[kayla.meyer_144]

Barr believes his 1st priority is to be Trump’s personal defense lawyer. Love the way he presented some things and swept the others behind. So Trump did not personally and actively participate in Russian hacking means Trump is innocent of everything.
 
So being an Useful Idiot now makes one innocent of all crimes. Will have to remember that. That will be the next defense lines for all the Wise Guys and other underlings of real criminal bosses, “Hey! I’m innocent because I was only a Useful Idiot!”

[Unknown Member]

My favorite line

Muellers report was for me

Well Mr, Barr aka Revolting Blob the mueller report was actually for the American people

[alyaa.rifaie_129]

[b][i]Just a stooge[/i][/b]
[b][i]
[/i][/b]
You know who the real stooges are? Main stream media. It is pathetic to the lengths that the media has gone to spreading disinformation, publish stories which some required retractions, and even after the report is out they continue to look for any little word or idea they can inflate and pontificate on. At the same time they have completely ignored the origin of the dossier, FISA  court issues, etc. etc .
 
Flipping channels. Stopped at CNN, who has ratings lower than the Food Channel (people would rather watch cooking) with their big panel grasping at every little thing they could think of or criticize Mueller, Barr  and coming back with all these whataboutisms. The media still cannot accept the fact that they were so wrong.
It is sad commentary on their journalistic integrity and for our country. Interesting the  WP had article w headline about Fox News was so right on this investigation. Actually said that Hannitty, Ingraham et al. had been saying for the last two years there was no collusion they had it right. Pretty sad when WP admits theses pundits have been correct on this investigation.

[Unknown Member]

He is a trump employee

A stooge, flunky, cronie …… whatever you wish to call him

He doesnt work for the American people

[19462008]

Quote from kpack123

He is a trump employee

A stooge, flunky, cronie …… whatever you wish to call him

He doesnt work for the American people

He’s smarter than you, he’s performed and adhered to the law all his life, he’s a subject matter expert, you are not. I’m sure you have broken a few laws intentionally in your life. But to listen to you not accept the end result indicates You’re an armchair Liberal whiner who thinks you no more that the justice system because you “Feel” it’s wrong. Your side has had two years to get their crap and facts together. They just yell, make up stories, believe Rachael and Todd, keep vomiting the same story with no evidence. Your side also played with the Russians as well didn’t they? Probably colluded as well… I “feel” they did. Either forget it… or it’s gonna come back and bite you on your little scrawny arse. Matter of fact… I see a big wide Jaw opening up with massive teeth.

[Unknown Member]

He may well be smarter than me

But he is still trumps attorney not the American peoples advocate

And you gotta admit he talks just like the revolting blob from billy Madison…. and looks a lot like him too

[Unknown Member]

And who is Rachel Todd

First you bring up candance Owens now this person

Any I supposed to know who these people are????

[katiemckee84_223]

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
Lo–hoooo-s’hers,
 
LOSERS
 
LOLOLLOLOLOOL

[19462008]

Quote from kpack123

And who is Rachel Todd

First you bring up candance Owens now this person

Any I supposed to know who these people are????

Rachel and Todd are you PMSNBC super authorities on everything anti-trump, constantly changing stories, new theories, new suspicions and one time able to banter with Tucker Carlson. But… Elitist money is far more tasty than full truth.

[19462008]

Quote from kpack123

He may well be smarter than me

But he is still trumps attorney not the American peoples advocate

And you gotta admit he talks just like the revolting blob from billy Madison…. and looks a lot like him too

Nice middle school bantering. You’re kids must be proud. That’s all you got? It ain’t maybe smarter… HE IS SMARTER. If it would have leaned your way, he would have been revered as the smartest most intelligent person EVERY!
 
Get over it, it’s dead news. Focus on patients. 

[Unknown Member]

Dude you lost me at Tucker Carlson

I really have no idea what you are talking about

Dont watch Fox News so I guess I dont know liberals are supposed to act since we are all alike

[19462008]

Quote from kpack123

Dude you lost me at Tucker Carlson

I really have no idea what you are talking about

Dont watch Fox News so I guess I dont know liberals are supposed to act since we are all alike

I see your schtick now, you don’t want to listen to.., or research… both sides to acquire an opinion, but you want to make a statements of fact. We’re do you get your news or information? Only the Internet? RT television, Tass? Frumi?
 
At least I watch the opposing side and see if they are skewed or at least sometimes, not being over dramatic. Do you realized that Fox gave Bernie a townhall platform to speak last week and the hosts were not condescending? That’s called maturity and character which the other networks just don’t have. Even NPR can be pretty centered at time. 
 
I guess based on you recent comment, we should not take you serious. Just like SLN… eh?

[kayla.meyer_144]

But that ‘non-condescending’ appearance of Republicans on so-called liberal shows happens all the time. It’s the way it’s supposed to be. Even Bill Maher has had very many Republicans with whom he strongly disagrees have their say.  The fact that it’s unusual on Fox is newsworthy. You are missing that point.
 
 

[19462008]

Quote from Frumious

But that ‘non-condescending’ appearance of Republicans on so-called liberal shows happens all the time. It’s the way it’s supposed to be. Even Bill Maher has had very many Republicans with whom he strongly disagrees have their say.  The fact that it’s unusual on Fox is newsworthy. You are missing that point.

I beg to differ, Republicans”1. Don’t get asked as much to appear on a left leaning show (Rachel / Chris Mathews / Don Lemon / . 2. Fox invites many on the Left but hardly any take the invitation. That’s why I liked Bernie. The Left Politicians spew out hatred and false doctrine but won’t appear to answer for it. Bill Maher? He’s an entertainer and a Narcissist who has mocked the Black community and said hateful statements against his own Race and Heritage has gotten away with it on the Left. Granted, he’s had a few on but the dynamic has always been 3 to 1 on the show. No difference than The Pewk (The View). The Unusualness is the Left showing up on Fox.

[Unknown Member]

No

I just dont watch much FOX news, CNN or anyone on MSNBC accept Chris Matthews

I honestly dont know any of the people you referenced except Tucker Carlson

I actually listen to CNBC a few hours a day and NFL radio

So again….. I pardon me for not acting how your propaganda based reality tells you that all liberals are supposed to act

I do occasionally watch SNL if I can stay awake…. not really an Alec Baldwin fan though. Their 2 news guys are hilarious

[katiemckee84_223]

This guy calls you a victim of propaganda, Cuda, while we all told them for 2 years it was a nothing burger. They were loving Mueller. His whole team was Democrat party donors. Now that he found nothing, they have to turn to something else to try their lies. What happened to Trump not getting through a first term, or even worse, being removed? Jail time?
 
