Mueller report delivered

[mmpsteve]

And these very same people say Trump is un-presidential.

One thing I hope that the Dem's disgusting behavior towards Barr accomplishes; I hope it pisses him off enough for him to exact vengeance on all the criminals that attempted a coup on a duly elected American President. It will be a satisfying day if we ever get to see criminal indictments of these pieces of ****.

.

 

[churchmouse]

One thing I hope that the Dem's disgusting behavior towards Barr accomplishes; I hope it pisses him off enough for him to exact vengeance on all the criminals that attempted a coup on a duly elected American President. It will be a satisfying day if we ever get to see criminal indictments of these pieces of ****.

.

I have always said that those who scream the loudest have the most to hide and the most to loose.

 

[SgtCarter]

I have always said that those who scream the loudest have the most to hide and the most to loose.

I've always heard this, too. Sadly I dont think we'll be seeing any indictments in the near future. Maybe if Trump gets reelected.

 

[KG1]

At the Senate Barr hearing on the Mueller report, every Dem Senator trashed Barr to his face. That ***** from Hawaii called him everything in the book, except Mr. Attorney General. Then the House wanted Barr to show up at their hearing, and be questioned by Senate legal Staffers, in addition to the congressmen, something that's never been done in the history of that committee. Barr call BS on that one, and the House lost the opportunity to question him. Bunch of idiots. I say **** them, all the way.

.

It's all political theater when the cameras are rolling covering these committee hearings. It would serve no purpose for them to act the way they do if they did'nt have an audience to play to. And that rotten pineapple head from Hawaii is the most egregious offender. She only exists to spew out any vile venom that her staff cooks up and shoves in front of her to read. She does nothing else constructive of note in the Senate that I can tell. Shes an all out disgraceful divisive partisan hack.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

FOX: Comey defends FBI's investigation in response to NYT 'spying' report
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/comey-defends-fbis-actions-in-response-to-nyt-spying-report#

Comey justifies this whole charade because Papadopoulos "knew" in late April 2016 that the Russians had hacked Hillary's email server and were going to leak the emails prior to the election.

Hmmm... I was arguing EXACTLY the same point with Hillary-supporters in FEBRUARY 2016 on a liberal news site. That not only had the Russians, Chinese, North Koreans and Iranians hacked her amateur home-brew email server, but every hacker-wannabe willing to point a kiddie-script at the clinton.com domain had as well... rumors were that they had been on the dark web for some time... and they absolutely were going to leak publicly prior to the election, though my prediction was October.

Morons! The whole bunch of them.

 

[MCgrease08]

Huh. That's funny, considering the FBI also knew the DNC servers were hacked a year or so prior, yet they were perfectly willing to let the DNC hire a private data security firm (Crowd Strike) to examine the servers and conclude it was the Russians. The FBI never actually examined the server, never insisted on leading the investigation, yet used the findings from the private firm as a basis to set the entire investigation in motion.

Even Slate called this out as odd.

https://slate.com/technology/2017/0...cause-it-relied-on-crowdstrikes-analysis.html

The DNC breaches feature prominently in that summary but, more to the point, the primary rationale readers are given for why they should believe that the Russian government meddled in the U.S. election is because the FBI, CIA, and NSA believe that to be the case. We are given very little actual detail about what happened or how the incidents were traced to Russia specifically, while we are treated to numerous statements along the lines of: “We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election” or “We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments.”

Of course, there are many reasons the Intelligence Community might have decided not to reveal any actual evidence for these claims. But in the absence of that evidence, whether or not you believe their conclusions rests entirely on your confidence in the judgment and investigative abilities of the FBI, CIA, and NSA. And if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. The DNC breach is not the only incident attributed to Russia in the Intelligence assessment summary and it’s likely that some of the others were directly investigated by the government. But even so, this conflation of government- and industry-gathered evidence without clear distinctions makes it harder to take the agencies’ assessments at face value.

 

[MCgrease08]

Here's more about CrowdStrike and the investigation into the hacked DNC servers. Including the fact that Obama appointed a CrowdStrike officer to an admin post two months before the June 2016 report on Russian hacking was released.

In April 2016, two months before the June report that alleged a Russian conspiracy, former President Barack Obama appointed Steven Chabinsky, the general counsel and chief risk officer for CrowdStrike, to the Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity.

CrowdStrike co-founder George Kurtz said at the time, “We wish Steve and the rest of the Commissioners every success in this important effort. Their dedicated and thoughtful leadership on these issues holds great potential for promoting innovation and the benefits of technology, while lowering the very real security risks we are facing today.”

https://dailycaller.com/2017/06/24/...ryone-is-ignoring-about-the-russia-dnc-story/

 

[IndyDave1776]

I have always said that those who scream the loudest have the most to hide and the most to loose.

Funny how that works, isn't it?

Right now I am thinking about a number of descriptors that apply to assorted congressweasels and a number of solutions for their malfeasance, but unfortunately posting any of these thoughts would constitute rule violations egregious enough to have every one else discussing me in the "List you shooters" thread.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

CNN: Fact-checking claims Nadler is breaking precedent by allowing staff members to interview Barrhttps://www.cnn.com/2019/04/30/politics/fact-check-nadler-barr-precedent/index.html

Short answer: try as they might, neither Nadler nor CNN can find a single instance of a sitting cabinet level official submitting to questioning by congressional staff.

