Nadler could have read the unredacted report and chose not to.

[Siete]

With that said, this breaking the law line is BS.

Negative.

1. Grand Jury Information can NOT be legally released.

2. Comey's own team helped / participated in the redaction of the report.
-- If you are going to accuse Barr of engaging in a cover-up by redacting information then you are simultaneously accusing Mueller's own team of engaging in that same cover-up.

3. READ THE LAW. Congress wrote it. If they wanted to they could have already changed the law, making it legal for the US AG to release the entire report. Instead, they have neither made any attempt to read the less redacted version nor made any effort to change their law to allow it to be released.

It's all political theater.

Appeals court affirms judges can release secret grand jury records

By JOSH GERSTEIN


02/11/2019 06:49 PM EST

An Atlanta-based federal appeals court, acting in the case of a 75-year-old Georgia lynching, has reaffirmed the rights of federal judges to release grand jury records that are typically kept secret.

The decision Monday from a split 11th Circuit panel came in one of a pair of cases that legal experts are closely watching for a potential impact on the Justice Department’s latitude to make public the results of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

An 11th Circuit ruling is unlikely to serve as a binding precedent for any aspect of Mueller’s D.C.-based inquiry, but backers of the investigation have been eager for courts to signal that grand jury materials can be released in extraordinary cases and that the list of explicit exceptions in federal court rules is not all-inclusive.

 

[basquebromance]

for most Americans, Mueller was the final word, not Fat Jerry Nadler!

 

[easyt65]

With that said, this breaking the law line is BS.

Negative.

1. Grand Jury Information can NOT be legally released.

2. Comey's own team helped / participated in the redaction of the report.
-- If you are going to accuse Barr of engaging in a cover-up by redacting information then you are simultaneously accusing Mueller's own team of engaging in that same cover-up.

3. READ THE LAW. Congress wrote it. If they wanted to they could have already changed the law, making it legal for the US AG to release the entire report. Instead, they have neither made any attempt to read the less redacted version nor made any effort to change their law to allow it to be released.

It's all political theater.

Appeals court affirms judges can release secret grand jury records

By JOSH GERSTEIN


02/11/2019 06:49 PM EST

An Atlanta-based federal appeals court, acting in the case of a 75-year-old Georgia lynching, has reaffirmed the rights of federal judges to release grand jury records that are typically kept secret.

The decision Monday from a split 11th Circuit panel came in one of a pair of cases that legal experts are closely watching for a potential impact on the Justice Department’s latitude to make public the results of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

An 11th Circuit ruling is unlikely to serve as a binding precedent for any aspect of Mueller’s D.C.-based inquiry, but backers of the investigation have been eager for courts to signal that grand jury materials can be released in extraordinary cases and that the list of explicit exceptions in federal court rules is not all-inclusive.

1 court rules that the proven treasonous Dems can call for the release of Grand Jury information...

Sorry, not impressed. Sadly, such rulings in such a political environment these days almost mean nothing...and the Democrats are to blame for that.

By that I mean that the Democrats have destroyed many Americans' faith in the Legal System, in government itself. For example, overwhelming evidence has already proved that Hillary Clinton broke laws, should have been indicted, and should be in jail right now. Comey's ludicrous criminally political public declaration that US laws did not apply to Hillary Clinton because she was too stupid to know she was committing those crimes was like a stake through the heart of the American Justice system and the belief that that equal justice exists in this country.

The facts remain:

No crime warranting an investigation or appointment of a Special Counsel ever existed.

No indictment or conviction for collusion or obstruction was ever made.

Mueller and his team FAILED TO PROVE GUILT.

There is no justification for releasing the Grand Jury information that the Mueller team helped redact.

Evidence has been exposed proving the entire investigation was a failed coup attempt perpetrated by the Obama administration, which is why the Democrats are desperately attempting to continue the coup attempt and trying to oust Barr before his and the US IG's reports come out.

 

[Slade3200]

Didn’t Fox have to apologize for Hannitys pushing of that fake story after Seth’s family asked him to cut it out?! Holy shit and you call that truth?! Wow

That's a cover-up. Their family settled for an undisclosed amount ( my guess upward of $20 million )
That's enough to turn people when their only option is to be ruined
by individuals who 'don't take no for an answer', we'll just say.

You fit the definition of brainwashed

 

[LaDairis]

You fit the definition of brainwashed

Sincerely,

the HILLARY CULT

 

[Slade3200]

1. Under U.S. law, grand jury testimony generally must be kept secret. But if a grand jury matter involves "grave hostile acts of a foreign power" or other intelligence information, the information can be shared with appropriate government officials.

