Could it be? Leaks from the Mueller team ANOTHER BOMBSHELL COMING!

[BWK]

So the NYT says....

What else have they lied about previously...

Changing the narrative isn't much help for you. The NYT's is quoting the Mueller team. Have you heard them correct the NYT's? No! This is a cover up plain and simple. This will be the second time that Barr involves himself in a cover up to protect a president.

IF the NYT is actually quoting the "Mueller team", whoever that is. After all, they get a lot wrong.

The New York Times controversies - Wikipedia

If you're having to give us a history lesson about the NYT's, your losing this argument. The Barr summary has turned from weird in the beginning, to absurd today;

LOL! Again with the innuendo from Rachel (I KNOW Trump is guilty so I'll cry when Mueller clears him) Maddow? That's sad. If that's the best you have, you're not worth reading. One chance to avoid being on ignore...convince us with facts from a real source.

If we go by what Barr said, Mueller will never clear Trump based on Barr's own recollection of the report. You want real facts, I suggest you go back and read Barr quoting Mueller.

As for "ignore", knock yourself out chief. There's nothing more boring and aggravating than reading an unintelligent post, void of counter arguments.

 

[BWK]

View attachment 253936

Mueller's team disagrees with Barr. That is explosive, and explains why Barr never gave any details. It's a cover up for Trump. This isn't Barr's first rodeo with cover ups. He did it with Iran-Contra as well in 92. I smelled a rat from the very beginning. Now the rat is being exposed.

Mueller is working with Barr. Do you think he's covering up his own report?

How is Mueller working with Barr?

Robert Mueller is helping redact sensitive material from his almost 400-page report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election

Mueller report will be released by mid-April, says US attorney general

Barr can run with his political agenda, but he cannot hide. Not revealing damaging information about collusion and obstruction, while simultaneously exonerating Trump, can only be rectified one way. Release the entire report, and like the Right who wanted all the redacted classified material from FISA, that door now swings open both ways. And, now that Barr totally dropped the ball on this report to play lackie to Trump, as he did for Iran-Contra back in 92, getting Reagan and those hoods off, the only people qualified to decide the fate of Trump is Congress and the public.

 

[hunarcy]

So the NYT says....

What else have they lied about previously...

Changing the narrative isn't much help for you. The NYT's is quoting the Mueller team. Have you heard them correct the NYT's? No! This is a cover up plain and simple. This will be the second time that Barr involves himself in a cover up to protect a president.

IF the NYT is actually quoting the "Mueller team", whoever that is. After all, they get a lot wrong.

The New York Times controversies - Wikipedia

If you're having to give us a history lesson about the NYT's, your losing this argument. The Barr summary has turned from weird in the beginning, to absurd today;

LOL! Again with the innuendo from Rachel (I KNOW Trump is guilty so I'll cry when Mueller clears him) Maddow? That's sad. If that's the best you have, you're not worth reading. One chance to avoid being on ignore...convince us with facts from a real source.

If we go by what Barr said, Mueller will never clear Trump based on Barr's own recollection of the report. You want real facts, I suggest you go back and read Barr quoting Mueller.

As for "ignore", knock yourself out chief. There's nothing more boring and aggravating than reading an unintelligent post, void of counter arguments.

And that is why I can't stand your stupid, unintelligent and dishonest postings. If you re-read the first sentence of your post, you'll see it makes no sense. So, I will enjoy the board without you.

 

[BWK]

RE: Could it be? Leaks from the Mueller team ANOTHER BOMBSHELL COMING!
※→ et al,

I think it is important to remember that there are people;e who just want to damage the White House and as many opposition personalities they can. Its now time for the three-ring circus in Congress to start so everyone can get their face in the news.

I think that what should be important (to everyone) and the focus of the outcome is the Mandated Appointment:

View attachment 254109 View attachment 254110
​

Many people (critics) and professional politicians (both Blue and Red) at trying to change that focus, and turn their attention to other issues → for the purpose of intentionally hurting the personality of the President (an ad hominem attack). What we should focus on are the coordination with the Russians, and any matters directly related to Russian involvement.

