Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
squistion

AG William Barr Thread

Recommended Posts

Adam Schiff says that William Barr's testimony that he wouldn't commit to recusing himself from the Mueller probe or commit to making the Mueller report public "ought to be reasons not to confirm him, but the combination of both would be completely disqualifying."

Via CBS

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1087054762011430913

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, squistion said:

CNN Breaking News @cnnbrk 2h2 hours ago

The Senate confirms William Barr as attorney general. He will oversee special counsel Mueller's investigation as it nears its conclusion.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/politics/william-barr-senate-confirmation-vote/index.html

I like how they just slip this in like it's an accepted fact this thing is almost over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barr's son in law has landed a job in the White House.

 

Quote

CNN reports that McGaughey, the husband of Barr’s youngest daughter, has been hired as an attorney in the White House counsel’s office, where he’ll “advise the president, the executive office, and White House staff on legal issues concerning the president and the presidency.” While the division is separate from the legal team that defends Trump in the Russia investigation—a group of leading lights that includes Rudy“maybe there was collusion” Giuliani—its work nevertheless does “intersect with the investigation.” (Trump reportedly blamed former White House counsel Don McGahn for failing to bring the probe to a close.) Meanwhile, Mary Daly, Barr’s oldest daughter, will be leaving her current job in the deputy attorney general’s office for a gig at the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), which has had its own Russian intrigues.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AG Barr holding news conference on release of Mueller report.

Discuss here.

Edited by squistion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far Barr is basically just repeating the 4-page Barr letter instead of saying anything new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nate Silver‏Verified account @NateSilver538 2m2 minutes ago

Basic political takeaway so far is that the WH is playing this for a draw rather than a win. They don't care if they appear partisan so long as their base is happy, because Democrats aren't gonna like Trump anyway and swing voters are exhausted and don't care much about Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel Dale‏Verified account @ddale8 8m8 minutes ago

Barr: "The bottom line" on collusion is that "the special counsel confirmed that the Russian government sponsored efforts to illegally interfere with the 2016 presidential election, but did not find that the Trump campaign or other Americans colluded."

Barr: "The president was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks."

Barr says Trump took "no act" to deprive Mueller of the documents or witnesses he needed in his investigation. He says, of his no-obstruction decision, that there was good evidence showing Trump had "non-corrupt motives."

Barr has sounded like a Trump spokesperson at various points of his statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel Dale‏Verified account @ddale8 2m2 minutes ago

Asked how Mueller explained why he didn't make a call on obstruction, Barr says he'll leave it to the report, but when they met, Mueller "made it very clear several times" that it wasn't because of the government position that says a sitting president can't be indicted.

Barr says Mueller didn't indicate his intention was to leave the obstruction call "to Congress." He says he didn't talk to Mueller directly about his decision to make his own call, but he's been "told" that Mueller thought it was "my prerogative."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barr says that he has no objection to Bob Mueller testifying before Congress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel Dale‏Verified account @ddale8 4m4 minutes ago

Asked why Mueller isn't here, given that it's his report we're discussing, Barr says, "No it's not. It's a report he did for me as the attorney general. He is required under the regulation to provide me with a confidential report. I'm here to discuss my response to that report."

Asked about his words that are "generous" to the president, Barr said, "The statements about his sincere beliefs are recognized in the report, that there was substantial evidence for that, so I'm not sure what your basis is for saying that I'm being generous to the president."

The press conference ended after Barr was asked if there was any impropriety in him pre-spinning the report. (An aide announced mid-question that it'd be the last question.) Barr simply said "no."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How cute someone’s fee fees were hurt so obstruction doesn’t apply.  What a political hack job.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael M. Grynbaum‏Verified account @grynbaum 13m13 minutes ago

Chris Wallace on Fox:

"The Attorney General seemed almost to be acting as the counselor for the defense, the counselor for the president, rather than the Attorney General, talking about his motives, his emotions... Really, as I say, making a case for the president."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neal Katyal on MSNBC:

"There is no reason whatsoever why the report shouldn't have been given first before the Barr press conference except so that Barr could get out his talking points and try and influence the direction of the country first ahead of time." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, squistion said:

Neal Katyal on MSNBC:

"There is no reason whatsoever why the report shouldn't have been given first before the Barr press conference except so that Barr could get out his talking points and try and influence the direction of the country first ahead of time." 

