press conference on the day the Special Counsel’s report was released to the public. In short, he peddled the President’s oft-repeated line, “No obstruction, no collusion.”

In reality, we know that Special Counsel Mueller found “substantial evidence” of criminal intent and nexus to a specific proceeding as it relates to at least four, if not more, obstructive acts taken by the President of the United States. We know he directed aides to fabricate internal documents, lie about their actions, attempted to fire the Special Counsel, get then-Attorney General Sessions to “un-recuse” himself so as to exert greater control over the investigation’s direction, and likely tamper with witnesses.

While it would be despicable enough if the Attorney General had thus mischaracterized the report, we now have evidence he appears to have lied to Congress twice about the extent of his knowledge of the Special Counsel’s reaction to Barr’s mischaracterization and support – or lack thereof – for his conclusions. As the Washington Post reports:

“In back-to-back congressional hearings on April 9 and 10, Attorney General William P. Barr disclaimed knowledge of the thinking of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and members of his team of prosecutors investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election.

“No, I don’t,” Barr said, when asked by Rep. Charlie Crist (D-Fla.) whether he knew what was behind reports that members of Mueller’s team were frustrated by the attorney general’s summary of their top-level conclusions.

“I don’t know,” he said the next day, when asked by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) whether Mueller supported his finding that there was not sufficient evidence to conclude that President Trump had obstructed justice.

On Wednesday, May 1st, the House Judiciary Committee obtained a letter dated March 27, 2019 from Special Counsel Mueller to Attorney General Barr. In his letter, Special Counsel Mueller first requested that the Attorney General, rather than summarize the Special Counsel’s report, immediately release executive summaries crafted by Mueller’s team. Second, he wrote that Barr’s summary sent to Congress “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation.”

We agree with Robert Mueller when he says this behavior “threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel.”

Furthermore, Attorney General Barr has willfully disobeyed a valid Congressional subpoena seeking the full, unredacted report produced by the Special Counsel – the deadline for which was May 1st. That subpoena was issued in furtherance of legitimate Congressional oversight, although Mr. Barr disregarded the Committee’s request. We note here that the Third Article of Impeachment against President Nixon reads:

“[The President] has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.”

As you know, the Virginia State Bar and D.C. Bar Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.3 “Candor Toward the Tribunal” prevents a layer from making “a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal.” Furthermore, Rule 8.4 (c) states that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to “engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation which reflects adversely on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law.” Finally, Rule 3.4 “Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel” states that “a lawyer shall not (a) obstruct another party’s access to evidence.”

By deceiving Congress and the American people, who vested their trust in both the Office of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice at large, Attorney General Barr must be subject to a professional review for the sake of the legal profession and the public.

We appreciate your attention to these critical matters and look forward to hearing from you. You can contact our offices at 202-225-3976 or 202-225-5516 should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

 

______________________                                         _____________________

Ted W. Lieu                                                                  Kathleen Rice

Member of Congress                                                     Member of Congress

 

I had forgotten about that Mueller/Barr letter that got leaked to the WaPo exposing Barr's conduct.  Now Barr is on the run from HJC

 

 

 

Edited May 31, 2019 by triplehorn

[jimmyjazz 45,920]

I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for either Bar to actually investigate Barr.  (ironic homonym)

[David Dennison 18,856]

1 hour ago, Jograves said:

His own AG appointed Mueller. 

That's one of the funniest parts of this whole affair.

[triplehorn 2,664]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for either Bar to actually investigate Barr.  (ironic homonym)

I think the letter is a signal to Barr more than the VA/DC bar associations, which are being used here as a sounding board.  However, it should give Barr pause to think about his life after his tango with the orange shit gibbon.  The letter to the respective bar associations is done professionally with detailed examples of his deceit and is a draft of what Barr faces at his next Congressional House testimony, which by all indications will have to be forced out of defiance.

[henrygandorf 29,190]

3 hours ago, slorch said:

@gandorf

 

so the lack of prosecution is political in nature...

 

But the investigation itself was not?

 

LOLZ.  Got it.

i didn't give an opinion on the investigation.

mueller (a lifelong republican) sought to conduct a nonpartisan investigation for the good of the country (since a hostile foreign entity attacked our election).  he was appointed by rod rosenstein, the republican deputy atty general appointed by trump.

just because a report found unflattering results for trump's administration, doesn't mean it's political or "run by angry democrats".

a couple months ago, all of trump's people were praising mueller and his report, calling it "the gold standard" and calling him "honorable".  at that point, they thought it was totally fair and accurate.  my guess on why, is because they didn't read it, and only had barr's characterization of the findings.

