One more great pick by Trump

[bripat9643]

Republicans can't face the truth that Barr is scum cut in the Trump mold They both deserve the same fate

Barr released a summary of the Mueller report before its public release that mischaracterized the report’s findings in a manner that helped Trump. Mueller complained to Barr that his summary “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s full report, but the report shaped public opinion on the findings of the Mueller investigation for weeks.

Walton also criticized Barr for holding a press conference ahead of the report’s release last April, saying he could not “reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings” of the Mueller report:

The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary

So what? Deciding how the public should interpret Mueller's report is none of the judge's business.

And Barr proved what a trump toady he is The best I can say about him is he's FOS

Liberal Dictionary:
=======================================================
Trump toady - anyone who doesn't believe Trump is a criminal.

 

[HappyJoy]

What's your point, Edie? You don't like Trump? You have TDS....bad?
You're actually a fence sitter when it comes to Trump?

truth be told Mr Meister I despise the ground that human poc walks on and those surrounding him too My problem lies in the fact that if Sanders wins my financial well being is going down hill That's why I've said I'll only vote for Biden whom I think is twice the human being than that slug Trump

Trump lets you know who he is....take it or leave it type of attitude.
Biden hides who he is, you'll get a smile and wink right before he slices your throat.

Hides his tax returns, hides documents, phone transcripts and keeps member of his administration from testifying.

He also hid the motive for Trump U, the purpose for his 'charity' and paid off at least two people from disclosing his affairs.

But you believed him when he told you Mexico was going to pay for the wall. Yeah, you don't know who he is.

 

[bripat9643]

give it about 10 minutes and all the Trumpians will be in here attacking the judge as if he is satan himself.

Why is anyone surprised, that is an establishment judge. The Bush family hates Trump.

so do over 60 million americans

Can you imagine the collective caterwauling, moaning, gnashing of teeth, and tears this coming November when Trump wins again?

That's 60 million people collectively loosing their bowels and wailing in unison. Gallons and gallons of beautiful salty tears flowing into the street of every city in this country.

The Schadenfreude will be awesome and the best part? We get four more years to laugh at all the stupid "I Hate Trump" threads on USMB.

You should start a gofundme, tubby. In about a year you can buy one of those for yourself.

Every time you make cracks like that I know that I've scored a direct hit.

 

[HappyJoy]

Republicans can't face the truth that Barr is scum cut in the Trump mold They both deserve the same fate

Barr released a summary of the Mueller report before its public release that mischaracterized the report’s findings in a manner that helped Trump. Mueller complained to Barr that his summary “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s full report, but the report shaped public opinion on the findings of the Mueller investigation for weeks.

Walton also criticized Barr for holding a press conference ahead of the report’s release last April, saying he could not “reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings” of the Mueller report:

The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary

So what? Deciding how the public should interpret Mueller's report is none of the judge's business.

How so?

A judge's job is to interpret the law. It's not to decide whether speeches are correct.

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

 

[HappyJoy]

Why is anyone surprised, that is an establishment judge. The Bush family hates Trump.

so do over 60 million americans

Can you imagine the collective caterwauling, moaning, gnashing of teeth, and tears this coming November when Trump wins again?

That's 60 million people collectively loosing their bowels and wailing in unison. Gallons and gallons of beautiful salty tears flowing into the street of every city in this country.

The Schadenfreude will be awesome and the best part? We get four more years to laugh at all the stupid "I Hate Trump" threads on USMB.

You should start a gofundme, tubby. In about a year you can buy one of those for yourself.

Every time you make cracks like that I know that I've scored a direct hit.

You posted an image of a coffee cup, I'm mocking your effort, tubby.

You probably spend your days watching Brazzers and playing video games on Steam in your parents basement.

 

[bripat9643]

Republicans can't face the truth that Barr is scum cut in the Trump mold They both deserve the same fate

Barr released a summary of the Mueller report before its public release that mischaracterized the report’s findings in a manner that helped Trump. Mueller complained to Barr that his summary “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s full report, but the report shaped public opinion on the findings of the Mueller investigation for weeks.

