It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Barr testimony before Senate Judiciary Committee

page: 10
47
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on May, 1 2019 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Show me in Muellers letter where he did not support the conclusion that Barr gave, that there was no crime of collusion, and that Mueller neither charged or exonerated Trump from obstruction.

What I read is that Mueller doesn't ever mention disputing this, but says he wants more material released.

I have read the Mueller report. Barr's letter does accurately sum up Muellers conclusion.

Again, we know those of you who pushed the Russian collusion lie for two years, and who had no problem with Hillarys team destroying subpoenaed evidence want to twist words to make it seem like this was a big deal, and Barr is some kind of criminal; but he is not.
edit on 1-5-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 1 2019 @ 05:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

Barr knowingly lied to Congress.

Trump should dismiss Barr on those grounds, if he is really wanting to drain the swamp.


Though he didn't lie to Congress that is the main point of the left these last few years. They want to use perjury and obstruction like weapons with nothing to really back any of it up with. Just grind and grill people until anything they deem even slightly meets their personal narratives of what perjury and obstruction means to them to some how hook them in for removal, impeachment, jail etc...

The funny part is that this all has done very little to the right while it keeps coming back around and biting the libtards right back in the ass. Whether its #metoo, Russian collusion, grab them in the P etc all of this just comes right back on them every time, so enjoy this next round of perjury and obstruction that will come back on the Democrats in the near future.


edit on 1-5-2019 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

I watched the hearing, I don't need FOX.

Where in the letter Mueller sent to Barr did Mueller dispute Barr's conclusions? I am trying to figure out what the lie is.
edit on 1-5-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-5-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 05:52 PM
link   
I thought he was talking about this line of questioning ...


“Now we know, contrary to what you said April 9, that on March 27 Robert Mueller wrote to you expressing very specific concerns that your March 24 letter … failed to capture the context, nature and substance of his report,” Leahy said.

“Why did you testify on April 9 that you didn’t know the concerns?” Leahy asked.

Barr defended his response, saying that he had responded to a question “relating to unidentified members who were expressing frustration to the accuracy relating to the findings,” but that he was not aware of those concerns.

“I spoke to Bob Mueller, not members of his team,” Barr said. “And I did not know what was being referred to, and Mueller had never told me that the expression of the findings was inaccurate.”


That's the transcript of what transpired today. Barr told the truth, no lies. He had no idea what those people were talking about because Barr spoke directly to Mueller, who said he had no issues of the substance.

Failing to capture the substance is not a "very specific" concern. It's about as far from the opposite as specific as you can be.
edit on 1-5-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:00 PM
link   
The only thing the evil coup ringleaders have left is to discredit Barr when he releases evidence of collusion between the Obama/Hillary Justice department and false Russian intel to attack Trump.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

I watched the hearing, I don't need FOX.

Where in the letter Mueller sent to Barr did Mueller dispute Barr's conclusions? I am trying to figure out what the lie is.


From paragraph 3 of Mueller's letter to Barr dated March 27, 2019:

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions."

The lie was that there was 'no objection to Barr's summary to Congress', when there actually was.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

That's why it's called a summary 😆😆😆



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: shooterbrody

Barr perjured himself.

Stop watching fake news. He was previously asked about what Mueller's team members that supposedly were concerned were talking about. He said he had no idea. He had no idea because in a phone conversation with Mueller, Barr asked him point blank if he thought there were any inaccuracies and was point blank told no. Barr has no idea what those team members who supposedly said that were talking about.


I went back to the source documents and transcripts.

It is you who have been lied to. The question made no mention of team members. Mueller sent him a letter well before Barr lied about it before Congress.

Read the source documentation, not the FauxNews endless opinion pieces.


Fella, you sound as ridiculous as the Democrat politicians. The collusion delusion bit you in the ass and now you're clinging on to some new false notion that Barr did not conclude correctly on the report. He did and Mueller has not disputed it.

As for lying, Barr was asked by Rep.Crist whether he had heard that some members of Muellers team 'were frustrated that his summary did not adequately or accurately portray their findings'.. Not only has there been no challenge from the Mueller team on the conclusion of the findings released by Barr, but Barr also made it clear to Crist at the time that he waa not interested in producing a summary of the report. He further stated that he suspected that they were wanting additional information released, which is entiely in keeping with the fact he had only spoken to Mueller, so could only speculate that is what his team were talking to the press about.

There is no lie, only Democrat spin to try and attack Barr, because he is going after them for their attempted coup.

You're on to another loser.


edit on 1/5/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

I watched the hearing, I don't need FOX.

