Fact Checked

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Ok let’s try again, read this very slowly and try to comprehend ok???

Your little insults do nothing to build your case. Did you know that?

Attempts to obstruct do not need to be successful for laws to be broken. The attempt itself can be a crime per our laws. This isn’t partisan option, it’s just a fact

Yes. So just point out and document where Robert Mueller's 756 day investigation was blocked and thwarted. Show us all where Mueller couldn't hire who he liked, investigate what he wanted to investigate and couldn't get funding for his partisan jihad.

If he was obstructed surely you can point to an example where he was hindered in his holy quest by Donald Trump. Right?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Why has Trump declared war on are nation's national security employees, the DOJ and the FBI with the exception of his selection of the AG?

Kindly fuck off! You still owe me an explanation for your comment in post #3.
Don't think you can start up a new line of bullshit now.

 

[Olde Europe]

Here's my opinion. As Sect. of State HRC was strong in here dealings with Putin and the Russian efforts to reestablish what was the Soviet Union, Putin is following the ultra conservative strategy used by prior fascist leaders.

The evidence was clear, given the tit for tat closing missions in both nations and sending home the peace makers (diplomats) that the Obama Administration was strong and held Putin accountable.

I doubt anyone whose aware of the reality does not believe Russia impacted the election of 2016, and used agent provocateurs and biddable fools within our borders to further divide our divided nation.

It worked, and the primary source is in the threads and posts on this message board, and the pages of Face Book and other social media sites.

Odd isn't it, the demise of democracy in the United States might be blamed - in the final inquisition - on our First Amendment.

Where to begin... I agree that Putin tries to claw back some of the sphere of influence the Soviet Union possessed. If you think that he lets himself be distracted by a personal animosity toward Hillary, or that sending home a few diplomats amounts to holding Putin accountable, you are mistaken.

I agree as to the "agent provocateurs and biddable fools", but the primary issue is the Trump campaign eagerly seeking, and accepting, Putin's help to win a presidential election. That's another category entirely.

Most vigorously I disagree that the First Amendment would be the undoing of the U.S. democracy. Rather, it's the GOP's carefully nurtured "base", which lets its leaders get away with murder, and a subservient, spine- and honorless Congressional GOP playing along for political gains. If anything, the First Amendment, allowing to find the appropriate terms for what the GOP has become, and the danger it poses to the proper workings of the Republic, is the prerequisite tool to save what's left.

 

[Slade3200]

Ok let’s try again, read this very slowly and try to comprehend ok???

Your little insults do nothing to build your case. Did you know that?

Attempts to obstruct do not need to be successful for laws to be broken. The attempt itself can be a crime per our laws. This isn’t partisan option, it’s just a fact

Yes. So just point out and document where Robert Mueller's 756 day investigation was blocked and thwarted. Show us all where Mueller couldn't hire who he liked, investigate what he wanted to investigate and couldn't get funding for his partisan jihad.

If he was obstructed surely you can point to an example where he was hindered in his holy quest by Donald Trump. Right?

I’m not insulting you I’m just asking that you try harder to comprehend because you keep missing the point. The investigation does not need to be blocked or thwarted for an obstruction charge. There just needs to be credible intent which Mueller laid out several cases of.

I posted the legal definition of obstruction of justice. Give it a read, you don’t need to take my word on it.

 

[Olde Europe]

I’m not insulting you I’m just asking that you try harder to comprehend because you keep missing the point. The investigation does not need to be blocked or thwarted for an obstruction charge. There just needs to be credible intent which Mueller laid out several cases of.

I posted the legal definition of obstruction of justice. Give it a read, you don’t need to take my word on it.

Yeah, but... you know, there's the difficulty explaining things to a man whose subservience to the Dear Leader would not suffer understanding stuff. So, there you go...

 

[Dana7360]

Convincing or not?

What Mueller, Barr Say About Obstruction of Justice - FactCheck.org

Barr is acting shady and definitely covering for the president but I don’t think he is doing anything illegal. It is concerning that the spin was so bad about the report both from Barr and the President that Mueller felt compelled to give a press conference to clear it up. That’s rather pathetic for the Trump team.

All modern presidents have AGs that are in their corner though, that’s not a shocker.

Yes they do but not to the point that the AG misleads or lies to the public and congress.

Imagine if Janet Reno had done the same thing with the starr report as barr has done with the Mueller report.

Having an AG that's in your corner is one thing but what barr has been doing is something very different. It may not be illegal but it sure is unethical, immoral and down right wrong.

