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 Disputes IG Horowitz Findings

page: 6
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody




we do not clear people here
we do innocent until proven guilty


Then Trump and his followers should stop saying that the Mueller report found Trump "innocent", or that it "exonerated" him, or that it "vindicated" Trump and that it found no evidence of "collusion" or obstruction.

Because, all of those assertions are false.




edit on 3-12-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha
it did
because no charges were recommended

that is how people are "exonerated" here

sorry you seem to not understand that fact



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
This thread is about Barr (also) rejecting IG Horowitz' report (like he did the Mueller report).

Partially wrong on the first point, totally wrong on the second.

He has only said he disagrees with one (albeit primary) of the conclusions in Horowitz's report, not the whole thing.

He said he had no problems with the Mueller report, he merely agreed that there was nothing there worth pursuing.


I'm not going to relitigate the Mueller report here.

And yet you couldn't help yourself...


this fallacious assertion that the Mueller report found Trump innocent, or cleared him of "collusion"

No one is claiming that, so please stop obfuscating and deflecting.

'Clearing' or 'exonerating' someone is not what investigators do, and that is the point. The nonsensical comment by Mueller that 'this report does not exonerate him' was purely food for TDS sufferers and demwits in Congress so they could continue the farce.

If he had found something worth pursuing, he would have said something like "I have found the following instances of collusion, and the following instances of obstructions of justice". He didn't, because he didn't find any.

PERIOD.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody




it did
because no charges were recommended


As Mueller explained, no charges against Trump were recommended, because the DOJ has a policy not to indict a sitting president, which is why Mueller, both during his testimony and in the report, said that was the job of Congress, and insisted that the report be referred the report to Congress, in his letter to Bill Barr.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha
nope
muller did not mention that in part 1
and left part 2 unfininshed
barr finished part 2

nice try tho

see mueller could have recommended whatever he liked
barr would have been the one to actually charge based upon the special councils recommendation
muller recommended no charges

either way trump still resides in the white house
and will continue to do so as he has committed no crime



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl




If he had found something worth pursuing, he would have said something like "I have found the following instances of collusion, and the following instances of obstructions of justice". He didn't, because he didn't find any.


The report did just that, it listed instances of collusion. However, collusion is not a crime. It also cited several instances of attempted conspiracy.

The report enumerated no less than 10 instances of obstruction of justice, that Mueller referred to Congress, because as he explained, the DOJ can't indict a sitting president.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha
and even the clearly partisan house dems did not follow up on such
what does that tell you?

trump beat mueller
like a government mule



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody




and even the clearly partisan house dems did not follow up on such


Yeah they did. Nadler's committee has 100s of subpoenas out that the White House has been stonewalling.

Dan MCGahn, for example, is most likely going to be ordered to testify about his dealings with Trump's obstruction of justice, as cited in the Mueller report.




edit on 3-12-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: shooterbrody




and even the clearly partisan house dems did not follow up on such


Yeah they did. Nadler's committee as 100s of subpoenas that the White House has been stonewalling.


good
let them fight it out in court

more do nothing from the do nothing dems

not healthcare
or infrastructure
or immigration

just get trump
for something mueller would not even recommend


again who resides in the white house???



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody




more do nothing from the do nothing dems


The House passed dozens, if not hundreds of bills, that are sitting on Mitch McConnell's, the "Grim Reaper, desk.
edit on 3-12-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha
no they have not

go lie elsewhere

why not type "a bajillion bills"?





edit on 3/12/2019 by shooterbrody because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Looks like Horowitz hasn’t been investigating but playing damage control

I hope Horowitz was secretly being watched/ investigated himself long ago when it would have been obvious he was behaving in a similar manor as bob mueller



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Arnie123

The member you’re addressing is certainly not “lying” and “you all” accept what you hear in your chosen media. Also, you don’t speak for anyone but yourself, so stop the fallacious forum gang crap arguments.

In point of fact, after 34 indictments and convictions of individuals and 3 companies, the Mueller investigation turned up plenty of evidence of criminal activity DIRECTLY related to the Trump Campaign and Russian interference in our Elections.