Where in the letter Mueller sent to Barr did Mueller dispute Barr's conclusions? I am trying to figure out what the lie is.


From paragraph 3 of Mueller's letter to Barr dated March 27, 2019:

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions."

The lie was that there was 'no objection to Barr's summary to Congress', when there actually was.


Barr did not release a summary...according to his own very clear response to Rep. Crist.
Hopefully you understand now.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

The absolute best exchange was the one where blumenthal asked for barr's notes on his conversation with mueller and barr told him no. LMAO, barr is savage. Just the right guy to stand up to these morons.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

To me, this has been the most fascinating part of the last 24 hours.

We got the mueller report of findings from barr
No collusion, No obstruction
Then the left accused him of covering up the truth
Then the mueller report itself came out
Again, no collusion and no obstruction

Then, miraculously, in the last 24 hours we have a bunch of wacko's saying the barr report of findings did not accurately portray the mueller report. We have the report, wth does it matter what barr said, and yes it absolutely did accurately portray the report. But again, it doesn't matter because we have the full report.

What we're seeing is denial. Plain and simple. They can't accept that they've completely wasted two years and all of their ammo on something that didn't happen. They refuse to accept it.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

I watched the hearing, I don't need FOX.

Where in the letter Mueller sent to Barr did Mueller dispute Barr's conclusions? I am trying to figure out what the lie is.


From paragraph 3 of Mueller's letter to Barr dated March 27, 2019:

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions."

The lie was that there was 'no objection to Barr's summary to Congress', when there actually was.

Ah no, there is no objection. They had a phone conversation, Barr asked Mueller if he disagreed with anything in the summary, Mueller said no. Wanting more information released is not an objection to a summary. Stop watching fake news.

I will give you another chance, what was in Barr's summary that Mueller has claimed is inaccurate?
edit on 1-5-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Your assumption is that the full context of the Mueller report
would somehow be different or conflict with the Barr summary.

Or should I say your faulty assumption?



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

Good thing I ignore most of what you say and disagree with the rest.


For the life of me, I can't see how that benefits anyone?

Your have been fact less and without merit since you jumped into the DJT hate club. That you would continue is a disgrace to your own sides logic.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Why take muellers word for it?

You can see Barr’s letter, right?

You can see the mueller report, right?

So you show me where Barr misconstrued muellers findings on obstruction where he quoted muellers report and said mueller neither recommended charging or exonerated trump.

This whole story, again coming from people who didn’t think Hillary’s team destroying subpoenaed evidence was obstruction, and who lied to us about collusion for two years, is laughable

We have all of the documents, and yet there main argument now is Barr sent a letter two weeks before the public got to see the info, and that letter although accurate about the conclusions of the report didn’t get muellers feelings quite right

Pathetic
edit on 1-5-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Since Barr is the boss of the Department of Justice,, it does not matter what Democrats or the liberal media think...

I keep seeing people try to defend William Barr against the haters and I have to shake my head ..wondering why the heck are they bothering.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

I also liked it when Barr was asked if he would recuse himself from the investigations around the FISA abuse that sprung out of the Mueller investigation and he very matter of factly flat out said, "no."

I chuckled out loud at that and startled my dog who was taking a nap on my lap when that portion of the hearing was on.

And then the dems kept trying over and over again to trip him up and he just kind of let them stumble about pontificating. They would go on and on not really ever coming to a point or asking a question and the few times they actually did ask a question, they obviously didn't like the answers Barr was giving them.

The dems are not used to someone standing up to their bull# like that.
edit on 1-5-2019 by jadedANDcynical because: -y



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Of course that’s one of the dem goals of this dog and pony show

They know barr is going to investigate the crimes of their hero Obama’s admin, and so they need to begin discrediting him now



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Yeah, that was pretty obviously another tack they were trying to take.

The one senator was really nasty, especially when she called from him to tender his resignation.

Let them keep it up, it's only going to drive the people in the middle away from them more than is already happening.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Show me in Muellers letter where he did not support the conclusion that Barr gave, that there was no crime of collusion, and that Mueller neither charged or exonerated Trump from obstruction.


Paragraph 3 second sentence.


What I read is that Mueller doesn't ever mention disputing this, but says he wants more material released.

I have read the Mueller report. Barr's letter does accurately sum up Muellers conclusion.


In your opinion.

But how valid is it?

Again, we know those of you who pushed the Russian collusion lie for two years, and who had no problem with Hillarys team destroying subpoenaed evidence want to twist words to make it seem like this was a big deal, and Barr is some kind of criminal; but he is not.




top topics



 
47
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join