When is America going to stop allowing such people to be in our government?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why has Trump declared war on are nation's national security employees, the DOJ and the FBI with the exception of his selection of the AG?

Kindly fuck off! You still owe me an explanation for your comment in post #3.
Don't think you can start up a new line of bullshit now.

Not that you deserve, or I'm obligated to do your homework, in the interests of other readers*, the following two links are provided.

The first is the entire "resume", the second a blown up and readable first page of the Resume. I'm sure there is somewhere on the Internet any easy to read copy, but I'm not inclined to respond to EAB's loaded questions, kindly or otherwise.

Document: William Barr Memo on Obstruction Investigation

https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/97d08tmqbk6p7gea/images/1-e2f41ba881.jpg


*readers seeking the truth.

 

[Olde Europe]

Barr is acting shady and definitely covering for the president but I don’t think he is doing anything illegal. It is concerning that the spin was so bad about the report both from Barr and the President that Mueller felt compelled to give a press conference to clear it up. That’s rather pathetic for the Trump team.

All modern presidents have AGs that are in their corner though, that’s not a shocker.

Yes they do but not to the point that the AG misleads or lies to the public and congress.

Imagine if Janet Reno had done the same thing with the starr report as barr has done with the Mueller report.

Having an AG that's in your corner is one thing but what barr has been doing is something very different. It may not be illegal but it sure is unethical, immoral and down right wrong.

When is America going to stop allowing such people to be in our government?

Yeah, our Trumpletons are equating an AG in line with a president's legislative agenda with one aligned with a president's criminality. And they think that's clever.

Well... from their vantage point it probably is.

 

[Slade3200]

Convincing or not?

What Mueller, Barr Say About Obstruction of Justice - FactCheck.org

Barr is acting shady and definitely covering for the president but I don’t think he is doing anything illegal. It is concerning that the spin was so bad about the report both from Barr and the President that Mueller felt compelled to give a press conference to clear it up. That’s rather pathetic for the Trump team.

All modern presidents have AGs that are in their corner though, that’s not a shocker.

Yes they do but not to the point that the AG misleads or lies to the public and congress.

Imagine if Janet Reno had done the same thing with the starr report as barr has done with the Mueller report.

Having an AG that's in your corner is one thing but what barr has been doing is something very different. It may not be illegal but it sure is unethical, immoral and down right wrong.

When is America going to stop allowing such people to be in our government?

I don’t like it either but when you elect a guy like trump and celebrate partisanship and division then that’s what you’re gonna get

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here's my opinion. As Sect. of State HRC was strong in here dealings with Putin and the Russian efforts to reestablish what was the Soviet Union, Putin is following the ultra conservative strategy used by prior fascist leaders.

The evidence was clear, given the tit for tat closing missions in both nations and sending home the peace makers (diplomats) that the Obama Administration was strong and held Putin accountable.

I doubt anyone whose aware of the reality does not believe Russia impacted the election of 2016, and used agent provocateurs and biddable fools within our borders to further divide our divided nation.

It worked, and the primary source is in the threads and posts on this message board, and the pages of Face Book and other social media sites.

Odd isn't it, the demise of democracy in the United States might be blamed - in the final inquisition - on our First Amendment.

Where to begin... I agree that Putin tries to claw back some of the sphere of influence the Soviet Union possessed. If you think that he lets himself be distracted by a personal animosity toward Hillary, or that sending home a few diplomats amounts to holding Putin accountable, you are mistaken.

I agree as to the "agent provocateurs and biddable fools", but the primary issue is the Trump campaign eagerly seeking, and accepting, Putin's help to win a presidential election. That's another category entirely.

Most vigorously I disagree that the First Amendment would be the undoing of the U.S. democracy. Rather, it's the GOP's carefully nurtured "base", which lets its leaders get away with murder, and a subservient, spine- and honorless Congressional GOP playing along for political gains. If anything, the First Amendment, allowing to find the appropriate terms for what the GOP has become, and the danger it poses to the proper workings of the Republic, is the prerequisite tool to save what's left.

Thanks for a substantive and thoughtful post.

[P1] Statement:

"If you think that he lets himself be distracted by a personal animosity toward Hillary, or that sending home a few diplomats amounts to holding Putin accountable, you are mistaken.

Response: I don't think that. What I think is Putin supported Trump; because he knew she was a powerful adversary and Trump was a useful idiot.

