A Blockbuster Trump Report will Be Released With the Mueller Report.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I feel bad that ATS members are attacking your personality/views. It's too bad a variety of personalities aren't tolerated like (IMO) they should be.

a reply to: underwerks

Because the entire investigation then report was based on false grounds and criminally falsified allegations

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks
Why would someone need a counter report for something that totally exonerates them?

Hmmm...

So I guess you don't watch the news and what they do with any information relating to Trump.

HHmmm...

If the Mueller report totally exonerates him, what's up for interpretation?

Unless it doesn't really exonerate him..

member edited

Again, if it totally exonerates him, why the extra report? Why not let it speak for itself? Why the attempt to frame it with his take on it?

None of that is needed if it is what he said it is. No matter how hard the media tries to spin something, the facts are the facts regardless of their take on it.

So, if it exonerates him like you and everyone else here have been screaming for the past few weeks, why not let it speak for itself?

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: underwerks

Because the entire investigation then report was based on false grounds and criminally falsified allegations

Even if that's true, he said it totally exonerates him. Do you not believe that now?

originally posted by: underwerks
Why would someone need a counter report for something that totally exonerates them?

Hmmm...

The counter report will be highlighting the next round on indictments 😆

The prison sentences will be equally distributed to Democrats 😎

a reply to: carewemust

The Supreme Court ruled that executive privilege can't be used to shield a president from wrongdoing in United States V Nixon case.

Do presidents oversee investigations of the Justice Department?

Definitely not.

Long-standing protocol dictates that the FBI and Justice Department operate free of political influence or meddling from the White House. That's one reason that the FBI director serves a 10-year term and does not turn over the reins as presidential administrations come and go. It also means that presidents are not supposed to supervise, initiate or stop law enforcement investigations.

White House officials and Justice Department lawyers aren't even meant to talk with each other about ongoing criminal investigations or civil enforcement actions, though there is some leeway granted for matters of national security.

A 2007 Justice Department memorandum says the department will advise the White House of criminal or civil enforcement matters "only where it is important for the performance of the president's duties and where appropriate from a law enforcement perspective."

"This limitation recognizes the president's ability to perform his constitutional obligation to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed' while ensuring that there is public confidence that the laws of the United States are administered and enforced in an impartial manner," the memo states.

www.latimes.com...

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: underwerks

Because the entire investigation then report was based on false grounds and criminally falsified allegations

Even if that's true, he said it totally exonerates him. Do you not believe that now?

No indictments were recommended, so yeah, that pretty much exonerates him at least imo.....

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Who said the redactions are Executive Privilege ?

Hypocrite 😁

a reply to: Sookiechacha

There was no wrong-doing... did you miss that part of Barr's synopsis of Mueller's report?

Do you not understand that Barr is the Attorney General?

So the White house was offered the report prior to its release...

Because legally Trump can claim executive privilege now.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?

a reply to: underwerks

I won't know unless I read it

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: Sookiechacha

There was no wrong-doing... did you miss that part of Barr's report?

So the White house was offered the report prior to its release...

Because legally Trump can claim executive privilege now.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?

they dont understand because they dont want to. they want to cling to any thread of hope that this fiasco is still viable, and that somehow, someway, they will still get him. it is really stunning to witness at times.

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: underwerks

I won't know unless I read it

My sentiments exactly. Which is why I find it weird everyone has already made their mind up about what it contains.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks
Why would someone need a counter report for something that totally exonerates them?

Hmmm...

So I guess you don't watch the news and what they do with any information relating to Trump.

HHmmm...

If the Mueller report totally exonerates him, what's up for interpretation?

Unless it doesn't really exonerate him..

I'm sorry... I didn't realize you were that stupid.

The left will cherry-pick every single sentence in the report, parse it, attempt to spin it in a way that somehow will put Trump in a bad light.

It's called politics and the left are exceedingly good at smear campaigns because they don't have an actual positive platform to run on.

So again, I'm assuming you have not watched the news since 2016, looked at what was there, actually researched it and came to your own conclusions on the matter.

Again, if it totally exonerates him, why the extra report? Why not let it speak for itself? Why the attempt to frame it with his take on it?

None of that is needed if it is what he said it is. No matter how hard the media tries to spin something, the facts are the facts regardless of their take on it.

So, if it exonerates him like you and everyone else here have been screaming for the past few weeks, why not let it speak for itself?

Do you even read your own responses to things, or just type and hit "reply"?

I told you exactly why.

Do you honestly think "facts" are any part of our political landscape now?

After all, if they were then there never would have been a Special Council in the first place.

It has nothing at all with facts to the left... hasn't been in some time.

It's all about selling the perception of guilt.