The list of their insanity proves that you shouldn’t even dialogue with this liars anymore. I think you are aware of that, however, at this point.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Very meaty Nothing Burger…

[Unknown Member]

Cuda

I do usually watch Chris Wallaces Sunday show followed by meet the press

Other than that I read USA Today and the wall Street Journal most days

But thats pretty much the source of my news

I try to avoid meaningless propaganda as much as possible

[Unknown Member]

…. but I guess fox news will tell you who all the as you say HOLLYWOOD BLACKS are

[19462008]

Quote from kpack123

Cuda

I do usually watch Chris Wallaces Sunday show followed by meet the press

Other than that I read USA Today and the wall Street Journal most days

But thats pretty much the source of my news

I try to avoid meaningless propaganda as much as possible

I’m about the same except for USA Today (Hotel gratis when traveling). You can tell on the first two pages always negative towards the Right. “The Sky is Falling”, “Another Source has Appeared”. It duplicates the same as the Visual Medias line of info almost word for word. 

[Unknown Member]

The sports is good on line

[Unknown Member]

Barr said Mueller left it for him to decide about obstruction. He said that Mueller’s decision not to indict on obstruction had nothing to do with the DOJ policy that sitting presidents cannot be indicted. 
 
Both are lies.  Here’s a quote from Mueller’s report: And [b]apart from OLCs constitutional view[/b], we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the Presidents capacity to govern and potentially preempt [b]constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct[/b].”
 
Barr said 5 times in yesterday’s press conference that Mueller concluded “no collusion.”  On page 2 of the report, Mueller’s team wrote: “[b]In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.”[/b]”
 
Barr is acting like a consigliere for Trump and not the attorney general for the people of this country. His next step might well be to step in and stop ongoing investigations in SDNY, etc..  You can be sure Trump is asking him to do this.  It’s an untenable situation.

[katiemckee84_223]

Quote from CudaRad

Quote from kpack123

He may well be smarter than me

But he is still trumps attorney not the American peoples advocate

And you gotta admit he talks just like the revolting blob from billy Madison…. and looks a lot like him too

Nice middle school bantering. You’re kids must be proud. That’s all you got? It ain’t maybe smarter… HE IS SMARTER. If it would have leaned your way, he would have been revered as the smartest most intelligent person EVERY!

Get over it, it’s dead news. Focus on patients. 

 
Smart isn’t kpack’s problem. I’m sure his brain can process “things” fairly quickly. The problem is that he is intellectually dishonest. Doesn’t want to consider facts and make proper conclusions. Would rather have a belief first, then back-fit evidence to try to support the conclusion.
 
That’s not how proper thinking, science, or reality works. That’s why he ends up lying about so many topics.
 
I’ve told them this would be a nothing burger for 2 years. It is obviously just that. Yet they talk about others with tin foil hats. All they do is change the story over and over. They have zero support for nearly every claim they make.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Intermittent Blasting

Smart isn’t kpack’s problem. I’m sure his brain can process “things” fairly quickly. The problem is that he is intellectually dishonest. 

All Leftists are intellectually dishonest, but in kpack’s case, there’s something else there. I’m with CudaRad on this. 

[katiemckee84_223]

Quote from Knob Creek Rye

Quote from Intermittent Blasting

Smart isn’t kpack’s problem. I’m sure his brain can process “things” fairly quickly. The problem is that he is intellectually dishonest. 

All Leftists are intellectually dishonest, but in kpack’s case, there’s something else there. I’m with CudaRad on this. 

 
You know the deal. Mosquito dikk is up there as top 3 possibility. Thinks women like that kind of approach but in reality, they are disgusted by it.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Intermittent Blasting

You know the deal. Mosquito dikk is up there as top 3 possibility. Thinks women like that kind of approach but in reality, they are disgusted by it.

[link=https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/political-motivations-may-have-evolutionary-links-to-physical-strength.html]https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/political-motivations-may-have-evolutionary-links-to-physical-strength.html[/link]

[katiemckee84_223]

After analyzing the madness of modern life, increasing central government power, political correctness and insane lefty politics for the last severals years … and seeing how things changed in my lifetime alone, this is clear. I wouldn’t say causation but rather one of many traits of high correlation.
 
It’s a personality thing. Those that can’t cut it try lots of (disgusting) maneuvers to compensate and reproduce. Most of these backfire and make the entire situation worse for all. Remember, there is a role for beta, but not blue pill. For that reason, I am in no way a survival of the fittest type, rather, a wholesome civilization type. The closer it gets to the former, by the way, the more we see super alpha consumption of all and super pathetic feminization of low level/much lesser “men”.

[ruszja]

After having spent a day reading through the report, I must say that Barrs summary of the findings released 2 weeks ago was spot on. As I said, I wish there were less redactions and Barr would be able to make it so (by dropping most of the current prosecutions). Probably wouldn’t change much of the overall picture, just add some detail on the actual actions by the russians to infiltrate the inept DNC and DCC.

[Unknown Member]

Whats delusional is your characterization of Julian Asange as a martyr who was preserving world peace by against Hillary

Further more your flat out denial of a change in the republican platform

Yes it just didnt happen…… everyone is out to get you

This was all totally normal behavior….meeting with any Russian they could find was just politics as usual

Yep you are definitely right …. this is just how the game is played

Your delusion is paranoia wrapped up in an ideology

[ruszja]

Quote from kpack123

Whats delusional is your characterization of Julian Asange as a martyr who was preserving world peace by against Hillary

I quoted facts from the report. I have no opinion about Mr Assanges martyrdom.

Further more your flat out denial of a change in the republican platform

I don’t deny that there was a change. You should really read the report before you spout off.

This was all totally normal behavior….meeting with any Russian they could find was just politics as usual

Yep you are definitely right …. this is just how the game is played

It’s a bit unusual that it was a republican campaign that had those contacts with the enemy, but yes thats normal in politics.