In my statement: "Odd isn't it, the demise of democracy in the United States might be blamed - in the final inquisition - on our First Amendment."

The limits imposed in the 1st A., i.e. "Congress shall make no law ...abridging the freedom of speech",allows for calumny and the SC's decision that money became defacto speech.

Social media, and sadly members of Congress, have no fear of culpability when attacking the character of a public figure, as do those who post on message boards anonymously.

If the FCC can impose fines and suspensions for using the word "fuck" and other unsavory words. isn't it time to do the same to punish damn liars?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Not that you deserve, or I'm obligated to do your homework, in the interests of other readers*, the following two links are provided.

The first is the entire "resume", the second a blown up and readable first page of the Resume. I'm sure there is somewhere on the Internet any easy to read copy, but I'm not inclined to respond to EAB's loaded questions, kindly or otherwise.

Document: William Barr Memo on Obstruction Investigation

https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/97d08tmqbk6p7gea/images/1-e2f41ba881.jpg


*readers seeking the truth.

You've done this several times now.
Why not just post this "resume" you refer to but will not post? The one where Barr says he will be Trump's "wing man", according to you. Or just keep tap dancing around the matter and go on ignore instead.
After all your chances I think it's just easier to place you on ignore. Poof! You are ignored.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yes he also lied to congress and is also in contempt of congress. Also he is not judge and jury and misrepresented the Mueller report on national TV.

Oh, and what did he lie about, Ahmed?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Convincing or not?

What Mueller, Barr Say About Obstruction of Justice - FactCheck.org

Explain and justify your response.

I believe you are a butthurt little fuck who failed in the coup you were so desperate to stage.

Time for you traitors to start going to prison.

Inspector general recommends criminal investigation of Andrew McCabe

 

[Penelope]

Yes he also lied to congress and is also in contempt of congress. Also he is not judge and jury and misrepresented the Mueller report on national TV.

Oh, and what did he lie about, Ahmed?

Mueller based his report on the OLC decision in 2000.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yes he also lied to congress and is also in contempt of congress. Also he is not judge and jury and misrepresented the Mueller report on national TV.

Oh, and what did he lie about, Ahmed?

Mueller based his report on the OLC decision in 2000.

What?

Look, you're just an ignorant Hamas terrorist - you're as dumb as the camels Arab men lust after.

But IF you dumb piles of shit want to accuse the AG of lying, you need to post EXACTLY what the AG said, and how it was an intent to deceive and is false.

Seriously, you may be dumber than Wry Catcher

 

[Dana7360]

But now, with the indisputable evidence against Trump, Democrats are boxed in now to perform a Constitutional duty. I'm still not convinced they will go through with it, seeing that the Senate won't move on it? But, I don't really see it as a choice either for them. Democrats are caught between two bad things for them politically too. They have no good political options, but the best one, to show they are doing a Constitutionally bounded function, is to proceed.

Sit back and watch. Assuming she won't be thwarted by her own caucus, you're going to see the best strategist in Washington perform her Constitutional duties, and outwit and outmaneuver the White House on top of it. It's going to be a blast.

Do you understand this is our nation? This isn't a game. This is very serious.

Personally, I don't want a president who was elected under the circumstances this one was elected. I don't want a president who undermines our institutions and standing in this world. I don't want a president who tells the world he believes putin over our many intelligence agencies. I so don't want a president who is a puppet for any foreign nation much less russia. I don't want a president who uses the office for his own personal gain so blatantly. I don't want a president who lies through his teeth just about every time he opens his mouth.

However I'm a realist. The reality is that the House can impeach him all day long. It means nearly nothing. The Senate will never vote guilty no matter what evidence is presented. trump will scream he's innocent of everything and it will become even more a circus and our nation will become more divided.

I believe in democracy. I believe in the vote of the people. There will be an election in a year in and a half. I want the people to throw his ugly butt out of office. I want the voice of our vote to get him out of office. That way he doesn't get any martyr status and a president pence can't pardon him or anyone involved with or related to trump who has committed crimes.

I want to see the truth be told to the American people and I want the American people to speak with our voices.

This isn't something that is going to be a blast. It's going to be very, very ugly and do nothing but harm and divide our nation more.

 

[Penelope]

Yes he also lied to congress and is also in contempt of congress. Also he is not judge and jury and misrepresented the Mueller report on national TV.

Oh, and what did he lie about, Ahmed?

Mueller based his report on the OLC decision in 2000.

What?

Look, you're just an ignorant Hamas terrorist - you're as dumb as the camels Arab men lust after.

