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.

 

AG Barr is a big fat liar

page: 9
18
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2019 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

You don't think it's lying to say mueller had no concerns about the accuracy of his summary when barr called and talked to mueller and mueller said it was 100% accurate? Why don't you think that's a lie!?!? Just because it isn't, doesn't mean it's not!

LMAO, I don't understand how the leftist mind works. Probably because it doesn't.




posted on May, 3 2019 @ 11:07 PM
link   
The problem is, ignorant people listen to the DNC propaganda-driven MSM and take it as gospel. They are SOOOOO mal-informed. And now they are REALLY DESPERATE.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 01:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Attorney General William Barr launched a pro Trump media campaign both with the 4 page summery he released covering the Mueller report and the press conference before the redacted report was released. Barr's summary and press conference that exonerated Trump was done so over frustration from Mueller and his team, and without Barr even looking at the evidence.

Barr said the evidence showed Trump didn't obstruct justice, this is a lie considering he didn't look over the evidence.


Barr claims Trump cooperated with the Mueller investigation, Trump refused to speak to Mueller, thus another lie.
Barr Claimed there was no concern from the special councils team how he was presenting the Mueller report, he lied because he knew from the Mueller letter there was concerns.

Barr is a partisan hack and should resign as Attorney General.


LOL!

Yeah... just because Nadler is trying to break the law, by demanding DOJ disclose investigative documents in contravention to the very law that creates the Office of Special Counsel framework... doesn't mean Nadler's trying to break the law... (...even though he's trying to break the law, and sweep away centuries of legal precedence, so there's that)

Let's see... there was an Empaneled Grand Jury, which voted NO on a True Bill to charge.

So for the gullible lefties, let me explain. It is fun watching Nadler talk about how defiant the DOJ is for not turning over a complete unredacted version of the Mueller Report and associated materials... but here's the problem... HE HAS NO LEGAL STANDING TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE DOCUMENTS, PERIOD!!

If you believe him that he does... HE'S LYING TO YOU.

This is not rocket science, folks. Quit being so gullible about everything you hear on TV from politicians.

Was there a decision to vote YES on a True Bill and file charges? NO, THERE WASN'T.

END. OF. STORY.

GET. OVER. IT.

(And while you're at it... why don't you spend 30 minutes and learn something about your own damn legal system!!!)



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: CrazyFox

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: LDragonFire

You lefties sure seem scared of Barr, wonder why that is.


Yeah, it's the righties who should be scared of tying themselves to a sinking stone.

Much better to completely disavow them when they get caught, like they did with the others.

:p


Wtf are you talking about?


In an unexpected twist that is abstracted from political parties, the Mueller report and other political issues, the AG got caught lying to Congress.

There was a whole cadre of people who, some suggested, were being unfairly targeted by "the Democrats" or "the left" and who Republican supporters, and specifically Trump supporters, cried were innocent.

Then they got charged and jailed. Now the same people who said they were innocent, call them criminals and traitorous liars (probably because they are).

Think of all those criminals who piggybacked into their positions of power on the Trump campaign and were Republican supporters.


When and where did he lie present some evidence, I did not have access to the unredacted version but the redacted one I read showed no collusion and no obstruction. Did you watch CNN again or MSNBC? Please show evidence of a lie. Your earlier post is accurate both parties are extremely nutso but stating he go caught lying to congress is so far off base it boggles me. Did you read Page's testimony where she admitted Obummer ordered the hit? Was she lying because no one can say something bad about the man who admitted to funding ISIL??? Just asking for a friend


The lie was not about the content of the Mueller report.

Barr gave an untruthful answer to a simple and direct question.

Here is the question: "Did Bob Mueller support your conclusion"

Here is the answer: "I don't know whether Bob Mueller supported my conclusion"

The truth is that he knew that Mueller had written to him, saying: "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."

He knew that Mueller did not support his conclusion, but said he didn't know.


Oh my... LOL!

You refuted your own premise, literally with your own quotes. You don't even see it, do you?

Here's the thing. Words have specific meaning. If you are having a bitch slapping session in an alley... that is one thing... "who dissed who" isn't really very important.

Now, I'll admit... this media masturbation show is premised to look like something of legal comportment, but it is not. That is why it has been so entertaining watching Barr, who has a sharp legal mind, answer these breathy "go for the drama" questions of Dumocrats running for President.

So, here's the presumed "important" part of your quote: "...did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions."

Here's the part and context of how you set it up and claim Barr is lying:

""Here is the question: "Did Bob Mueller support your conclusion"

Here is the answer: "I don't know whether Bob Mueller supported my conclusion" ""

Okay... this might be difficult to grok... so listen up: Bill Barr, smart ass lawyer as he is, is basically saying "I can not read Mueller's mind." The fact is... HE KNOWS ANY ANSWER HE GIVES, that suggests he knows the mind of Bob Mueller, would be a farce. He's not psychic... and he's saying the ONLY thing he can say, without having heard SPECIFICALLY from Bob Mueller about the content and context of the question.

So... Barr is admitting he can not read Mueller's mind. The Lefties are going into vapor-lock over the answer, despite it being 100% Socratically sound.

Alrighty then!



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 02:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut


The presumption of innocence is a legal right in a criminal trial.

No criminal trial, no presumption of innocence.


Are you saying that anyone not under criminal investigation is not innocent? If that were the case, we would be operating on the flipside of the 5th Amendment and Due Process.

The State, in general, must view everyone as innocent. If they did not, we could be stopped at random, with no just cause by an agent of the State. (I know this happens regardless and is wrong)


How do you think the Police work if everyone is presumed innocent?