Walton also criticized Barr for holding a press conference ahead of the report’s release last April, saying he could not “reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings” of the Mueller report:

The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary

So what? Deciding how the public should interpret Mueller's report is none of the judge's business.

How so?

A judge's job is to interpret the law. It's not to decide whether speeches are correct.

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

 

[bripat9643]

so do over 60 million americans

Can you imagine the collective caterwauling, moaning, gnashing of teeth, and tears this coming November when Trump wins again?

That's 60 million people collectively loosing their bowels and wailing in unison. Gallons and gallons of beautiful salty tears flowing into the street of every city in this country.

The Schadenfreude will be awesome and the best part? We get four more years to laugh at all the stupid "I Hate Trump" threads on USMB.

You should start a gofundme, tubby. In about a year you can buy one of those for yourself.

Every time you make cracks like that I know that I've scored a direct hit.

You posted an image of a coffee cup, I'm mocking your effort, tubby.

You probably spend your days watching Brazzers and playing video games on Steam in your parents basement.

You obviously have no facts or logic to support your idiotic opinions.

 

[BlindBoo]

Considering how Barr Deep Six'ed the Iran-Contra findings for Ray-Gun, Bush and accomplices, how the fuck is anyone surprised that he is a "Toady for Trumpybear".

 

[bripat9643]

Considering how Barr Deep Six'ed the Iran-Contra findings for Ray-Gun, Bush and accomplices, how the fuck is anyone surprised that he is a "Toady for Trumpybear".

Democrats Praised William Barr Before Donald Trump Nominated Him | People's Pundit Daily

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., then-chairman of the House Crime and Criminal Justice Subcommittee, also praised the man his members now want to back into a corner.

“Mr. Barr has proven to be a capable deputy attorney general. He did a good job of helping run the department in troubled times.”

Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., still a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, not only praised Mr. Barr but said he would be “an independent voice for all Americans – not just the President.”​

 

[HappyJoy]

Republicans can't face the truth that Barr is scum cut in the Trump mold They both deserve the same fate

Barr released a summary of the Mueller report before its public release that mischaracterized the report’s findings in a manner that helped Trump. Mueller complained to Barr that his summary “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s full report, but the report shaped public opinion on the findings of the Mueller investigation for weeks.

Walton also criticized Barr for holding a press conference ahead of the report’s release last April, saying he could not “reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings” of the Mueller report:

The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary

So what? Deciding how the public should interpret Mueller's report is none of the judge's business.

How so?

A judge's job is to interpret the law. It's not to decide whether speeches are correct.

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

A judge could release documents themselves. Or as this one is doing is communicating how Barr fucked up, the message is loud and clear.

 

[HappyJoy]

Can you imagine the collective caterwauling, moaning, gnashing of teeth, and tears this coming November when Trump wins again?

That's 60 million people collectively loosing their bowels and wailing in unison. Gallons and gallons of beautiful salty tears flowing into the street of every city in this country.

The Schadenfreude will be awesome and the best part? We get four more years to laugh at all the stupid "I Hate Trump" threads on USMB.

You should start a gofundme, tubby. In about a year you can buy one of those for yourself.

Every time you make cracks like that I know that I've scored a direct hit.

You posted an image of a coffee cup, I'm mocking your effort, tubby.

You probably spend your days watching Brazzers and playing video games on Steam in your parents basement.

You obviously have no facts or logic to support your idiotic opinions.

You have a picture of a coffee mug and a Brazzers account, don't ya' Bri?

 

[bripat9643]

So what? Deciding how the public should interpret Mueller's report is none of the judge's business.

How so?

A judge's job is to interpret the law. It's not to decide whether speeches are correct.

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

A judge could release documents themselves. Or as this one is doing is communicating how Barr fucked up, the message is loud and clear.

The judge cannot release a document under the purview of the DOJ.

Anyone is free to "communicate" his opinion of Barr. The judge's opinion has no more legal force than my opinion.