2. The law also lets a judge release grand jury information when strong public interest is at stake.

1. Overwhelming evidence - to include the Mueller report - has proven that no such grave hostile act by a foreign power involving the President of the United States EVER occurred. By your own statement you admit there is no justification for releasing the Grand jury information. In fact your statement supports the continuing fact that to release that information would be a crime.

No evidence of criminal collusion warranting an investigation.
No evidence of criminal collusion warranting the appointment of a Spcl Counsel.
No evidence of Trump / Trump Team collusion.
No indictment of Trump / Trump Team members for collusion.
No conviction of Trump / Trump Team members for collusion.
No finding of Obstruction.
No indictment for obstruction.
No conviction for Obstruction.
Overwhelming evidence the investigation was a failed coup attempt perpetrated by the Obama administration, begun criminally intentionally.

2. There is no 'strong public interest' in continuing this exposed coup. There is only biased treasonous Democrat interest in continuing this attempt to oust / undermine the elected President of the United States.

While I’m personally all for ending this thing I still have to call out your BS. The report evidenced many cases of indictable obstruction which Mueller did not rule on. Barr’s assessment doesn’t seem to be objective so Congress is doing their thing which is their power to impeach. I think that’s a mistake but it is their right. So yes there is evidence of obstruction and if done by our POTUS that can be perceived as a threat to the USA and can be the grounds in which they impeach. It’s all right there whether you agree with it or not.

 

[easyt65]

While I’m personally all for ending this thing I still have to call out your BS. The report evidenced many cases of indictable obstruction which Mueller did not rule on.

You continue to lie.

It was the Democrats', Obama's, and Mueller's investigation.

Provide the links to the reports / news reports / indictments / convictions of President Trump, any of his family members, any of his team members, or any of his associates for 'Obstruction' and / or 'Obstruction'.

The FACT is you CAN'T!

Mueller and his team failed to prove guilt.

There is no evidence of Russian collusion or obstruction involving anyone connected to Trump, which is clearly stated in Mueller's report, no matter how much you want to 'read-into' / project into the report, as proven by the fact that there was no indictment / conviction for such crimes.

What do you NOT understand about 'no obstruction / no collusion' indictments / convictions?

You say there were - provide the links and the specific charges and sentences.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Trump hasnt read it -

Neither has Nadler, the whiney ass fat bitch.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

View attachment 260074

More like:

View attachment 260091

View attachment 260074

More like:

View attachment 260091

Barrack Hussain Obama?

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Only the dumb liberal crackpots are buying Nadlers corrupt political games

 

[Leo123]

While I’m personally all for ending this thing I still have to call out your BS. The report evidenced many cases of indictable obstruction which Mueller did not rule on. Barr’s assessment doesn’t seem to be objective so Congress is doing their thing which is their power to impeach. I think that’s a mistake but it is their right. So yes there is evidence of obstruction and if done by our POTUS that can be perceived as a threat to the USA and can be the grounds in which they impeach. It’s all right there whether you agree with it or not.

So...Why then hasn't Nadler read it? It is available for members of congress to read. Nadler should READ it and then let you know all the 'indictable' cases of obstruction yet he doesn't....Do you ever ask yourself why?

 

[the other mike]

for most Americans, Mueller was the final word, not Fat Jerry Nadler!

Mueller had the final word on the Trump investigation.
And now that the ignorant leaders of the Democratic party have slandered Barr and insulted him, he's going to thoroughly enjoy investigating the real criminals who started all this.

 

[kwc57]

As Lindsay Graham stated a couple weeks ago, the Senate Judiciary has the unredacted report. Anyone with clearance, including Chairman Nadler in the House, can go in the classified area and read it. So why hasn't he ?

For the Democrats to continue with this obvious charade they appear to be sabotaging their chances of winning any 2020 elections, especially defeating Trump. His poll numbers are inching up the more it goes on. Americans are quickly waking up to the things going on and as usual, the Democrats probably won't catch on until the next election cycle.

Collins blasts contempt vote as 'desperate' move to discredit Barr.
Ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. Doug Collins hits back at House Democrats' response to the Mueller report and says he does not believe Mueller will testify on the findings.

Sure he could. Only he couldn't talk about it to anybody nor was he allowed to take notes. So what exactly was he supposed to do after he read it?

He can stand down satisfied in the knowledge that there is no there there.

 

[forkup]

As Lindsay Graham stated a couple weeks ago, the Senate Judiciary has the unredacted report. Anyone with clearance, including Chairman Nadler in the House, can go in the classified area and read it. So why hasn't he ?