[kayla.meyer_144]

As I said, the fact that Sanders was able to appear on Fox “without condescension” as noted by Cuda is itself newsworthy. You both are deliberately sidestepping that it IS newsworthy that he was allowed his say without condescension. Yet as I note even Bill Maher allows Republicans with whom he very strongly disagrees have their say without condescension as do many other so-called “liberal” shows and news programs. NPR and Newshour are 2 who have Republicans on every day having their say without condescension.
 
When it comes to dishonesty you need to look in your mirror.

[Unknown Member]

Honestly trough

Fox or MSNBC is not news

They are not opposite sides

They are both agenda driven propaganda so if you state you watch both sides and these are your sources then basically you are just getting a peek into the arsehole of both extremes

Honestly Chris Matthews, Chris Wallace and Chuck Todd havevtheir biases but at least they are fair and reasonable

So I will watch them buy these other blowhards are just showman who either yell people down, bring on morons that they can beat up or just try to advance their own ratings

Honestly I dont watch any of those types

I like CNBC and the non opinion portion of the WSJ

Other than that its the NFL or MLB network with an occasional golf channel

[Unknown Member]

I mean cmon if you want an opinion of a clueless arsewipe …. there is a guy in here who was telling everyone gold was going 3500$ and better yet he was acting like everyone who disagrees somehow stupid

Thats basically what happens if you watch propaganda

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Frumious

As I said, the fact that Sanders was able to appear on Fox “without condescension” as noted by Cuda is itself newsworthy. You both are deliberately sidestepping that it IS newsworthy that he was allowed his say without condescension. Yet as I note [b]even Bill Maher allows Republicans with whom he very strongly disagrees have their say without condescension[/b] as do many other so-called “liberal” shows and news programs. NPR and Newshour are 2 who have Republicans on every day having their say without condescension.

When it comes to dishonesty you need to look in your mirror.

I have to quote this post, because it contains one of the most egregious lies I’ve seen on this forum. Not a lie of great import, but one soaked in audacity, given its manifest falsehood.
 
We’ve all seen Bill Maher clips, including ones with those on the “Right.” In virtually every instance (in fact, every instance I remember), Maher is obviously condescending toward the token “conservative” on the show. It goes above and beyond the snark and sarcasm characteristic of his show.
 
Seriously, if you’re going to lie about this stuff, you might want to choose a far lesser-known personality to whom we might not have been exposed.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Are you talking about the panel or the 1st guest? He states his disagreements but he’s had the likes of Ann Coulter on many times, a very malodorous extremist & has allowed her to speak her noxious opinions. Also Darryl Issa, Matt Schlapp, Steve Bannon, George Will and others. He absolutely allowed them all to speak.
 
He also often has Republicans on the panel to discuss topics. They all have opportunities to speak freely.
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Frumious

Are you talking about the panel or the 1st guest? He states his disagreements but he’s had the likes of Ann Coulter on many times, a very malodorous extremist & has allowed her to speak her noxious opinions. Also Darryl Issa, Matt Schlapp, Steve Bannon, George Will and others. He absolutely allowed them all to speak.

He also often has Republicans on the panel to discuss topics. They all have opportunities to speak freely.

Don’t move goalposts. You lied and said that Maher allows such people on his show without displaying condescension. That’s risibly false. 
 
Side note: Coulter is not an extremist, and Will is not a conservative.

[kayla.meyer_144]

No lie, you just can’t handle the truth.
 
Coulter is an extremist and Will is certainly a conservative. If anyone has moved the goalposts, you people have.
 
What is a conservative? Trump is a conservative? Being a habitual liar is the first requirement obviously for being a Trump kind of conservative. Will does not have a reputation for lying. Trump does. REPEATEDLY!
 
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Conservatism is cultural; not a fervent commitment to certain tax rates or Medicare policies. Will is essentially left-wing in his worldview.
 
Coulter is a moderate.

[kayla.meyer_144]

So what does conservatism stand for again? Trump? Which is what exactly? 
 
You mean all these decades – no centuries – everyone had got it all wrong? Only Trump actually discovered the real conservatism & only just now in 2016? 
 
You obviously know nothing.
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

Interesting, Ann Coulter was a guest on Margaret Hoover’s “On The Firing Line” tonight. She is consistent, I’ll give her that.

[Unknown Member]

Wasnt trump a life long democrat

[katiemckee84_223]

Quote from Frumious

Interesting, Ann Coulter was a guest on Margaret Hoover’s “On The Firing Line” tonight. She is consistent, I’ll give her that.

 
Another example of hating someone until she sings what they wanna hear
 
You really are easy to manipulate, Frum-ster

[Unknown Member]

Furthermore its totally normal that a foreign power micro targets a large portion of our electorate to advocate for a candidate of their choice

This is all totally normal

It is ok

And everyone does

Dumb b-tard

[Unknown Member]

Again this is like invasivion of the body snatchers

Its all normal

[btomba_77]

partisan hack …
 
Barr Once Decried Hatchet Jobs on Ken Starr[/h1]  
William Barr said in a 1998 interview that he was disturbed that Attorney General Janet Reno had not defended independent counsel Ken Starr from spin control, hatchet jobs and ad hominem attacks, [link=https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/24/politics/william-barr-1998-letter-ken-starr/index.html]CNN[/link] reports.
 
Two decades later, Barr is now attorney general himself and defending another president who has repeatedly blasted a special counsels investigation of his activities. Barr stayed silent as President Donald Trump railed against special counsel Robert Muellers witch hunt.’

 

[kayla.meyer_144]

OMG! The worm turns! How long will Billy Barr stay in this administration? How long before Trump fires him? Billy getting an independent streak complaining that all these twits by Trump are undermining Barr and his ability to work and the Justice Dept’s ability to work!
 
[link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/barr-pushes-back-against-trumps-criticism-of-justice-dept-says-tweets-make-it-impossible-for-me-to-do-my-job/2020/02/13/7ff5f308-4e7c-11ea-9b5c-eac5b16dafaa_story.html]https://www.washingtonpos…ac5b16dafaa_story.html[/link]

 

Attorney General William P. Barr pushed back hard Thursday against President Trumps attacks on the Justice Department, saying Im not going to be bullied or influenced by anybody, a remarkable public rebuke that could jeopardize his tenure as the nations top law enforcement official.
 