Remember the Kavenaugh hearings for a good example?

Nothing to do at all with "facts" but because it was political it should all be about "what you believe".

I'm done with you tonight... no human being can possibly be that obtuse to what is really going on.

a reply to: Lumenari

Nixon and his appointees said he was inncoent too. Still, the Supreme Court ruled that Nixon, nor any president, could use executive priviledge to cover up any wrongdoing. Mueller did not exhonerate Trump or his campaign of wrongdoing.

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: Sookiechacha

There was no wrong-doing... did you miss that part of Barr's report?

So the White house was offered the report prior to its release...

Because legally Trump can claim executive privilege now.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?

they dont understand because they dont want to. they want to cling to any thread of hope that this fiasco is still viable, and that somehow, someway, they will still get him. it is really stunning to witness at times.

It's literally Stockholm Syndrome.

It amazes me to watch.

They are literally the prisoners fighting WITH the prison guards to prevent them from being freed.

Ah well.. next 6 months are going to be fun to watch.

Be well, my friend.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Lumenari

Nixon and his appointees said he was inncoent too. Still, the Supreme Court ruled that Nixon, nor any president, could use executive priviledge to cover up any wrongdoing. Mueller did not exhonerate Trump or his campaign of wrongdoing.

Ummm....

I'm just going to quote you and end it here.

Just... breathtakingly oblivious.

ETA... Nixon was driven out of office for spying on political opponents.

And rightfully so... he committed a crime and needed to be punished... his party needed to pay for that politically as well because they lost the trust of the citizens.

The Republican party was essentially out of power for 40 years because of that.

What do you think is going to happen to the Democratic party when we find out that our former Democratic President used the CIA, FBI, AG, outside intelligence agencies and a dossier provided by Russia to lie to a FISA court to get a court order to spy on a political opponent to overturn an election?

Gonna be a rough time for you and yours coming up.

I can't wait.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Lumenari

Nixon and his appointees said he was inncoent too. Still, the Supreme Court ruled that Nixon, nor any president, could use executive priviledge to cover up any wrongdoing. Mueller did not exhonerate Trump or his campaign of wrongdoing.

Yes Mueller did in fact exonerate Trump and his campaign of wrongdoing. 😎

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks
Why would someone need a counter report for something that totally exonerates them?

Hmmm...

So I guess you don't watch the news and what they do with any information relating to Trump.

HHmmm...

If the Mueller report totally exonerates him, what's up for interpretation?

Unless it doesn't really exonerate him..

I'm sorry... I didn't realize you were that stupid.

The left will cherry-pick every single sentence in the report, parse it, attempt to spin it in a way that somehow will put Trump in a bad light.

It's called politics and the left are exceedingly good at smear campaigns because they don't have an actual positive platform to run on.

So again, I'm assuming you have not watched the news since 2016, looked at what was there, actually researched it and came to your own conclusions on the matter.

Again, if it totally exonerates him, why the extra report? Why not let it speak for itself? Why the attempt to frame it with his take on it?

None of that is needed if it is what he said it is. No matter how hard the media tries to spin something, the facts are the facts regardless of their take on it.

So, if it exonerates him like you and everyone else here have been screaming for the past few weeks, why not let it speak for itself?

Do you even read your own responses to things, or just type and hit "reply"?

I told you exactly why.

Do you honestly think "facts" are any part of our political landscape now?

After all, if they were then there never would have been a Special Council in the first place.

It has nothing at all with facts to the left... hasn't been in some time.

It's all about selling the perception of guilt.

Remember the Kavenaugh hearings for a good example?

Nothing to do at all with "facts" but because it was political it should all be about "what you believe".

I'm done with you tonight... no human being can possibly be that obtuse to what is really going on.

Do you as a habit get this emotional when discussing politics? Facts are facts, and will remain that regardless of the spin people try to put on them.

Your belief in the absence of facts in politics is exactly what enables the liars in politics to continuing lying and getting away with it.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Who said the redactions are Executive Privilege ?

Hypocrite 😁

Who? Lumenari did.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

a reply to: carewemust



I suppose those "counter arguments" will dovetail nicely with the redactions.



Also, pretty sure showing the report to White House before Congress gets a redacted version violates a law or policy somewhere. I'm sure we'll being hearing about it from the talking heads.

Then I'm pretty sure that you don't know what Prerogative Power means, never heard the term Executive Privilege and don't understand that Barr is just following the rules.

Trump had the choice to get the entire report first, read it, redact whatever he wanted to and turn that over to Congress.

He declined to do that.

What is happening now is the actual procedure.

/facepalm

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I thought Nixon said that ? 😮

Or was it Carter? 😯