:lmao:

Translation:  No fair. We wanted to get our talking points in first. It’s our duty to smear the President to our base that won’t read or understand the report.  

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, knowledge dropper said:

Translation:  No fair. We wanted to get our talking points in first. It’s our duty to smear the President to our base that won’t read or understand the report.  

You are aware that is unprecedented for the AG to hold a press conference on a report presented to Congress and not release it to members of Congress beforehand. That has never once happened in the history of this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MSNBC reports that Trump is to speak shortly on Barr's presser. Brian Williams called it a "prebuttal" before release of report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, squistion said:

You are aware that is unprecedented for the AG to hold a press conference on a report presented to Congress and not release it to members of Congress beforehand. That has never once happened in the history of this country.

Brilliant move.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reported on MSNBC:

NBC's Julia Ainsley reports that, according to the report, Robert Mueller did consult the Office of Legal Counsel opinion that you cannot indict a sitting president. She notes that that counters what Barr said earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike Downing of Bloomberg reports:

Mueller said he lacked confidence to clear Donald Trump of obstruction of justice but suggested Congress could take action on at least 10 instances where the president sought to interfere with the probe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, knowledge dropper said:

:lmao:

Translation:  No fair. We wanted to get our talking points in first. It’s our duty to smear the President to our base that won’t read or understand the report.  

Few things...no, but it is suspect that they want to get their narrative out before congress even sees it.

Also...judging by the russia thread, the anti trump base is actually reading the report, those supporting Trump have obviously avoided reading anything on it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Few things...no, but it is suspect that they want to get their narrative out before congress even sees it.

Also...judging by the russia thread, the anti trump base is actually reading the report, those supporting Trump have obviously avoided reading anything on it.

 

No doubt there was no collusion.  Now it’s all about Trump haters doing the old bait and switch to the purely subjective standard of obstruction.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, knowledge dropper said:

No doubt there was no collusion.  Now it’s all about Trump haters doing the old bait and switch to the purely subjective standard of obstruction.  

A.  There is doubt there was conspiracy..."collusion" isn't a legal term.  There is only no doubt Mueller didn't recommend criminal charges or have evidence to support criminal conspiracy.  This is a fact you can't refute.

B.  Nobody is doing any bait and switch here.  And its not a subjective standard for obstruction being discussed either.

C.  None of this even addresses the point being made was the clear observance in the Russia thread was a group of people actually reading the report and summaries and posting about them...and those who appear to refuse to read any of it (including at least one who won't answer if he read any of it as he opines on how bad it is for the democrats).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

A.  There is doubt there was conspiracy..."collusion" isn't a legal term.  There is only no doubt Mueller didn't recommend criminal charges or have evidence to support criminal conspiracy.  This is a fact you can't refute.

B.  Nobody is doing any bait and switch here.  And its not a subjective standard for obstruction being discussed either.

C.  None of this even addresses the point being made was the clear observance in the Russia thread was a group of people actually reading the report and summaries and posting about them...and those who appear to refuse to read any of it (including at least one who won't answer if he read any of it as he opines on how bad it is for the democrats).

 

A.  Falsehood.  Provide proof there was a conspiracy between Trump and Russians.

B. False

C. Is this tattling? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, knowledge dropper said:

A.  Falsehood.  Provide proof there was a conspiracy between Trump and Russians.

B. False

C. Is this tattling? 

A.  Read the russia thread (or the actual report)...its all there showing cooperation.  What the report says is more about rising to the level of criminal conspiracy.

B.  Stop this (like with A).  Back up your claim of false.  How is any of this bait and switch.  The actual report makes it clear that he was not cleared of conpiracy...further the more we saw today (as discussed in the other thread) is that Barr's first "summary" wasn't fully descriptive of what the report had to say on obstruction.

C.  No...its pointing out that your point above "We wanted to get our talking points in first. It’s our duty to smear the President to our base that won’t read or understand the report.  " that I originally replied to appears to be the exact opposite.  That the side who has read it are the democrats and that it appears much more so that republicans and Trump supporters have not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

A.  Read the russia thread (or the actual report)...its all there showing cooperation.  What the report says is more about rising to the level of criminal conspiracy.

