What legal standing does Barr have to NOT release Mueller's report to Congress?

[M14 Shooter]

You have no idea what you;re talking about.

You're wrong, and the federal law protecting grand jury evidence has been sidestepped more than once. You don't have to sit there and complain, or take my word for it. You can look it up yourself.

Better yet:
Prove your claim to be true.
Be sure your proof is in context, quoted, and cited.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If the President cannot commit the crime of obstruction, there was absolutely no reason to investigate him for obstruction.

The president can commit the crime of obstruction. And every case is different. And mueller was not tasked only with investigating crimes.

Loook at you, trying to have it both ways.
So cute.

Youre not following very well. While the president can commit the crime of obstruction, it may be that, in this case, his special protection under the constitution to run the executive branch may have led mueller to believe it was not a viable charge.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Prove your claim to be true.

What claim? That judges can order the release of grand jury information? No , i won't do that work for you. You can read up on both the clinton and nixon cases and see it for yourself . You should have already been in possession of this info before commenting.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If the President cannot commit the crime of obstruction, there was absolutely no reason to investigate him for obstruction.

The president can commit the crime of obstruction. And every case is different. And mueller was not tasked only with investigating crimes.

Loook at you, trying to have it both ways.
So cute.

Youre not following very well. While the president can commit the crime of obstruction, it may be that, in this case, his special protection under the constitution to run the executive branch may have led mueller to believe it was not a viable charge.

You're still talking out both sides of your mouth - trying to, anyway.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Prove your claim to be true.

What claim? That judges can order the release of grand jury information? No , i won't do that work for you. You can read up on both the clinton and nixon cases and see it for yourself . You should have already been in possession of this info before commenting.

Translation:
You cannot prove your claim.
I accept your concession.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You're still talking out both sides of your mouth - trying to, anyway.

Yeah, you said that twice. You just forgot to explain.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You cannot prove your claim.

Of course i can. Any child with google can read up on how judges ordered the release of grand jury information in both the clinton and nixon cases. If you cared to make informed comments, you would have already read up on this.

In short,a judge may (and has) order the release of the grand jury evidence to congress.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Congress has invited AG Barr to join them in petitioning a judge to release the Mueller grand jury testimony amd evidence to congress.

I wonder if he will accept the invitation?

 

[M14 Shooter]

You're still talking out both sides of your mouth - trying to, anyway.

Yeah, you said that twice. You just forgot to explain.

To even the lightest of wits, it's self-evident.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You're still talking out both sides of your mouth - trying to, anyway.

Yeah, you said that twice. You just forgot to explain.

To even the lightest of wits, it's self-evident.

Then explain it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You cannot prove your claim.

Of course i can.

Good. Step to it.
Be sure your proof is in context, quoted, and cited.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You cannot prove your claim.

Of course i can.

Good. Step to it.
Be sure your proof is in context, quoted, and cited.

Hmm,no,I am perfectly content with you being wrong. And I do not care if you take my word for it or not.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You're still talking out both sides of your mouth - trying to, anyway.

Yeah, you said that twice. You just forgot to explain.

To even the lightest of wits, it's self-evident.

Then explain it.

:yawn:
You:
While the president can commit the crime of obstruction, it may be that, in this case, his special protection under the constitution to run the executive branch may have led mueller to believe it was not a viable charge.
Ok... Why?
Recall that his statement was not about the viability of the charge, but the nature of the evidence as it relates to the charge,.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You cannot prove your claim.

Of course i can.

Good. Step to it.
Be sure your proof is in context, quoted, and cited.

Hmm,no,I am perfectly content with you being wrong. And I do not care if you take my word for it or not.

I accept your concession of the point.
Thank you

 

[Faun]

Wrong.

See above post.

Your link says "can and should" release.

The law (as I posted the link) says "AG doesn't have to release"

If he doesn't release it, the Congress will simply start up their own investigations into the matter and drag it on for another 2 years.

But since there's no reason to think he won't release it, your "if" is nothing more than an attempt to find something to be butt-chapped about pre-emptively.

Not at all. You should learn the meaning of the word "if."

I didn't misstate the meaning of "if" in any way. You just don't like that I nailed your motives for dwelling on it.

LOL

You nailed nothing since I never said Barr wouldn’t release Mueller’s report.

 

[buckeye45_73]

He's very transparent dipshit
he's not holding back anything...Rosenstein signed off on Barr's assessment....it's over, now jump in a lake

LOL...

Barr quoted two sentences from a nearly 400 page report.

Uh huh. So you figure Mueller went on and on about what a criminal Trump is, and then included two sentences stating that he was cleared for Barr to "cherrypick" out? Is that what you're telling yourself happened to avoid admitting that you've wasted 2 years and tons of money?

And that's leaving alone the fact that Barr's summary included far more than two sentences, and the fact that there's no way Mueller would remain silent if Barr were lying about his report.

It quoted two sentences from the report of nearly 400 pages.

That is indeed cherrypicking. What is your definition?

I never said he was lying, liar.

Well that's what summaries are......

the definition of summary

un, plural sum·ma·ries.
a comprehensive and usually brief abstract, recapitulation, or compendium of previously stated facts or statements.
adjective
brief and comprehensive; concise.
direct and prompt; unceremoniously fast: to treat someone with summary dispatch.
(of legal proceedings, jurisdiction, etc.) conducted without, or exempt from, the various steps and delays of a formal trial.

Goddamn, dude.

Two sentences out of 400 pages can in no way be considered "comprehensive" as your definition requires.

You just proved why it is not a summary.

You apparently don't know what a summary is. It was a 4 page summary.......I've seen those before.......maybe if you dealt with documents and no flipping burgers you'd know it as well.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Your link says "can and should" release.

The law (as I posted the link) says "AG doesn't have to release"

If he doesn't release it, the Congress will simply start up their own investigations into the matter and drag it on for another 2 years.

But since there's no reason to think he won't release it, your "if" is nothing more than an attempt to find something to be butt-chapped about pre-emptively.

Not at all. You should learn the meaning of the word "if."

I didn't misstate the meaning of "if" in any way. You just don't like that I nailed your motives for dwelling on it.

LOL

You nailed nothing since I never said Barr wouldn’t release Mueller’s report.

He said he was going to release it, so why say if?

 

[Faun]

If he doesn't release it, the Congress will simply start up their own investigations into the matter and drag it on for another 2 years.

But since there's no reason to think he won't release it, your "if" is nothing more than an attempt to find something to be butt-chapped about pre-emptively.

Not at all. You should learn the meaning of the word "if."

I didn't misstate the meaning of "if" in any way. You just don't like that I nailed your motives for dwelling on it.

LOL

You nailed nothing since I never said Barr wouldn’t release Mueller’s report.

He said he was going to release it, so why say if?

I know you folks lack the ability to absorb context, but I said that in response to a rightwingnut pointing out that Barr doesn’t have to release the report at all if he doesn’t want to.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ok... Why?

I have no idea . that would be in the report. You keep stumbling over this .

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I accept your concession of the point.

You can lie to yourself out loud as much as you like. You are also free to remain ignorant and wrong, and to beg stragers on the internet to spoonfeed you.