[BradInATX 9,208]

The only thing "political" about the lack of prosecution is that the Republicans in the Senate have made it perfectly clear that they have no intention of holding Trump accountable for anything ever, so there's no point in trying. The Democrats are just trying to navigate the rubble that the right has created in the wake of destroying the checks and balances of our system.

Edited May 31, 2019 by BradInATX

[Theo Huxtable 48]

Why do you guys even listen to and respond to slorch? Seriously, why don't you just ignore him? He's trolling you and you're all falling for it. 

[hayden_horn 11,362]

21 minutes ago, Theo Huxtable said:

Why do you guys even listen to and respond to slorch? Seriously, why don't you just ignore him? He's trolling you and you're all falling for it. 

i actually think slorch is for real, and is part of the psychosis of those people who support trump. honestly, they delude themselves into feeling superior to the libtards, and even though they purport to not support nor vote for trump (who are they kidding, you may ask? i think they are actively kidding themselves), they seem to always have it out for the libtards. because that's what this is about. trump always talked about winning, but this is ultimately about making them lose. 

it's a fundamental human condition. create a them, vilify them, defeat them by any means necessary. right now, if them losing means defending trump, then MAGA bitches!

[henrygandorf 29,190]

26 minutes ago, Theo Huxtable said:

Why do you guys even listen to and respond to slorch? Seriously, why don't you just ignore him? He's trolling you and you're all falling for it. 

i don't like seeing someone asking easily answerable questions, and watching others respond with, "lol you're an idiot".  that's what encourages more posting like "omg you can't even give me a good answer holy shit!"  that's feeding the trolls.

if he (and others) are arguing in bad faith or being intellectually dishonest or whatever the latest buzzword characterization we're using is, then i wasted 5-6 minutes of my day.  i've done worse.

[Red Five 40,857]

Um yes he’s for real and there are tens of millions like him out there. Hell I’ve got some in my own family. “Hey what do they really have on Trump anyway? Nothing. He’d be in jail if they did.”

[Ten Bears 2,481]

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

This fucking guy and his fire and jacket in late spring. 

[Anastasis 23,469]

1 hour ago, Ten Bears said:

This fucking guy and his fire and jacket in late spring. 

Meh.  Alaska. 

[bolverk 29,671]

21 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Why are you willfully obtuse?  Do you not have any intellectual curiosity whatsoever?  What exactly do they teach at Tech?  I would think anyone with a functioning brain would be puzzled by the repeated efforts by Trump to interfere with Mueller's investigation, among other things, but it not only doesn't matter to you, it doesn't REGISTER.  

I'm a few pages behind here but Calm Down Bro (or whatever his new handle is - can't remember at the moment), Bullneck, and myself all went to school at Tech. The problem ain't the university. Sure, we've got the Slorches and Bash Riprocks to account for, but we've also got KaiserSoze (oh, hai). A couple of us went on to get post-grad degrees at UT. Give the academic shit a rest.

The second volume of the Mueller Report lays out at least 10 clear instances of obstruction. All the evidence that's needed is spelled out for anyone willing to read it.

Edited May 31, 2019 by bolverk
fuck that

[BLKNSTY 289]

5 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I'm a few pages behind here but Calm Down Bro (or whatever his new handle is - can't remember at the moment), Bullneck, and myself all went to school at Tech. The problem ain't the university. Sure, we've got the Slorches and Bash Riprocks to account for, but we've also got KaiserSoze (oh, hai). A couple of us went on to get post-grad degrees at UT. Give the academic shit a rest.

lmao fuck Tech. fuck A&M. fuck UH. fuck Baylor. fuck TCU. 

This is a UT Board homeboy. Best remember that.

[bolverk 29,671]

2 minutes ago, BLKNSTY said:

lmao fuck Tech. fuck A&M. fuck UH. fuck Baylor. fuck TCU. 

This is a UT Board homeboy. Best remember that.

I've got a degree from The University of Texas at Austin. This is my home, boy.

[Anastasis 23,469]

17 minutes ago, BLKNSTY said:

lmao fuck Tech. fuck A&M. fuck UH. fuck Baylor. fuck TCU. 

This is a UT Board homeboy. Best remember that.

Your take is hands down the dumbest I’ve ever seen. I honestly, swear to god, mean it.

You should go back to lurk negging. 

[Patrick Bateman 3,913]

This comparison seems much more apt now...