I think its time to stop the tweeting about Department of Justice criminal cases, Barr said in [link=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/barr-blasts-trumps-tweets-stone-case-impossible-job/story?id=68963276&cid=social_twitter_abcn]an interview with ABC News[/link], adding that such statements about the department, about people in the department, our men and women here, about cases pending here, and about judges before whom we have cases, make it impossible for me to do my job and to assure the courts and the prosecutors and the department that were doing our work with integrity.
 
I cannot do my job here at the department with a constant background commentary that undercuts me, the attorney general said. He also noted that when he became attorney general last year, he pledged to resist intimidation from any quarter, whether Congress, the White House, or elsewhere.

 
The comments are almost certain to anger the president, who has heaped criticism on a selection of current and former Justice Department officials over prosecutions and investigations involving the presidents former associates and alleged leaking by government officials. Barr said he was prepared to accept the consequences of speaking out against the president.
 
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

[kaldridgewv2211]

Good soundbites on TV. His words dont match his actions.

[kaldridgewv2211]

This looks more and more like a real put up job. Trump hasnt tweeted anything negative at Barr and supposedly isnt mad at Barr. Thats how you know this is nothing but a PR setup. Barr tried to act like hes independent when hes nothing but Trumps lap dog.

[19462008]

Well at least he tells it like it is and doesn’t care what his Boss says. Isn’t that what you want in an AG? or do you want them to keep their mouth shut? provide a fake name to cover up an investigation? meet with a past president on a plane to insure their wife would not be prosecuted for not providing subpoena information of national security? sell guns to drug cartels and cover them up and not even communicate with their President.
 
Rouge AG’s with no supervision. Yeah… Just like that past… that’s what we want. You can’t have it both ways Liberals. 

[kaldridgewv2211]

Quote from CudaRad

Well at least he tells it like it is and doesn’t care what his Boss says. Isn’t that what you want in an AG? or do you want them to keep their mouth shut? provide a fake name to cover up an investigation? meet with a past president on a plane to insure their wife would not be prosecuted for not providing subpoena information of national security? sell guns to drug cartels and cover them up and not even communicate with their President.

Rouge AG’s with no supervision. Yeah… Just like that past… that’s what we want. You can’t have it both ways Liberals. 

You miss the point that it’s a dog and pony show.  He goes out and says one thing but it’s a pure PR stunt.  He’s not independent and Trump just said he could poke his fingers into any criminal case he wants.  His “right” as he put it.  You can keep on with the what aboutism but we’re real time watching the politicization of the justice department.  It looks shady AF.

[Unknown Member]

Speaking of Barr

He looks and talks like the grade school principal/wrestler from Billy Madison

The revolting Blob

[19462008]

Quote from DICOM_Dan

Quote from CudaRad

Well at least he tells it like it is and doesn’t care what his Boss says. Isn’t that what you want in an AG? or do you want them to keep their mouth shut? provide a fake name to cover up an investigation? meet with a past president on a plane to insure their wife would not be prosecuted for not providing subpoena information of national security? sell guns to drug cartels and cover them up and not even communicate with their President.

Rouge AG’s with no supervision. Yeah… Just like that past… that’s what we want. You can’t have it both ways Liberals. 

You miss the point that it’s a dog and pony show.  He goes out and says one thing but it’s a pure PR stunt.  He’s not independent and Trump just said he could poke his fingers into any criminal case he wants.  His “right” as he put it.  You can keep on with the what aboutism but we’re real time watching the politicization of the justice department.  It looks shady AF.

Well… what absolutisms work both ways. I can say the say the same thing about the prior admin and the shadiness of their actions. Except their legal team got people killed. Even Reno’s lack of logical reasoning got children killed and ripped a child away from his mother and sent back to a communist regime. Case in point, Barr is far better than Jeff Sessions in law and action. No nonsense. Experienced. Sessions was weak, the left liked that about him. He did nothing but let the carnage and abuses run. I think it’s childish with all the recent “Hate Everything Associated with Trump” frenzy and the Mueller crap, Impeachment Show and Russia Hoax (all planned prior to,,, and after the election), we need to give him a chance to do what he is supposed to do. He did state that he is frustrated that Donny needs to stop tweeting or speaking of Judiciary things. That was on MSN a true… and fair… no biased report. So, you gotta believe that. But if he’s fooling everyone, it will come out. But I will give him his fair due. Time will tell. 

[kaldridgewv2211]

Barr was nicknamed the “cover-up general”.  Essentially Trump says intervene and he intervenes.  It’s also come to light that he’s got an outside prosecutor looking at the Flynn case.  A move that’s highly unusual in the DOJ.  
 
You mentioned the Mueller stuff above.  AS I recall he gave his watered down take.  No one to my knowledge has seen the un-redacted report, nor the evidence accumulated.  Mueller also had Trump nailed on 10 counts of obstruction. 
 
Janet Reno got some kids killed, do I think Clinton forced her to do that or did she act independently.  She was known as independent.
 
Also other notable news today that McCabe isn’t being charged after the investigation of him, and the Army isn’t Trumping up Trumpy charges on Vindman.
 
 

[19462008]

There is nothing there. You’re reheating hash again. Yet, McCabes getting off, Clapper and Brennan are still walking after perjuring themselves on TV. So what is it? No one here are experts and it’s just too early to Judge him. But because Schiff, Pelosi and tubby wubby said they don’t like him, All of the left follows suit like good comrades. 

[kayla.meyer_144]

You can’t perjure yourself on TV so Clapper & Brennan are “exonerated” and “vindicated.”
 
And “It’s not a crime,” as I’ve heard defenders of Trump say about his daily constant lies and all the other things.
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Perjuring themselves on Television

Hahahaha Hahahaha Hahahaha

Im trying to be nicer this year
I wont say what I want to say

[Unknown Member]

kpack, I looked through some of your old posts and predictions,
 
I thought Trump would be in jail by now
 
not president for [b]4 more years[/b]
 
lol

[Unknown Member]

I remember when you said gold was going to 3500$

Dow was going to 12000

Bit coin was and easy double in a yearwhen it was18,000

And when you said MSFT would our preform
Apple

[Unknown Member]

Trump did get impeached

At least I was close

[Unknown Member]

Im not sure if the story about Barr has been gotten right yet. It might be that our system is working better than ever.

This Stone sentencing thing is silly. 6-9 years, or something like that, for this guy? When there was a former Democratic congressional candidate as foreperson of the jury tweeting anti Trump messages during the trial? Seems excessive and more than a bit fishy.