 

[HappyJoy]

How so?

A judge's job is to interpret the law. It's not to decide whether speeches are correct.

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

A judge could release documents themselves. Or as this one is doing is communicating how Barr fucked up, the message is loud and clear.

The judge cannot release a document under the purview of the DOJ.

Anyone is free to "communicate" his opinion of Barr. The judge's opinion has no more legal force than my opinion.

This is a FOIA case, so yeah the judge could rule that more of the Mueller report be released.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Considering how Barr Deep Six'ed the Iran-Contra findings for Ray-Gun, Bush and accomplices, how the fuck is anyone surprised that he is a "Toady for Trumpybear".

Look at you......bringing back the Ray-gun thingy. How retro.....and pathetic.

 

[bripat9643]

A judge's job is to interpret the law. It's not to decide whether speeches are correct.

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

A judge could release documents themselves. Or as this one is doing is communicating how Barr fucked up, the message is loud and clear.

The judge cannot release a document under the purview of the DOJ.

Anyone is free to "communicate" his opinion of Barr. The judge's opinion has no more legal force than my opinion.

This is a FOIA case, so yeah the judge could rule that more of the Mueller report be released.

He could, but Barr will appeal it and win.

 

[BlindBoo]

Considering how Barr Deep Six'ed the Iran-Contra findings for Ray-Gun, Bush and accomplices, how the fuck is anyone surprised that he is a "Toady for Trumpybear".

Democrats Praised William Barr Before Donald Trump Nominated Him | People's Pundit Daily

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., then-chairman of the House Crime and Criminal Justice Subcommittee, also praised the man his members now want to back into a corner.

“Mr. Barr has proven to be a capable deputy attorney general. He did a good job of helping run the department in troubled times.”

Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., still a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, not only praised Mr. Barr but said he would be “an independent voice for all Americans – not just the President.”​

Let me see how does that quote go. "Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

William Barr’s been accused of a presidential cover-up before

WASHINGTON — Weeks before former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger’s criminal trial over his role in the 1980’s Iran-Contra scandal, then-Attorney General William Barr dropped a bomb on the prosecution.

“People in the Iran-Contra affair have been treated very unfairly,” Barr told USA Today in December 1992, blasting the charges as illegitimate. “People in this Iran-Contra matter have been prosecuted for the kind of conduct that would not have been considered criminal or prosecutable by the Justice Department.”

Weinberger faced charges of lying to Congress, brought by a special prosecutor, then known as an “independent counsel,” who accused him of withholding 1,700 pages of notes about high-level meetings that allegedly held “evidence of a conspiracy.”

Barr’s broadside alarmed the lead prosecutor handling the case against Weinberger, James J. Brosnahan, who warned the judge that Barr may have just unduly biased his jury pool. Later that month, when the White House pardoned six top Iran-Contra defendants on Christmas Eve 1992 at Barr’s urging, Brosnahan believed he’d just witnessed the completion of a successful cover-up.

Three decades on, Brosnahan fears Barr has returned to his old job to run the same scheme again.

“If you want a presidential cover-up, Barr is your guy,” Brosnahan, now 85, told VICE News. “And I think we’ve already seen that.”

Barr again is facing scrutiny for his decisions at the helm of the DOJ, especially from leading Democrats who worry he may be planning to withhold key information in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s final report. Those concerns were inflamed in early April when Mueller’s team began grumbling to associates that Barr’s brief summary to Congress omitted important, damaging findings. Barr then spooked Democrats and ex-prosecutors by telling Congress last week he believed investigators had spied on the Trump campaign, while offering no evidence.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

A judge's job is to interpret the law. It's not to decide whether speeches are correct.

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

A judge could release documents themselves. Or as this one is doing is communicating how Barr fucked up, the message is loud and clear.

The judge cannot release a document under the purview of the DOJ.

Anyone is free to "communicate" his opinion of Barr. The judge's opinion has no more legal force than my opinion.