But IF you dumb piles of shit want to accuse the AG of lying, you need to post EXACTLY what the AG said, and how it was an intent to deceive and is false.

Seriously, you may be dumber than Wry Catcher

Look it up, you have google.

 

[Olde Europe]

In my statement: "Odd isn't it, the demise of democracy in the United States might be blamed - in the final inquisition - on our First Amendment."

The limits imposed in the 1st A., i.e. "Congress shall make no law ...abridging the freedom of speech",allows for calumny and the SC's decision that money became defacto speech.

Social media, and sadly members of Congress, have no fear of culpability when attacking the character of a public figure, as do those who post on message boards anonymously.

If the FCC can impose fines and suspensions for using the word "fuck" and other unsavory words. isn't it time to do the same to punish damn liars?

I see your point - saw it before, actually. I am convinced, though, that the appropriate counter to obnoxious speech is better speech, not forbidding speech you (we) don't like. Remember, too, that forbidding their speech opens up an avenue for them to forbid speech they don't like. I would guess, you won't like what they come up with. I agree, free speech can be a calumny, but it doesn't begin to compare to handing government the power generally to regulate speech.

Look, democracy is adversarial, at times messy, and certainly not a comfortable experience. Attacking the character of an obnoxious public figure is part of that, and lies about public figures shall be exposed for what they are. Again, we see what they are trying to do to Mueller. Mueller can take it. What I don't see is folks with some decency standing up for him in huge numbers. That's the really disheartening thing about this, not the attacks on Mueller, and not even those gullible enough to run with the slander.

Also, I am convinced that the Supreme Court ruling equating money with speech will one day be regarded as one of the most egregious aberrations of Constitutional jurisprudence. The counter to that is, again, better speech, better arguments to prove that handing over money wasn't meant to be covered by the First Amendment, and to reverse that ruling and destroy the legacy this ruling produced.

Finally, the FCC regulates the transmission of speech. That matter is loosely related to freedom of speech, but most assuredly not equivalent. No conclusion should be drawn from fines regarding the First Amendment.

 

[BWK]

Do you believe AG Barr is obstructing justice?

No

Would you if I offered you a banana?

How is Barr obstructing justice?

'First of all I believe and stated so above that Barr used a policy, not a law, not even a regulation, to decide a sitting president cannot be indicted for a crime.

An Attorney General, the highest law enforcement officer in our country has decided that the POTUS is above the law.

Now, consider this, an Investigation is the process to determine if a) a crime was committed; and b) who committed it.

Mueller's one page assignment,

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3726408/Rosenstein-letter-appointing-Mueller-special.pdf

"APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS"

is detailed in the link above.

I agree, policy is not law. Which begs the question. Why didn't Mueller prosecute? Does he think POTUS is above the law?

Also detailed in the link;

(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is
authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.

He didn't want it to be political, which is why he handed it off to Congress.

 

[Olde Europe]

Do you understand this is our nation? This isn't a game. This is very serious.

Personally, I don't want a president who was elected under the circumstances this one was elected. I don't want a president who undermines our institutions and standing in this world. I don't want a president who tells the world he believes putin over our many intelligence agencies. I so don't want a president who is a puppet for any foreign nation much less russia. I don't want a president who uses the office for his own personal gain so blatantly. I don't want a president who lies through his teeth just about every time he opens his mouth.

However I'm a realist. The reality is that the House can impeach him all day long. It means nearly nothing. The Senate will never vote guilty no matter what evidence is presented. trump will scream he's innocent of everything and it will become even more a circus and our nation will become more divided.

I believe in democracy. I believe in the vote of the people. There will be an election in a year in and a half. I want the people to throw his ugly butt out of office. I want the voice of our vote to get him out of office. That way he doesn't get any martyr status and a president pence can't pardon him or anyone involved with or related to trump who has committed crimes.

I want to see the truth be told to the American people and I want the American people to speak with our voices.

This isn't something that is going to be a blast. It's going to be very, very ugly and do nothing but harm and divide our nation more.

I agree with pretty much everything stated above. I agree, in particular, that calling for impeachment hastily, without proper preparation, without a widely understood cause, will be "very, very ugly and do nothing but harm and divide our nation more."

Still, I am confident Pelosi will perform her duties as the Speaker of the House with skill, dignity, and with her sights firmly on the right objective and timing. Watching her will be a blast. What the GOP caucus and the rightarded blabbosphere will make of it, not so much.