They do work on that presumption, or are supposed to at least. If we take your logic, how come we are allowed to petition bail when we are accused?



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 03:12 AM
link   
Terrified leftists...



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Pelosi called Barr a liar.


BREAKING: Special Counsel Mueller “deeply disturbed” by Pelosi accusations against AG Barr today and is urging Nadler to push up his hearing to testify and correct the record as soon as possible

mobile.twitter.com...



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 05:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Even when Mueller gets up and supports Barr's version they will still say it. TDS is real.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Trump won. Again. Dems lost. Again. Rinse and repeat.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

The ag didn’t lie to congress

The people you cheer for lied about Russian collusion for two years

Now they are lying about Barr, as I have showed you on multiple threads

You just repeating it doesn’t make it true, just like your repeating of the Russia collusion lie didn’t make it true


Do "they" pay per repeated post, you think?




posted on May, 4 2019 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

If this was actually the case, then why is Mueller refuting what you're saying? Probably ought to quit listening to all the DNC propaganda.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: ownbestenemy

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut


The presumption of innocence is a legal right in a criminal trial.

No criminal trial, no presumption of innocence.


Are you saying that anyone not under criminal investigation is not innocent?


The presumption of innocence is not the same as actual innocence. It is a legal procedure that guides the court case.

The Police, to do their job, must suspect those they investigate. The presumption of innocence does not factor into the process at that stage. The Police also cannot declare anyone legally guilty, that is the function of the courts where the case gets handed off for adjudication and where the presumption of innocence comes into play.


If that were the case, we would be operating on the flipside of the 5th Amendment and Due Process.

The State, in general, must view everyone as innocent.


The state is a different thing to the Judiciary.


If they did not, we could be stopped at random, with no just cause by an agent of the State. (I know this happens regardless and is wrong)


No, it happens because the presumption of innocence does not come into play until charges are laid. It is neither illegal nor wrong.



How do you think the Police work if everyone is presumed innocent?


They do work on that presumption, or are supposed to at least. If we take your logic, how come we are allowed to petition bail when we are accused?


You also cannot petition bail unless you have been charged but have not yet been convicted or acquitted. The presumption of innocence is a function of jurisprudence. It isn't universal.



posted on May, 6 2019 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: tanstaafl

You don't think it's lying to say mueller had no concerns about the accuracy of his summary when barr called and talked to mueller and mueller said it was 100% accurate?

The question Barr was asked - that everyone is yammering about that Barr lied in response to - was whether or not any one else on Muellers Team had concerns - not Mueller himself, anyone else on Muellers Team. No one else on Muellers Team had sent Barr a letter or called with any concerns, so he answered truthfully.


LMAO, I don't understand how the leftist mind works. Probably because it doesn't.

Agreed...



posted on May, 6 2019 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut




The presumption of innocence is a function of jurisprudence. It isn't universal.

In our nation it is, why is that so hard for you to understand?
You should research probable cause.



posted on May, 6 2019 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut




The presumption of innocence is a function of jurisprudence. It isn't universal.

In our nation it is, why is that so hard for you to understand?
You should research probable cause.


It's always fun to see a foreigner try to explain our legal system to others.

There are all sorts of legal thresholds to cross for criminality: "Reasonable suspicion" , "probable cause", "preponderance of evidence" , and "beyond reasonable doubt". The government is held by "semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit", and needs to demonstrate a corresponding standard of evidence for any non-consensual action against a citizen. Mueller spent two years and couldn't cross beyond "Reasonable suspicion" on obstruction. Even a symbolic indictment (or statement they had enough to indict, but could not because of the OLC guidelines)would only require a "preponderance of evidence".

A person suspected of a crime never needs to actively defend himself unless he wishes to stop action for which the state has already established it's burden. No one needs to exonerate himself or have investigators exonerate him in this country. That's not what investigators do here. There is no burden on the citizen unless the state meets it's threshold.
It doesn't mean Trump never committed a crime, but in the eyes of the law, he enjoys the presumption of innocence until the state meets its legal threshold. Still a long, long way from "this report does not conclude the President committed a crime" to "beyond a reasonable doubt" after two years of investigation.



posted on May, 6 2019 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Especially when they do not have the rights we do.

No doubt it will continue, wait until he gets re elected.
Global liberal meltdown.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Really OP? Barr is a liar? How many "IRS" forms have you "filed" over the years? And why? OP, you may not be a "liar", but you're an ignorant and an idiot. Why do you think it is so important for you to "sign" a W-2).?
Barr is not a liar. He's a "lawyer". .. Big difference!
An "attorney",.. "To twist", in Latin...legalese...



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

Yeah, it's the righties who should be scared of tying themselves to a sinking stone.

Much better to completely disavow them when they get caught, like they did with the others.



One would have to be completely daft to imagine that any court is going
or order Attorney General Barr to violate Federal law.

But the lefties just love the sound bites, great hamster fare.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: RadioRobert

Especially when they do not have the rights we do.

No doubt it will continue, wait until he gets re elected.
Global liberal meltdown.


And he IS getting re elected.

Global
Liberal
Meltdown

2021 is gonna be a good year!!



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: RadioRobert

Especially when they do not have the rights we do.

No doubt it will continue, wait until he gets re elected.
Global liberal meltdown.


And he IS getting re elected.

Global
Liberal
Meltdown

2021 is gonna be a good year!!

Oh the Muller investigation made sure of that.
In addition to the dems running as far left as possible.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join