Its a good thing when our leaders point out something wrong in the justice system.

So, operating from the presumption that there was something wrong on some level with that sentencing, there are a few major options open to Trump.

1). Say and do nothing. Guess it avoids interfering with justice. But its also not good for the leader of a free country to allow something that looks like a misapplication of justice to go forward untouched.

2) Say nothing publicly, privately influence Barr. Likely a common route…a back room, hand on the shoulder kind of thing. Seems pretty sketchy though, right? Getting jail sentences for ones associates reduced by pressuring the justice department in secret? Almost like an impeachable abuse of power?

3). Publicly roast the whole doggone thing. Well…this is probably the best option. Transparent. Calls attention to the thing. Everything out in the open, let the public weigh in.

Barr actually seems to agree about the sentencing and tells Trump, I got this, let me do my job.

So, a trial with high political overtones resulted in a sentence that appears unfair, excessive and politically motivated. The major check on this negative outcome is controlled by the opposing political party, so any check will come across as politically motivated/partisan as well, even if it ultimately results in a more just outcome.

So whats the best way to mitigate the swampiness of a necessary response to an inadequate application of justice? Do it as publicly as possible.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Or you just might be applauding political interference for FOT (Friends Of Trump) getting lower sentences. Just like they do in 3rd World dictatorships.

[kayla.meyer_144]

More than 1,100 prosecutors sign an open letter condemning Barr and encouraging Barr to step down after intervening.
 
[link=https://medium.com/@dojalumni/doj-alumni-statement-on-the-events-surrounding-the-sentencing-of-roger-stone-c2cb75ae4937]https://medium.com/@dojal…ger-stone-c2cb75ae4937[/link]
 

We, the undersigned, are alumni of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) who have collectively served both Republican and Democratic administrations. Each of us strongly condemns President Trumps and Attorney General Barrs interference in the fair administration of justice.
 
As former DOJ officials, we each proudly took an oath to support and defend our Constitution and faithfully execute the duties of our offices. The very first of these duties is to apply the law equally to all Americans. This obligation flows directly from the Constitution, and it is embedded in countless rules and laws governing the conduct of DOJ lawyers.
 
They stand for the proposition that political interference in the conduct of a criminal prosecution is anathema to the Departments core mission and to its sacred obligation to ensure equal justice under the law.
 
And yet, President Trump and Attorney General Barr have openly and repeatedly flouted this fundamental principle, most recently in connection with the sentencing of President Trumps close associate, Roger Stone, who was convicted of serious crimes. 
 
For these reasons, we support and commend the four career prosecutors who upheld their oaths and stood up for the Departments independence by withdrawing from the Stone case and/or resigning from the Department. 

 
 
 

[19462008]

Quote from Frumious

You can’t perjure yourself on TV so Clapper & Brennan are “exonerated” and “vindicated.”

And “It’s not a crime,” as I’ve heard defenders of Trump say about his daily constant lies and all the other things.

Ohhh excuse me, I’m sorry.. I produce for my employer instead of blogging all day while on the clock. Isn’t that stealing? I rushed to judgement in my words when responding quicker than I should have during my break. (That was my time). Oh dear Lord… I was corrected by two compassionate, Whitty and oh so intelligent Bolsheviks named Frumi and Kpack. I mean… your names are everywhere… all the times… every topic… every comment…. every 12 paragraph cut and paste response. How about this Kids… let’s put it this way, they were caught lying. Everyone heard them, saw them and it’s been recorded, it’s been commented on by many other networks, Radio and Legal shows. it’s a topic of concern Yet, nothing has happened to them. The Vindicate or Exonerate theory is an inside job. This will soon come out. It is a crime. But hey, it’s just my opinion. I can truly say I’m not an expert. It’s just a feeling and my feelings matter.  As per the Left Millennial liberal code of ethics warrants.  

[Unknown Member]

Wait you dont waste time on an Internet forum

…..but you are the first one to rush onto the Internet forum
Screaming sign me up

Ok

[Unknown Member]

Meh. Eric Holder was Obamas wingman. And if you or I had put thousands of classified emails on a home server, wed currently be serving 10-20 in Leavenworth. Wed also be in jail if wed done what the rest of the former officials/current CNN panelists did.

I like when the president calls out a possible injustice publicly. Sunlight is good.

[kayla.meyer_144]

What about the other 1,099+ signatories?

[ruszja]

Quote from Frumious

What about the other 1,099+ signatories?

They don’t like him either. No surprise, you can’t please everyone in the universe of former DOJ employees.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Ah, they ALL must be Never-TRumpers. All given posts by Democrats & therefore axes to grind against Republicans.
 
You wonder how the Republic existed all this time without Trump to show us the way.

[Unknown Member]

I dont know the context of the number. A quick google showed 2300 prosecutors offices in the US. Those offices probably have and have had more than one prosecutor go through them. So is this 1100 former prosecutors out of 5000 disagree? 10,000? 50,000? Does the 1100 represent 2% of prosecutors who disagree and the other 98% are good with it?

I stopped believing in these kinds of things once I realized the AMA was trying to speak for all doctors, but very few of the docs I knew agreed with the stuff the AMA was saying.

[kayla.meyer_144]

The Silent Majority of prosecutors who didn’t sign; obviously means they are Forever-Trumpers.
 
Even the ones who are Democrats and Democratic appointees?

[Unknown Member]

Sure, why not? Silent majority (or close enough) for the win…got Trump elected last time :).

[link=https://www.thethings.com/15-of-the-most-hilarious-petitions-from-change-org/]https://www.thethings.com…tions-from-change-org/[/link]

I like the petition to save America from aliens, which claims that many people in the US and EU have been slaughtered by extraterrestrials. Only 14 supporters though.

[Unknown Member]

Do you know what would be interesting? Trump announces a pardon of Stone and Flynn on Super Tuesday. Sucks the media coverage away from whoever the Democratic frontrunner turns out to be.

[katiemckee84_223]

Quote from radgrinder

Do you know what would be interesting? Trump announces a pardon of Stone and Flynn on Super Tuesday. Sucks the media coverage away from whoever the Democratic frontrunner turns out to be.