I'm confused, and maybe you and Sookie can help me out here, but where does this fit in with the Mueller report stating that no American was involved with collusion? “The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation”, which would include the Trump campaign, would it not?

Why does the report seemingly contradict itself, if what you two are saying is true?



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: mtnshredder

I listed those specifically in the thread regarding Barr’s speech to the Federalist Society (which is the primary basis of my comments). Basically though, Barr’s position that the Executive is not subject to our laws and the system of checks-and-balances are the primary issues I have with Barr’s position.

The Presidency has grown WAY BEYOND constitutional limits; we need to push all branches of the Federal Government back to their CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS (including the bloated bureaucracy).


What version did you read? Can you point out where he stated that, "[T]he Executive is not subject to our laws and the system of checks-and-balances..."? Reading skills are important.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: shooterbrody




we do not clear people here
we do innocent until proven guilty


Then Trump and his followers should stop saying that the Mueller report found Trump "innocent", or that it "exonerated" him, or that it "vindicated" Trump and that it found no evidence of "collusion" or obstruction.

Because, all of those assertions are false.


It's not worth arguing about, because the DOJ and Senate are on our President's side, as they should be.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




In point of fact, after 34 indictments and convictions of individuals and 3 companies, the Mueller investigation turned up plenty of evidence of criminal activity DIRECTLY related to the Trump Campaign and Russian interference in our Elections.


That isn't exactly true. More than half of those indictments relate to the 12 Russian bots, and most of those related to fraud. Cohen's deeds make up a big chunk, many of which occurred before Trump ever hired him, and the one to which he plead guilty having to do with campaign violations wasn't even an actual crime. The remainder were accusations of lying, some of which, we know now, turned out to be false while others were immaterial, but used as cudgels in hopes of manufacturing a canary (see Cohen).
edit on 3-12-2019 by timequake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Sookiechacha
no they have not

go lie elsewhere

why not type "a bajillion bills"?



House passed nearly 400 bills this year — and McConnell is blocking as many as he can americanindependent.com...

You should be cautious accusing people of lying, or you might be become known as the Ignoramus Who Cried "Lies" too often.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454




I'm confused, and maybe you and Sookie can help me out here, but where does this fit in with the Mueller report stating that no American was involved with collusion?


It doesn't say that. The report cites numerous examples of "collusion", but collusion is not a crime. It also cites several examples of attempted conspiracy, but claims that the parties in involved, like Don Jr, Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort were too dumb to successfully pull it off.

Mueller claimed that no American was found to have successfully conspired with Russia to influence the election.



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 06:07 PM
link   
FYI - Senator Lindsey Graham has met one-on-one with Attorney General Barr twice over the past month, regarding the Horowitz Report and Durham Investigation. Here is an excerpt from his appearance on the Hannity show (FoxNews) last night..

Senator Lindsey Graham stopped by ‘Hannity’ Monday night to weigh-in on the upcoming DOJ report on FISA abuse during the 2016 election; saying “we’re going to find that they pulled a fast one on the courts.”

“You broke it right here on this show, one week from today we’ll get the IG report on FISA abuse,” said Hannity.

“The first thing I want to say is: Be wary of the Washington Post and the New York Times reporting on what’s coming up with Horowitz. They’re trying to downplay it. I can tell you Attorney General Barr has every confidence in the world in Mr. Horowitz,” said Graham.

“I’m going to ask Mr. Horowitz, ‘Without the dossier, would there be a FISA warrant?’ We’re going to find that they pulled a fast one on the FISA court,” he added.
Source: hannity.com...



posted on Dec, 3 2019 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: tanstaafl




If he had found something worth pursuing, he would have said something like "I have found the following instances of collusion, and the following instances of obstructions of justice". He didn't, because he didn't find any.


The report did just that, it listed instances of collusion. However, collusion is not a crime. It also cited several instances of attempted conspiracy.

The report enumerated no less than 10 instances of obstruction of justice, that Mueller referred to Congress, because as he explained, the DOJ can't indict a sitting president.


Bullcrap. CLinton was prosecuted as a sitting president. Mueller could had done so as well.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join