The narrow question of determining "precedent" depends on how you define it, but CNN could not locate an instance where a Cabinet official was interviewed by staff members during a public hearing before the House Judiciary Committee. However, there have been instances where staff attorneys were permitted to interview witnesses. And ultimately this argument may have only political importance.

 

[Phase2]

CNN: Fact-checking claims Nadler is breaking precedent by [STRIKE]allowing[/STRIKE]requiring staff members to interview Barrhttps://www.cnn.com/2019/04/30/politics/fact-check-nadler-barr-precedent/index.html under threat of contempt of congress.

Short answer: try as they might, neither Nadler nor CNN can find a single instance of a sitting cabinet level official submitting to questioning by congressional staff.

FTFY

 

[DoggyDaddy]

House Panel Votes to Hold Barr in Contempt

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tr...ock-release-of-full-unredacted-mueller-report

 

[churchmouse]

House Panel Votes to Hold Barr in Contempt

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tr...ock-release-of-full-unredacted-mueller-report

Good lord. The insanity.

 

[KittySlayer]

House Panel Votes to Hold Barr in Contempt

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tr...ock-release-of-full-unredacted-mueller-report

The committee's 24-16 vote on contempt for Barr was along party lines and came after hours of debate.

Who in their right mind creates a committee with 40 people on it? There is no way to accomplish anything with 40 people in a room, particularly a bunch of politicians that like to hear themselves talk. Plus you have all their minions running around feeding them crap to talk about. Drain the Swamp!

 

[MCgrease08]

Good lord. The insanity.

A complete ****ing clown show.

 

[KG1]

House Panel Votes to Hold Barr in Contempt

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tr...ock-release-of-full-unredacted-mueller-report

Utterly contemptible political move on the part of the Democrats.

 

[jamil]

Unlike the time when Holder refused to hand over documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal, and was held in contempt of congress, Barr refused to hand over the redacted parts of Mueller’s report because the law requires it.

So now, just like in Holder’s case, Barr asked Trump to use executive privilege to protect him from contempt. Unlike Holder, Barr is held in contempt anyway.

At this point, the Republican led Senate should just start choosing random Democrats to vote on contempt charges since a legal reason doesn’t matter. So maybe first on the list should be Nancy Pelosi for having saggy boobs. Then Chuck Schumer for being a dick head. Then, of course, AOC for being an idiot, along with the rest of the fresh faced crack hoes of the new democrat party. Let’s not forget Feinstein for being a ***** ass hypocrite.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Unlike the time when Holder refused to hand over documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal, and was held in contempt of congress, Barr refused to hand over the redacted parts of Mueller’s report because the law requires it.

So now, just like in Holder’s case, Barr asked Trump to use executive privilege to protect him from contempt. Unlike Holder, Barr is held in contempt anyway.

At this point, the Republican led Senate should just start choosing random Democrats to vote on contempt charges since a legal reason doesn’t matter. So maybe first on the list should be Nancy Pelosi for having saggy boobs. Then Chuck Schumer for being a dick head. Then, of course, AOC for being an idiot, along with the rest of the fresh faced crack hoes of the new democrat party. Let’s not forget Feinstein for being a ***** ass hypocrite.

I am disappointed. You forgot to include Nadsforbrains in your list!

 

[BugI02]

Utterly contemptible political move on the part of the Democrats.

If holding congress in contempt is against the law, they haven't got 1/10000th of the prison space they're going to need

 

[DoggyDaddy]

If holding congress in contempt is against the law, they haven't got 1/10000th of the prison space they're going to need

Creating more jobs. MAGA!

 

[BugI02]

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...confession-informant-needed-to-air-trump-dirt
Steele's stunning pre-FISA confession: Informant needed to air Trump dirt before election

If ever there were an admission that taints the FBI’s secret warrant to surveil Donald Trump’s campaign, it sat buried for more than 2 1/2 years in the files of a high-ranking State Department official.


Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with FBI informant Christopher Steele shows the Hillary Clinton campaign-funded British intelligence operative admitted that his research was political and facing an Election Day deadline.

Kavalec’s notes do not appear to have been provided to the House Intelligence Committee during its Russia probe, according to former Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.). "They tried to hide a lot of documents from us during our investigation, and it usually turns out there’s a reason for it," Nunes told me. Senate and House Judiciary investigators told me they did not know about them, even though they investigated Steele’s behavior in 2017-18.

Nonetheless, the FBI is doing its best to keep much of Kavalec’s information secret by retroactively claiming it is classified, even though it was originally marked unclassified in 2016.

The mere three sentences that the FBI allowed State to release, unredacted, show that Kavalec sent an email two days after her encounter with Steele, alerting others.


“You may already have this information but wanted to pass it on just in case,” Kavalec wrote in the lone sentence the FBI and State released from that email. The names of the recipients, the subject line and the attachments are blacked out.


Interestingly, one legal justification cited for redacting the Oct. 13, 2016, email is the National Security Act of 1947, which can be used to shield communications involving the CIA or the White House National Security Council.

They're afraid of Barr. And they should be