 
Yup, the Manafort/Stone/Flynn debacle is the no.1 reason why the country is confused, divided, and another proof of the deep state. Not one of these men committed or are charge with a real crime. You know, what you can even claim is remotely similar in common language to what a layman understands to be such. The clowns on here try to act like just because you get locked up (lying to the FBI?) for a parking ticket, somehow, “See, see, he’s guilty!” LOL, what a clown world the Dumbos live in.
 
The best part of it is that it won’t last, and in fact, all of it will be reversed.

[ruszja]

Quote from radgrinder

I dont know the context of the number. A quick google showed 2300 prosecutors offices in the US. Those offices probably have and have had more than one prosecutor go through them. So is this 1100 former prosecutors out of 5000 disagree? 10,000? 50,000? Does the 1100 represent 2% of prosecutors who disagree and the other 98% are good with it?

I stopped believing in these kinds of things once I realized the AMA was trying to speak for all doctors, but very few of the docs I knew agreed with the stuff the AMA was saying.

60% of dentists agree that Tide makes your bunny fluffier than competing dryer sheets !

[katiemckee84_223]

Quote from radgrinder

Meh. Eric Holder was Obamas wingman. And if you or I had put thousands of classified emails on a home server, wed currently be serving 10-20 in Leavenworth. Wed also be in jail if wed done what the rest of the former officials/current CNN panelists did.

I like when the president calls out a possible injustice publicly. Sunlight is good.

 
Reason doesn’t work on them. Try telling them the Obama administration (yes, with his knowledge) tapped James Rosen’s phone and computer (and his families) and did the same to Cheryl Atkisson of CBS. And we get “fake news” or cry about real criminals from nowhere, we are just making it up. Suuuuuure. If you mention it to them, they will not even address it. That’s because they ignore the fact that they support the real criminals, and it is demonstrably so.
 
If you’ll notice, my posts actually give the examples of the crimes I see, are known, and support them with what is verifiable. If we were looking for real political criminals, Brennan, Comey, Clapper, Obama, Rice and all those FBI/CIA lackeys would be in the slammer. Yet Vladimir Putin is some amazingly nefarious guy, half a world away. Meanwhile, Obama is spying on journalists and opposition candidates — and it is KNOWN. See the projection?

[btomba_77]

[h1]Federal Judges Group Calls Emergency Meeting to Address DOJ Interference[/h1]  
A national association of federal judges has called an emergency meeting Tuesday to address growing concerns about the intervention of Justice Department officials and President Trump in politically sensitive cases, [link=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/02/17/roger-stone-sentence-judges-worried-political-interference/4788155002/]USA Today[/link] reports.
 

[Unknown Member]

Understandable. They just got raked over the coals for being rubber-stampers regarding the whole FISA court debacle. They dont like being held accountable.

This presents an opportunity for revenge.

[kaldridgewv2211]

Quote from radgrinder

Understandable. They just got raked over the coals for being rubber-stampers regarding the whole FISA court debacle. They dont like being held accountable.

This presents an opportunity for revenge.

FISA court judges are not the same as the national judges association.  They might be members but in the overall they’re just a small cog.

[Unknown Member]

True.

If anesthesiologists has been raked over the coals recently, and then pathologists were being criticized a bit later (gas = FISA, path = federal judges overseeing Stone case), would you as a doctor be kind of predisposed to assembly to defend the honor of the physician profession?

Even though anesthesiologists, or path, or radiology is a relatively small cog in the field of medicine…yeah, probably would be predisposed to assemble with other physicians to commiserate on the predicament. And possibly figure out a way to make it stop before the next subset of the profession gets whacked.

Note that it doesnt necessarily mean the group is right or wrong about a particular issue. More of a circling of the wagons.

[kayla.meyer_144]

WTF are you trying to say?

[Unknown Member]

Sure. What Im saying is that various prosecutors and judges (or any professionals) being annoyed when their judgment is questioned is not much of a story and not terribly meaningful. More dog bites man or fish swim in water than man bites dog.

[Unknown Member]

Stone sentence reduced to 40 months.

The judge ripped Trump for how he went about criticizing the original sentence, but in the end she agreed that the original sentence of ~9 years was far too harsh.

Worked out quite well. A more just solution was administered after an injustice was pointed out publicly. The judges comments certainly do not indicate she was intimidated, so the pearl-clutching by the prosecutors and judges association seems unnecessary.

Better than even chance Stone is pardoned on or around Super Tuesday. Good counterprogramming; forces the Democratic victor of Super Tuesday to lose air time to commentary about something Trump did.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Not that truth of the Rule Of Law matters to Trumpets, but this is what Judge Jackson said about Stone’s conviction while sentencing him.  
   
“For about 50 intense minutes on Thursday, Jackson highlighted Stone’s crimes and condemned the scorched-earth politics that he and Trump championed for years, most recently in 2016.  
   
Along the way, she debunked no fewer than five conspiracy theories that have found a home on Trump’s Twitter feed, conservative media outlets and Stone’s allies on the fringes of the Internet.”  

  
  First, Jackson said it’s “beyond debate” that the Kremlin interfered in the 2016 election, citing conclusions from across the US government. But Trump has [link=https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/18/politics/trump-versus-us-intelligence-on-russian-election-interference/index.html]never unequivocally accepted [/link]these findings, and has publicly embraced denials from Russian President Vladimir Putin.  
   
“Stone was charged because he told “flat-out lies” to Congress about his contacts with WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign, then threatened a witness who could expose his lies.”  

All of the false statements, Jackson noted, were made “not to some secret anti-Trump cabal,” but to [link=https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/26/politics/roger-stone-house-intelligence-committee/index.html]the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee [/link]in 2017.  

[size=”0″]”I have received letters urging me not to silence an important voice in the public arena, but that will not be an element of this sentence in any way. I expect he will keep talking. And as you’ve just heard when I went through the elements of the offense, he was not convicted and is not being sentenced for exercising his First Amendment rights, his support of the President’s campaign or his policies. [/size] 
   
“He was not prosecuted, as some have complained, for standing up for the President. He was prosecuted for covering up for the President.” 
[size=”0″]”So what did the defense say to the jury on his behalf? So what? So what? Of all the circumstances in this case, that may be the most pernicious. The truth still exists. The truth still matters. Roger Stone’s insistence that it doesn’t, his belligerence, his pride in his own lies are a threat to our most fundamental institutions, to the very foundation of our democracy.[/size] 
   
And if it goes unpunished, it will not be a victory for one party or another. Everyone loses because everyone depends on the representatives they elect to make the right decisions on a myriad of issues — many of which are politically charged but many of which aren’t — based on the facts.  
   