This is a FOIA case, so yeah the judge could rule that more of the Mueller report be released.

Why would you want more of the Mueller report released? So you leftists can keep pretending there's evidence of Trump colluding with the Russians. You people sure love to get humiliated.

 

[HappyJoy]

Actually a judge can insist the public receives accurate information.

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

A judge could release documents themselves. Or as this one is doing is communicating how Barr fucked up, the message is loud and clear.

The judge cannot release a document under the purview of the DOJ.

Anyone is free to "communicate" his opinion of Barr. The judge's opinion has no more legal force than my opinion.

This is a FOIA case, so yeah the judge could rule that more of the Mueller report be released.

He could, but Barr will appeal it and win.

Well, at least you admitted you're wrong even if you don't understand that.

 

[bripat9643]

Considering how Barr Deep Six'ed the Iran-Contra findings for Ray-Gun, Bush and accomplices, how the fuck is anyone surprised that he is a "Toady for Trumpybear".

Democrats Praised William Barr Before Donald Trump Nominated Him | People's Pundit Daily

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., then-chairman of the House Crime and Criminal Justice Subcommittee, also praised the man his members now want to back into a corner.

“Mr. Barr has proven to be a capable deputy attorney general. He did a good job of helping run the department in troubled times.”

Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., still a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, not only praised Mr. Barr but said he would be “an independent voice for all Americans – not just the President.”​

Let me see how does that quote go. "Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

William Barr’s been accused of a presidential cover-up before

WASHINGTON — Weeks before former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger’s criminal trial over his role in the 1980’s Iran-Contra scandal, then-Attorney General William Barr dropped a bomb on the prosecution.

“People in the Iran-Contra affair have been treated very unfairly,” Barr told USA Today in December 1992, blasting the charges as illegitimate. “People in this Iran-Contra matter have been prosecuted for the kind of conduct that would not have been considered criminal or prosecutable by the Justice Department.”

Weinberger faced charges of lying to Congress, brought by a special prosecutor, then known as an “independent counsel,” who accused him of withholding 1,700 pages of notes about high-level meetings that allegedly held “evidence of a conspiracy.”

Barr’s broadside alarmed the lead prosecutor handling the case against Weinberger, James J. Brosnahan, who warned the judge that Barr may have just unduly biased his jury pool. Later that month, when the White House pardoned six top Iran-Contra defendants on Christmas Eve 1992 at Barr’s urging, Brosnahan believed he’d just witnessed the completion of a successful cover-up.

Three decades on, Brosnahan fears Barr has returned to his old job to run the same scheme again.

“If you want a presidential cover-up, Barr is your guy,” Brosnahan, now 85, told VICE News. “And I think we’ve already seen that.”

Barr again is facing scrutiny for his decisions at the helm of the DOJ, especially from leading Democrats who worry he may be planning to withhold key information in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s final report. Those concerns were inflamed in early April when Mueller’s team began grumbling to associates that Barr’s brief summary to Congress omitted important, damaging findings. Barr then spooked Democrats and ex-prosecutors by telling Congress last week he believed investigators had spied on the Trump campaign, while offering no evidence.

The prosecution of Wienberger was a political witchhunt, just like the whole "Russia! Russia! Russia!" hoax. Bush was right to give him a pardon. Dims always claim it's a coverup when their nefarious schemes are thwarted.

 

[bripat9643]

He can "insist" with the same legal authority that you or I insist. He has no legal standing in the matter. His job is to rule on the decisions of lower court judges, not on whether someone is exercising his First Amendment rights according to the judge's preferences.

A judge could release documents themselves. Or as this one is doing is communicating how Barr fucked up, the message is loud and clear.

The judge cannot release a document under the purview of the DOJ.

Anyone is free to "communicate" his opinion of Barr. The judge's opinion has no more legal force than my opinion.

This is a FOIA case, so yeah the judge could rule that more of the Mueller report be released.

He could, but Barr will appeal it and win.

Well, at least you admitted you're wrong even if you don't understand that.

I didn't admit I was wrong.