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.

 

William Barr: House votes to hold US Attorney General in contempt

page: 6
42
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

and it still doesn't say what you say it does
stating that the courts have done something is not a request to have a court do something
you simply lie
fat jerry, prior to today, had not made any request for the doj to get a court to allow the grand jury material released
you can lie about it all you like
the subpoena threat was made with out the request
that makes the threat illegal




posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

He asked Barr to seek to courts permission.



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

today



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Riiiiiiihgt.



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

i guess reading comprehension is not your thing?
today is the first time fat jerry mentioned any court request
fat jerry stated the court has done it but did not request barr to request the court to do so

but lie away and pretend he did
fat jerry is good at threats and bad at actual law



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Until they tell him its over reach.
Or Mueller writes a book.

New York is still waiting and he wont have his cronies there to help him out.



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody


Expect when they call in an outside prosecutor to question Christine Blasey Ford.
Oh how quickly we forget...


Did not Christine Blasey Ford not have her legal representatives right there while being questioned? Yes she did. They at times answered for her too.

Barr was attempting to negotiate with the House, they were too impatient to negotiate. Simply wanted it all their way. Apples to Oranges.



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Looks like somebody has actually petitioned the Court ...........

Any other Petition would be hinged on the first Petition 😎

Dated April 1, 2019 (but not a joke)

Court Petition



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:13 PM
link   
This whole thing is a straight up dog and pony show, intended to help out candidates running for office in 2020.

Nadler knows very well that if the AG gave them the Grand Jury testimony he would be breaking the law. He knows he's demanding something the AG can't give them. All in an attempt to question him and hope they can trick him into making a mistake. If Barr complied they would go after him for breaking the law.

They learned their lesson well from the what we now know to be corrupt FBI. Make up a phony charge against someone you don't like for partisan reasons, haul them in and lie their behinds off while questioning them until they make a misstatement then put an innocent person in prison for lying to the FBI, even though the original charge was also a made up lie.

Sadly it's also true, that like the FBI, our elected leaders can sit in the House or Senate and lie all they want to the camera's and that's perfectly legal. The country is looking more and more like Chicago every day.
edit on 5/8/2019 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Is that so?



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody


Expect when they call in an outside prosecutor to question Christine Blasey Ford.
Oh how quickly we forget...


But "Dr" Ford and her Attorneys agreed to that scenario and method 😎

And that (as it turned out for "Dr" Ford) was the hinge pin that failed 😎



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme




Until they tell him its over reach.

who is "they"?
russians?
greys?
and who is him?

as to your book idea some education is in order as usual:
www.mtsu.edu...


In Snepp v. United States (1980), the Court commented further on the question of prior restraint and classified documents, holding that the First Amendment does not override an employee-employer agreement requiring that a former CIA officer wanting to publish information concerning his activities clear the material with the agency before publication to avoid divulging classified information.

yeah sure he can write a book.....el oh el

new york is your "youthful" fantasy and nothing more



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

He asked Barr to seek to courts permission.


Why isn't he doing that himself, or on behalf of the Committee ? 😎



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

And so goes the constant clog of the cogs we call our government. A consistent pool of standing water that is the status quo.

The only thing they're good at is breaking things even further.



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

they dont offer complimentary sandwiches?



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

Is that so?


Yes.

"That" is so 😎




posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:17 PM
link   
They held him in contempt for following the law.

This really is clown world.



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
They held him in contempt for following the law.

This really is clown world.

you can say that again man
crazy days



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: xuenchen

they dont offer complimentary sandwiches?


"That" would be one Hell-of-a good reason 😎

He needs to address that in Motions Court 😎



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Their favor? Aren't you personalizing this a bit?



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join