Just My 2¢ worth,
Most Respectfully,
R

And Trump and his lackies were at the center of that coordination, because they were more than eager to get their help. "If it's what you say it is, I love it", by Don Jr. "Russia if you are listening" by Trump. And when they got caught, they lied about it. If that isn't where the focus should be, I can't imagine another better place to start? Can you?

Trump brought all this Russia attention on to himself when Flynn got caught trying to tell the Russians not to act on Obama's new sanctions, and an uncleared Kushner setting up back channels with Russia.

Or what abour Manafort and Gates passing off polling data to the Russian government. And I'm just getting started.

You want to push a pity party around for Trump? Hell no! He doesn't get one. He's the one paying off porn stars where other folks go to jail for, and he and Jr. are still walking around, using their "get out of free jail above the law card". Are you out of your mind here boss?

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[BWK]

Changing the narrative isn't much help for you. The NYT's is quoting the Mueller team. Have you heard them correct the NYT's? No! This is a cover up plain and simple. This will be the second time that Barr involves himself in a cover up to protect a president.

IF the NYT is actually quoting the "Mueller team", whoever that is. After all, they get a lot wrong.

The New York Times controversies - Wikipedia

If you're having to give us a history lesson about the NYT's, your losing this argument. The Barr summary has turned from weird in the beginning, to absurd today;

LOL! Again with the innuendo from Rachel (I KNOW Trump is guilty so I'll cry when Mueller clears him) Maddow? That's sad. If that's the best you have, you're not worth reading. One chance to avoid being on ignore...convince us with facts from a real source.

If we go by what Barr said, Mueller will never clear Trump based on Barr's own recollection of the report. You want real facts, I suggest you go back and read Barr quoting Mueller.

As for "ignore", knock yourself out chief. There's nothing more boring and aggravating than reading an unintelligent post, void of counter arguments.

And that is why I can't stand your stupid, unintelligent and dishonest postings. If you re-read the first sentence of your post, you'll see it makes no sense. So, I will enjoy the board without you.

Barr is the one who purposely took Mueller out of context, and now we find out just how bad it was, If that has another meaning for you, that's better for me. I know what I type, and I know what I interpret. And in the last few days, none of it is in Trump's favor. You, like so many, if not all, Trump Sheep on this board, have no real debate skin in this game. In other words, why do Republicans show up to begin with? They have nothing to bargain with.

 

[BWK]

That's the problem with Republicans. When the truth sneaks in on them, they're all asleep. Lol!

 

[Aletheia4u]

Okay super, so just put it over there with the rest of them.

View attachment 253919

 

[depotoo]

Visions of delusions dancing in their heads...

 

[lantern2814]

IF the NYT is actually quoting the "Mueller team", whoever that is. After all, they get a lot wrong.

The New York Times controversies - Wikipedia

If you're having to give us a history lesson about the NYT's, your losing this argument. The Barr summary has turned from weird in the beginning, to absurd today;

LOL! Again with the innuendo from Rachel (I KNOW Trump is guilty so I'll cry when Mueller clears him) Maddow? That's sad. If that's the best you have, you're not worth reading. One chance to avoid being on ignore...convince us with facts from a real source.

If we go by what Barr said, Mueller will never clear Trump based on Barr's own recollection of the report. You want real facts, I suggest you go back and read Barr quoting Mueller.

As for "ignore", knock yourself out chief. There's nothing more boring and aggravating than reading an unintelligent post, void of counter arguments.

And that is why I can't stand your stupid, unintelligent and dishonest postings. If you re-read the first sentence of your post, you'll see it makes no sense. So, I will enjoy the board without you.