Everyone depends on our elected representatives to protect our elections from foreign interference based on the facts. No one knows where the threat is going to come from next time or whose side they’re going to be on, and for that reason the dismay and disgust at the defendant’s belligerence should transcend party.  
   
The dismay and the disgust at the attempts by others to defend his actions as just business as usual in our polarized climate should transcend party. The dismay and the disgust with any attempts to interfere with the efforts of prosecutors and members of the judiciary to fulfill their duty should transcend party.  
   
[b]Sure, the defense is free to say: So what? Who cares? But, I’ll say this: Congress cared. The United States Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia that prosecuted the case and is still prosecuting the case cared. The jurors who served with integrity under difficult circumstances cared. The American people cared. And I care.[/b] 
[u][b] [/b][/u] 
  
[u][b]”The truth still exists. The truth still matters.”[/b][/u] 

  
But Trumpets don’t care, they have “alternate facts.” 
  
The conviction was not “nothing.” 
  
  

[Unknown Member]

Indeed. The conviction was not nothing. A smack down was deserved.

The sentence was excessive. It also deserved a smack down.

Good stuff. The system worked.

[Unknown Member]

“He covered up for the president”. You mean the president that didn’t do anything wrong and hasn’t committed any crime?
 
Name the crime Stone committed. I dare anyone to try. The whole thing is preposterous, just like the dog and pony shows that in reality, show the spying and collusion was AGAINST Trump and his team, by the same deep state and prior admin.

[kayla.meyer_144]

You are a tool, cigar. Stone was convicted of CRIMES. PLURAL!
 
Read up on it. Learn something.
 
And how much do you dare that I can list the crimes he was convicted of?
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Frumious

You are a tool, cigar. Stone was convicted of CRIMES. PLURAL!

Read up on it. Learn something.

And how much do you dare that I can list the crimes he was convicted of?

 
Be my guest, Mr. kangaroo court.
 
Durham is a head fake. Watch.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Not that truth of the Rule Of Law matters to Trumpets, but this is what Judge Jackson said about Stone’s conviction while sentencing him.
 
“For about 50 intense minutes on Thursday, Jackson highlighted Stone’s crimes and condemned the scorched-earth politics that he and Trump championed for years, most recently in 2016.
 
Along the way, she debunked no fewer than five conspiracy theories that have found a home on Trump’s Twitter feed, conservative media outlets and Stone’s allies on the fringes of the Internet.”

  First, Jackson said it’s “beyond debate” that the Kremlin interfered in the 2016 election, citing conclusions from across the US government. But Trump has [link=https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/18/politics/trump-versus-us-intelligence-on-russian-election-interference/index.html]never unequivocally accepted [/link]these findings, and has publicly embraced denials from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
 
“Stone was charged because he told “flat-out lies” to Congress about his contacts with WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign, then threatened a witness who could expose his lies.”

All of the false statements, Jackson noted, were made “not to some secret anti-Trump cabal,” but to [link=https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/26/politics/roger-stone-house-intelligence-committee/index.html]the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee [/link]in 2017.

[size=”0″]”I have received letters urging me not to silence an important voice in the public arena, but that will not be an element of this sentence in any way. I expect he will keep talking. And as you’ve just heard when I went through the elements of the offense, he was not convicted and is not being sentenced for exercising his First Amendment rights, his support of the President’s campaign or his policies. [/size]
 
“He was not prosecuted, as some have complained, for standing up for the President. He was prosecuted for covering up for the President.”
[size=”0″]”So what did the defense say to the jury on his behalf? So what? So what? Of all the circumstances in this case, that may be the most pernicious. The truth still exists. The truth still matters. Roger Stone’s insistence that it doesn’t, his belligerence, his pride in his own lies are a threat to our most fundamental institutions, to the very foundation of our democracy.[/size]
 
And if it goes unpunished, it will not be a victory for one party or another. Everyone loses because everyone depends on the representatives they elect to make the right decisions on a myriad of issues — many of which are politically charged but many of which aren’t — based on the facts.
 
Everyone depends on our elected representatives to protect our elections from foreign interference based on the facts. No one knows where the threat is going to come from next time or whose side they’re going to be on, and for that reason the dismay and disgust at the defendant’s belligerence should transcend party.
 
The dismay and the disgust at the attempts by others to defend his actions as just business as usual in our polarized climate should transcend party. The dismay and the disgust with any attempts to interfere with the efforts of prosecutors and members of the judiciary to fulfill their duty should transcend party.
 
[b]Sure, the defense is free to say: So what? Who cares? But, I’ll say this: Congress cared. The United States Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia that prosecuted the case and is still prosecuting the case cared. The jurors who served with integrity under difficult circumstances cared. The American people cared. And I care.[/b]
[u][b] [/b][/u]
 
[u][b]”The truth still exists. The truth still matters.”[/b][/u]

But Trumpets don’t care, they have “alternate facts.”
 
The conviction was not “nothing.”
 
 

[btomba_77]

[b]Trump Lays Down the Gauntlet for William Barr[/b][/h1]  
President Trump told [link=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-barr-durham-probe-gauntlet]Fox News[/link] that he hopes U.S. Attorney John Durham, who is investigating the origins of the Russia probe, is not going to be politically correct and warned that Attorney General William Barr could go down as the greatest attorney general or just an average guy depending on what comes out of the monthslong probe.
 
Said Trump: They spied on my campaign, which is treason. They spied, both before and after I won, using the intelligence apparatus of the United States to take down a president, a legally elected president, a duly elected president of the United States. It is the single biggest political crime in the history of our country.
 
He added: Bill Barr can go down as the greatest attorney general in the history of our country, or he can go down as an average guy. Well see what happens.

 

[btomba_77]

[link=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/22/william-barr-rupert-murdoch-muzzle-andrew-napolitano-fox-news-trump-critic-book]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/22/william-barr-rupert-murdoch-muzzle-andrew-napolitano-fox-news-trump-critic-book[/link]
 
[b]Attorney General Bill Barr pressured Fox to muzzle Judge Napolitano, new book claims[/b]
 

The attorney general, William Barr, told Rupert Murdoch to muzzle [link=https://twitter.com/Judgenap]Andrew Napolitano[/link], a prominent Fox News personality who became a critic of Donald Trump, according to a new book about the rightwing TV network.
 