[TwiceHorn 31,463]

3 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

i didn't give an opinion on the investigation.

mueller (a lifelong republican) sought to conduct a nonpartisan investigation for the good of the country (since a hostile foreign entity attacked our election).  he was appointed by rod rosenstein, the republican deputy atty general appointed by trump.

just because a report found unflattering results for trump's administration, doesn't mean it's political or "run by angry democrats".

a couple months ago, all of trump's people were praising mueller and his report, calling it "the gold standard" and calling him "honorable".  at that point, they thought it was totally fair and accurate.  my guess on why, is because they didn't read it, and only had barr's characterization of the findings.

There's an even simpler answer.  The lack of prosecution is constitutional in nature:  it is forbidden.  The only type of prosecution a sitting President is liable for is impeachment, an inherently political process.

[bolverk 29,671]

Ned "the Mueller" Stark. Perfect.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

I always had Comey as Ned Stark.  Mueller is more master of whispers that serves the realm. 

[triplehorn 2,664]

2 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

 

The system Mueller honored is still working - Barr couldn't make a run at it without lying, misdirection, and deceit. 

Barr is actively fleeing a subpoena for a return to give House testimony as I type.  #ETTD

 

So much lying bullshit from Bill fucking Barr

 

[bolverk 29,671]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I always had Comey as Ned Stark.  Mueller is more master of whispers that serves the realm. 

Comey is more Brienne. Mueller is Ned all the way.

[Patrick Bateman 3,913]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I always had Comey as Ned Stark.  Mueller is more master of whispers that serves the realm. 

Nah.  Mueller isn't willing to do the ugly work that needs to be done including stepping outside a code of honor he holds sacred, Varys always was able to separate his moral predilections vs what was he thought was best for the greater good.  Mueller as Ned makes much more sense.  A man of deep honor and code who can't or won't allow himself to comprehend the type of villainy or lack of moral degradation he's up against.... therefore, he's unprepared for the double cross.

 

[NWBuck 8,557]

3 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

 

To be fair, maybe 48 seconds is the longest he's ever been hard.

[triplehorn 2,664]

Mueller is Jaqen H'ghar.

[bolverk 29,671]

1 minute ago, triplehorn said:

Mueller is Jaqen H'ghar.

Pelosi would be more accurate, but only if she proves to be what a lot of her fans think she is.

[jimmyjazz 45,920]

48 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I'm a few pages behind here but Calm Down Bro (or whatever his new handle is - can't remember at the moment), Bullneck, and myself all went to school at Tech. The problem ain't the university. Sure, we've got the Slorches and Bash Riprocks to account for, but we've also got KaiserSoze (oh, hai). A couple of us went on to get post-grad degrees at UT. Give the academic shit a rest.

I'm pretty sure I was clear that it was a surprise to me that a Tech grad could be so intellectually incurious.  Yeah, it isn't Stanford -- neither is UT (although UT is closer).

[BLKNSTY 289]

18 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I've got a degree from The University of Texas at Austin. This is my home, boy.

So what? Because you have both a UT and TT degree we have to tip-toe around you and not shit on Tech because it upsets you?

[Anastasis 23,469]

2 minutes ago, BLKNSTY said:

So what? Because you have both a UT and TT degree we have to tip-toe around you and not shit on Tech because it upsets you?

Another poster who should be wearing a helmet when they leave the house. 

[Js1 85,325]

3 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

i don't like seeing someone asking easily answerable questions, and watching others respond with, "lol you're an idiot".  that's what encourages more posting like "omg you can't even give me a good answer holy shit!"  that's feeding the trolls.

if he (and others) are arguing in bad faith or being intellectually dishonest or whatever the latest buzzword characterization we're using is, then i wasted 5-6 minutes of my day.  i've done worse.

That's what ignore is for, my friend! 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Trump is Joffrey 

[BLKNSTY 289]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Another poster who should be wearing a helmet when they leave the house. 

do i need to wear the helmet when I look at the Steele Dossier or is that just you?

 

[bolverk 29,671]

2 minutes ago, BLKNSTY said:

So what? Because you have both a UT and TT degree we have to tip-toe around you and not shit on Tech because it upsets you?

Who are you again?

Back on topic, I agree with something Anastasis posted several pages back as the best move. I think the Pelosi strategy here for Trump is death by a thousand cuts while also slowly raising the temperature on Republican Senators and letting it extend into the election season.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Even if you agree with death by 1000 cuts, Pelosi is shitting the bed on that strategy as well.  She has already squandered so many opportunities to take cuts.  She needs more public hearings and at least try to educate the public with expert witnesses and information.  

She sucks at political warfare and it shows. 