For the Democrats to continue with this obvious charade they appear to be sabotaging their chances of winning any 2020 elections, especially defeating Trump. His poll numbers are inching up the more it goes on. Americans are quickly waking up to the things going on and as usual, the Democrats probably won't catch on until the next election cycle.

Collins blasts contempt vote as 'desperate' move to discredit Barr.
Ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. Doug Collins hits back at House Democrats' response to the Mueller report and says he does not believe Mueller will testify on the findings.

Sure he could. Only he couldn't talk about it to anybody nor was he allowed to take notes. So what exactly was he supposed to do after he read it?

He can stand down satisfied in the knowledge that there is no there there.

And what if there is a there there? He conceded that he couldn't talk about it. Where does he go from there?

 

[forkup]

While I’m personally all for ending this thing I still have to call out your BS. The report evidenced many cases of indictable obstruction which Mueller did not rule on. Barr’s assessment doesn’t seem to be objective so Congress is doing their thing which is their power to impeach. I think that’s a mistake but it is their right. So yes there is evidence of obstruction and if done by our POTUS that can be perceived as a threat to the USA and can be the grounds in which they impeach. It’s all right there whether you agree with it or not.

So...Why then hasn't Nadler read it? It is available for members of congress to read. Nadler should READ it and then let you know all the 'indictable' cases of obstruction yet he doesn't....Do you ever ask yourself why?

Again. He and a FEW others can read it on the condition that they don't discuss it.

 

[Leo123]

While I’m personally all for ending this thing I still have to call out your BS. The report evidenced many cases of indictable obstruction which Mueller did not rule on. Barr’s assessment doesn’t seem to be objective so Congress is doing their thing which is their power to impeach. I think that’s a mistake but it is their right. So yes there is evidence of obstruction and if done by our POTUS that can be perceived as a threat to the USA and can be the grounds in which they impeach. It’s all right there whether you agree with it or not.

So...Why then hasn't Nadler read it? It is available for members of congress to read. Nadler should READ it and then let you know all the 'indictable' cases of obstruction yet he doesn't....Do you ever ask yourself why?

Again. He and a FEW others can read it on the condition that they don't discuss it.

Again, he hasn't even READ it!!

 

[Siete]

Trumps handlers wont allow him to read the report. They know damn well he will Twitter-leak something at 3am in the morning.

Trump claims he hasn't read Mueller report "though I have every right to do so"

 

[forkup]

While I’m personally all for ending this thing I still have to call out your BS. The report evidenced many cases of indictable obstruction which Mueller did not rule on. Barr’s assessment doesn’t seem to be objective so Congress is doing their thing which is their power to impeach. I think that’s a mistake but it is their right. So yes there is evidence of obstruction and if done by our POTUS that can be perceived as a threat to the USA and can be the grounds in which they impeach. It’s all right there whether you agree with it or not.

So...Why then hasn't Nadler read it? It is available for members of congress to read. Nadler should READ it and then let you know all the 'indictable' cases of obstruction yet he doesn't....Do you ever ask yourself why?

Again. He and a FEW others can read it on the condition that they don't discuss it.

Again, he hasn't even READ it!!

Again, if he reads it and he establishes wrongdoing he CAN NOT discuss it without breaking the agreement that he made to see the material in the first place. This would severely weaken his position to pursue this wrongdoing, because I suspect you and most members of the GOP would slam him for breaking his word if he tried.

 

[forkup]

While I’m personally all for ending this thing I still have to call out your BS. The report evidenced many cases of indictable obstruction which Mueller did not rule on. Barr’s assessment doesn’t seem to be objective so Congress is doing their thing which is their power to impeach. I think that’s a mistake but it is their right. So yes there is evidence of obstruction and if done by our POTUS that can be perceived as a threat to the USA and can be the grounds in which they impeach. It’s all right there whether you agree with it or not.

So...Why then hasn't Nadler read it? It is available for members of congress to read. Nadler should READ it and then let you know all the 'indictable' cases of obstruction yet he doesn't....Do you ever ask yourself why?

Again. He and a FEW others can read it on the condition that they don't discuss it.

Again, he hasn't even READ it!!

Again, if he reads it and he establishes wrongdoing he CAN NOT discuss it without breaking the agreement that he made to see the material in the first place. This would severely weaken his position to pursue this wrongdoing, because I suspect you and most members of the GOP would slam him for breaking his word.

It's kind of like when Nixon agreed to allow one member of congress to listen to his tapes.... The one member that was deaf.

 

[Lakhota]

Nadler could have read the unredacted report and chose not to.

Not true! Barr is only offering a LESS redacted report. Nadler wants the ENTIRE report along with the hundreds or thousands of pages of supporting documents and evidence.