B.  Stop this (like with A).  Back up your claim of false.  How is any of this bait and switch.  The actual report makes it clear that he was not cleared of conpiracy...further the more we saw today (as discussed in the other thread) is that Barr's first "summary" wasn't fully descriptive of what the report had to say on obstruction.

C.  No...its pointing out that your point above "We wanted to get our talking points in first. It’s our duty to smear the President to our base that won’t read or understand the report.  " that I originally replied to appears to be the exact opposite.  That the side who has read it are the democrats and that it appears much more so that republicans and Trump supporters have not.

A.  A 2200s page of Trump hate.  No bias there.  

B. I asked YOU to provide conspiracy proof    

C  It WAS s smart move to get in front of the story before the left leaning media began their spin.  

Good Day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, knowledge dropper said:

A.  A 2200s page of Trump hate.  No bias there.  

B. I asked YOU to provide conspiracy proof    

C  It WAS s smart move to get in front of the story before the left leaning media began their spin.  

Good Day. 

A.  People posting actual quotes from Mueller's report.  Are you claiming Mueller's findings are biased?

B.  B had nothing to do with conspiracy...you appear to not be willing to read where its being discussed...so Im positive you have read none of the report.  This was about obstruction...and again you are unwilling to read even comments about the report much less what Mueller has to say about it.

C.  This again does not address the claim you made about democrats even reading it.  In addition, what we have seen is that the only ones spinning are Trump, Barr, and the GOP.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

The democrats need to apologize 

For what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

For what?

I’m giving you guys time to come to your senses and then I expect a full apology to all Trump supporters and more importantly the man, Donald J Trump himself. 

  • Laughing 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

I’m giving you guys time to come to your senses and then I expect a full apology to all Trump supporters and more importantly the man, Donald J Trump himself. 

Will come right after the nation apologizes to Nixon for just how unfairly he was treated.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HellToupee said:

The democrats need to apologize 

You're right. I hereby apologize for not doing enough to prevent the election of a conman to the office of President of the United States and underestimating the stupidity of the American voters..

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, HellToupee said:

I’m giving you guys time to come to your senses and then I expect a full apology to all Trump supporters and more importantly the man, Donald J Trump himself. 

how's that voter fraud investigation going?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, HellToupee said:

I’m giving you guys time to come to your senses and then I expect a full apology to all Trump supporters and more importantly the man, Donald J Trump himself. 

Still waiting...apologize for what?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, apalmer said:

You're right. I hereby apologize for not doing enough to prevent the election of a conman to the office of President of the United States and underestimating the stupidity of the American voters..

and willingness to put party above country, values and the rule of law.  But I'm sure this would be the same tune they'd be singing if this was Hillary Clinton we were talking about.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, HellToupee said:

The democrats need to apologize 

This is a thing on the right wing blogosphere, isn't it.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Frum in The Atlantic writes:

"Barr has focused on two missions: on the one hand, cracking down on crimes by the poor and the foreign-born; on the other, going easy on the crimes of President Trump's associates."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/bill-barr-sees-law-tool-class-warfare/606571/?utm_content=edit-promo&utm_source=twitter&utm_term=2020-02-14T11%3A45%3A29&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=the-atlantic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1228320580233039873

Inbox:

A.G. Barr's "disparaging public statements about an active Department of Justice investigation violate rules intended to prevent biasing inquiries and protect due process," according to a complaint filed today by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking via NYT:

A.G. Barr has assigned an outside prosecutor to scrutinize the criminal case against Michael Flynn, according to people familiar with the matter.

The review is highly unusual and could trigger more accusations of political interference.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/14/us/politics/michael-flynn-prosecutors-barr.html?referringSource=articleShare

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, squistion said:

Breaking via NYT:

A.G. Barr has assigned an outside prosecutor to scrutinize the criminal case against Michael Flynn, according to people familiar with the matter.

The review is highly unusual and could trigger more accusations of political interference.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/14/us/politics/michael-flynn-prosecutors-barr.html?referringSource=articleShare

Wow this #### is unbelievable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Godsbrother said:

Maybe I am thinking of someone else but didn't Flynn ADMIT to wrongdoing?

Yes he did, in court, twice.

I blame Sullivan though for not sentencing him when he had the chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

Maybe I am thinking of someone else but didn't Flynn ADMIT to wrongdoing?

Yes, in making false statement to the FBI. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.