Barrs meeting with Murdoch, at the media moguls New York home in October 2019, was [link=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/10/us/politics/fox-news-poll-trump-impeachment.html]widely reported[/link] at the time, [link=https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/why-is-william-barr-meeting-with-rupert-murdoch]with speculation[/link] surrounding its subject.
 

[b]
[/b]
 
 

[btomba_77]

[link=https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/06/politics/schiff-barr-election-interference-cnntv/index.html]Schiff accuses Barr of lying over election intelligence[/link]

[i]House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff on Sunday accused Attorney General William Barr of lying about intelligence related to foreign interference in the upcoming presidential election.

In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” Schiff was asked about Barr’s claim from last week’s interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that China is interfering with the election more than Russia.

“That’s just a plain, false statement by the Attorney General. A flat-out false statement,” Schiff said, maintaining, “you can tell that[b] Bill Barr is just flat-out lying to the American people, and it’s tragic but it’s as simple as that.”[/b]

He added: “It’s just such a disservice to the country that we can’t trust our own attorney general, but apparently Bill Barr is willing to do anything or say anything to help Donald Trump.”[/i]

[clickpenguin_460]

Lol Schiff accuses Barr of lying.  That’s hilarious.

[btomba_77]

Comey 2.0?
 
[b]Barr to release “interim version” of Durham Report ahead of election[/b]
 
 
[link=https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/attorney-general-william-barr-plan-to-release-interim-john-durham-report-violates-protocols-james-comey-was-supposedly-fired-for-breaking-lawyers/]https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile…aking-lawyers/[/link]

[i]U.S. Attorney General [/i][i]William Barr is planning to publicly release an interim report on U.S. Attorney John Durhams probe on the origins of the Russia investigation before the presidential election, the New York[/i]
[i] Times [link=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/11/us/politics/nora-dannehy-durham-russia-investigation.html]reported[/link][/i][i] Friday.[/i]
 
[i] Lawyers and former DOJ officials lambasted the plan, noting that departmental protocol specifically prohibits leveraging an ongoing investigation in any way to impact an upcoming election.

As a federal prosecutor for almost 20 years, I never issued or observed a public report about an investigation, wrote NBC News legal analyst and former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan Barbara McQuade.

We either filed an indictment or we closed the investigation. A public report by Durham would violate the very thing for which [former FBI director James Comey] was purportedly fired.[/i]

[clickpenguin_460]

Interesting.
 
I don’t know the history of releasing interim reports so I will have to look into that.
 
The difference between Comey and Hillary though is that Hillary was running for President.  The Durham investigation likely does not involve Biden in any meaningful way.
 
There are certain circumstances when the public deserves to know what is going on/what happened.  This may be what Barr is thinking.  He may also be worried about things being pushed under the rug if Trump loses, although he could release it all the day after the election or something similar.
 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

What is the point of an “interim report?”
 
That already smells fishy.
 
[font=”book antiqua,palatino”][size=”3″][i]Barrs plan to release an interim report was revealed hours after criminal prosecutor [b]Nora Dannehy[/b]  one of Durhams top aides assigned to the probe  [link=https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/top-john-durham-aide-resigns-out-of-concern-barr-is-pressuring-team-for-results-before-election-report/]resigned[/link] from the DOJ, reportedly due to concerns over pressure from the attorney general to deliver results in advance of November.[/i][/size][/font]

[clickpenguin_460]

The only plausible explanation I can think of is to allow the public to know the truth so make an informed vote – if those things were to sway them.  But again, I’m not sure that’s a justified reason.
 
I think Barr is frustrated that it’s taking so long and sees the Dems getting away with all the wrongdoing from 2016 and then having it all wiped away forever with a Biden win.
 
Doesn’t seem to be “right” to give an interim report but Durham himself could give some sort of update on what they are doing.  That is sometimes done for investigations.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Quote from Cubsfan10

I think Barr is frustrated that it’s taking so long and sees the Dems getting away with all the wrongdoing from 2016 and then having it all wiped away forever with a Biden win.

Sounds like deja-vu the Clinton investigation in the 1990’s. 6 years was it of investigations going through I think 3 Robert Muellers because no one could find anything until the dress w semen.
 
Yes, Barr wants at least the suggestion of something, enough to throw the election towards TRump before the election. 2016 was lucky in that Comey threw the election to Trump 3 days before election day suggesting evidence was actually found. Trying to get lucky again.

[clickpenguin_460]

Quote from Frumious

Quote from Cubsfan10

I think Barr is frustrated that it’s taking so long and sees the Dems getting away with all the wrongdoing from 2016 and then having it all wiped away forever with a Biden win.

Sounds like deja-vu the Clinton investigation in the 1990’s. 6 years was it of investigations going through I think 3 Robert Muellers because no one could find anything until the dress w semen.

Yes, Barr wants at least the suggestion of something, enough to throw the election towards TRump before the election. 2016 was lucky in that Comey threw the election to Trump 3 days before election day suggesting evidence was actually found. Trying to get lucky again.

 
Is it luck if they actually broke the law?  Or do you just object to it affecting the election?

[kayla.meyer_144]

Sending out incomplete and possibly wrong/false information that could deliberately effect the election?
 
Yes, I do object to that.
 
And what luck for who breaking the law?

[clickpenguin_460]

What if its factual information that people broke the law in 2016?

Dems release incomplete, possibly fake stuff about trump every 3 to 4 days to try to swing the election. Does that bother you?

[kayla.meyer_144]

What? Release first & Later test the veracity?

[btomba_77]

Quote from Cubsfan10

What if its factual information that people broke the law in 2016?

Dems release incomplete, possibly fake stuff about trump every 3 to 4 days to try to swing the election. Does that bother you?

 

Do you really assign the same level of responsibility for a journalist at Buzzfeed and the US Attorney General?
 
Or in your mind the journalists are just “dems” and the AG is just another Trump Republican partisan.  
 
So if the NYT is “out to get Trump” its  therefore OK for government of the people to use its power to act as a Republican partisan counterweight to “get Biden?”  
 
I truly hope that you are not that cynical.