[Anastasis 23,469]

3 minutes ago, BLKNSTY said:

do i need to wear the helmet when I look at the Steele Dossier or is that just you?

Yes, you probably need to have your thinking cap on.  

[bolverk 29,671]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump is Joffrey 

If I wanted to attend a counsel meeting, I would now have to climb all the stairs in the tower of the hand.

[David Dennison 18,856]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Even if you agree with death by 1000 cuts, Pelosi is shitting the bed on that strategy as well.  She has already squandered so many opportunities to take cuts.  She needs more public hearings and at least try to educate the public with expert witnesses and information.  

She sucks at political warfare and it shows. 

This is a very bad take.

[jimmyjazz 45,920]

11 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Another poster who should be wearing a helmet when they leave the house. 

Pretty sure that's the same guy.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Just now, David Dennison said:

This is a very bad take.

Dynamite drop in.  She doesn’t have much time to build a case and she started two years behind coming in.  There is no sense of urgency to search for the facts.  She’s just going to let the clock run out and hope uncle Joe wins in 2020. 

[bolverk 29,671]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Even if you agree with death by 1000 cuts, Pelosi is shitting the bed on that strategy as well.  She has already squandered so many opportunities to take cuts.  She needs more public hearings and at least try to educate the public with expert witnesses and information.  

She sucks at political warfare and it shows. 

While I agree that's her strategy and is probably the smartest play, that doesn't mean I think she's doing it well. In fact, I think she's doing a particularly shitty job at it, but I hope I'm wrong and she's the Varys we all once knew.

[David Dennison 18,856]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Dynamite drop in.  She doesn’t have much time to build a case and she started two years behind coming in.  There is no sense of urgency to search for the facts.  She’s just going to let the clock run out and hope uncle Joe wins in 2020. 

And if she does, there's a very good reason for doing so.

[Bozo_Casanova 26,452]

I haven’t  defended Trump.
 
I have lampooned this investigation.
 
You motherfuckers think if someone isn’t 100% on your side, they are the enemy. You can’t see the forest for the trees.
 
FWIW, I’ve already said on this board multiple times I will not vote for Trump in the next Presidential election...  but yeah, I am so up in his shit.

I read the report. You should. You’re wrong about what it says. What is it that you *think* was investigated and that do you think the principle conclusions were?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

And if she does, there's a very good reason for doing so.

Yeah, we’ll get another Trump in 2024 because she didn’t stand up and fight this bullshit head on.  

 

[BLKNSTY 289]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

Who are you again?

an anonymous internet poster. you know, like all of us.

[Anastasis 23,469]

1 minute ago, BLKNSTY said:

an anonymous internet poster. you know, like all of us.

No, a moron who thinks that the specific words on a magical piece of paper hanging on the wall somehow makes you better than others. 

[David Dennison 18,856]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Yeah, we’ll get another Trump in 2024 because she didn’t stand up and fight this bullshit head on.  

 

Maybe.

Probably not.

[hayden_horn 11,362]

can we all just agree that ou sucks?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Nice to see a few non cowards in office.  Justin Amash and Elizabeth Warren on the same page is something I didn’t see coming.

continued:

The Mueller report is a clear roadmap for impeachment, because that’s the only path Mueller had. But impeachment shouldn’t be the only way that a president can be held accountable for committing a crime.

No president should be above the law. So why does this Justice Department act like he is? Because in the 1970s Richard Nixon’s Justice Department wrote a memo saying so (yes, really) and DOJ has continued to stand by that view.

Congress should pass a law clarifying that DOJ can indict the president if he or she commits a crime in office, and should amend our obstruction of justice statutes to explicitly allow for indictment when the President abuses the powers of the office—like Donald Trump did.

One of the strongest arguments against indictment is that the Constitution gives Congress the sole authority to decide when to interfere with the President's duties. These new laws would eliminate that argument and remove any statutory ambiguity.

Attorney General Bill Barr has disgraced himself by acting like Trump’s personal defense attorney. When I’m elected, I will appoint an Attorney General who shares my strong conviction that no one—not even a president—is above the law. And I’ll go one step further:

I pledge to nominate an Office of Legal Counsel head who will reverse the Watergate-era rule that a president cannot be indicted for criminal behavior. The OLC’s purpose is to govern the conduct of the executive branch, not act as the president’s get-out-of-jail-free card.

Our democracy only works if everyone can be held accountable. These changes will make sure that’s the case for generations to come. Read my full plan here:

https://medium.com/@teamwarren/no-president-is-above-the-law-f4812e580336