Barr is the one who purposely took Mueller out of context, and now we find out just how bad it was, If that has another meaning for you, that's better for me. I know what I type, and I know what I interpret. And in the last few days, none of it is in Trump's favor. You, like so many, if not all, Trump Sheep on this board, have no real debate skin in this game. In other words, why do Republicans show up to begin with? They have nothing to bargain with.

Well little moron, you have NO quotes from anybody on Mueller's team for one. Third hand hearsay and you lap it up like the loyal unthinking sheep you are. So YOU have no facts, no hope, and no argument. Try an extra large dose of Dr. Trump's butthurt cream. Seems like you need it.

 

[Aletheia4u]

I can't wait for them to release Roger Stone's testimony to the public. I want to hear what he has to hide.

He initially fought for the testimony to be televised and public, though he ultimately agreed to a closed-door session.
LETTER: Roger Stone's Attorneys Demand Transcript Release | Roger Stone | Stone Cold Truth

Judge imposes full gag order on Roger Stone

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Could it be? Leaks from the Mueller team ANOTHER BOMBSHELL COMING!
※→ et al,

Don't get me wrong. I'm still waiting for a violation of a prohibited/criminal act under the US Code.

And Trump and his lackies were at the center of that coordination, because they were more than eager to get their help. "If it's what you say it is, I love it", by Don Jr. "Russia if you are listening" by Trump. And when they got caught, they lied about it. If that isn't where the focus should be, I can't imagine another better place to start? Can you?

Trump brought all this Russia attention on to himself when Flynn got caught trying to tell the Russians not to act on Obama's new sanctions, and an uncleared Kushner setting up back channels with Russia.

Or what abour Manafort and Gates passing off polling data to the Russian government. And I'm just getting started.

You want to push a pity party around for Trump? Hell no! He doesn't get one. He's the one paying off porn stars where other folks go to jail for, and he and Jr. are still walking around, using their "get out of free jail above the law card". Are you out of your mind here boss?

(COMMENt)

OK, I'll give you that wessle Mike Flynn. He was a dumb shit when he was the G-2 for Petraeus in Iraq, and he was much the same loser in the White House. By having said that, if he had come clean about his involvement (not make false official statements) I'm not sure that he broke any laws.

We now know what he did, and the question becomes, does it rise to a level of a specific violation? None of it is Espionage. None of it is Treason. Even if the Candidate for President Trump made a meeting with President Putin, what specific law does that break?

When I turned in my Badge and Credential (now some time ago) I instilled an examination of the Elements to an Offence. Nothing the President did "after" he took office is a security issue. The President is the original classification authority for all classified information. It can be TS-SI/TK/G/HCS and he can, with the stroke of a pen, declassify any information within the Executive Branch of Government. I've never seen a Congressional Classification authority, but as for the Judicial Branch - they can gain access to anything they need and they routinely classify FISA Warrants. But anything in the executive branch is the President's domain.

I would not be surprised that if you trace the original information that raised the issue, I would not be surprised if it came back to a foreign government as a Chaos/Havoc disruption operation.

The government has done more to damage the credibility of the government (Executive and Legislative) then if they had been working for a hostile foreign intelligence service.

I am waiting to see the charge sheets against the President and the ROIs that stipulate the evidence for a violation (or multiple violations) of some criminal statute.

I ask you → What is the charge (specifically) and what specific criminal code does it violate.

I am willing to be that the Special Counsel did not have the necessary evidence to take anything to Grand Jury pertaining to his mandate. And once Congress releases the report, the evidence will be out for everyone to see, tainting the entire population in the case.

But Director Mueller (Special Council) is no fool. With the exception of J Edgar himself, Robert Mueller served long as the Director than any other. If he did not make a recommendation for prosecution → he had a reason.

Let's see how it plays out before we form the gallows and Hang'em High.

Just my thoughts'

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MAGAman]

We shall see

This is like watching some really pathetic loser pine for a girlfriend who dumped him like two years ago. It just really sad.

Is it? Sounds more like a cover up for Trump. No wonder Barr made a decision before we see the report. If we see it at all.