Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s 448-page report was released to the public Thursday morning following AG Bill Barr’s press conference.
Mueller’s report concluded that allegations against Trump campaign advisor Carter Page used to justify the FISA spying campaign against him were FALSE.
OOPSIE! Release the krakken!
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
Well, Barr was an accomplished public servant for decades before becoming AG. He was well-respected by everyone as a fair, tough guy who was not beholden to anyone. But as soon as he said something that people didn't like, suddenly he became a "Trump stooge". Can anyone find any evidence of Barr being corrupt- or partisan- prior to him becoming AG?
My point is: is Seth Abramson really worth following- as an unbiased source of truth? Or is he just someone that tells people what they want to hear?
Are you aware of irony?
And I've pretty much written off discussing anything with you.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
I don't have Twitter. Is there a website that this guy is connected to? I'm willing to read it, if you can post it.
If you really want to read it, follow that link. You don't need Twitter, it's open for anybody to read. All of Twitter is (unless your account is set to private).
Quote: @A1Janitor said:
@ KingBash said:
@ A1Janitor said:
Lightly redacted!
How's it feel to lose what little credibility you had left?
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
This is such a joke. Glad Barr has wasted taxpayer money to silence Mueller. And I'm glad you and the other Trumpers on this site enjoy it.
Tell me what was redacted that wasn’t legally required to be redacted.
Barr doesn’t care if Mueller testifies.
They will release an unredacted copy to Congress.
Again - it’s clear. No Russian collusion. Meaning the whole investigation was bullshit.
How would you behave if you were falsely accused of a crime that didn‘t occur. Not just a crime that you didn’t commit ... but a crime that never hapened. You and I would both fight back. That’s not obstruction.
Trump turned over 1.4 million pages of documents. Did not prohibit anyone from testifying. Did not refuse any request. About some alleged crime that did not occur.
Game over.
Nah. You're wrong. Unfortunately since you support Russia and crooked Trump, we'll never know.
Have a good Thursday!
EDIT: To your point in bold:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cases-factbox/factbox-guilty-pleas-indictments-abound-in-trump-russia-probe-idUSKCN1RT1X3
God, I love being so right all the time.
Collusion.
Game over (but only because Trump supporters have emboldened a cheater).
Quote: @KingBash said:
@ A1Janitor said:
@ KingBash said:
@ A1Janitor said:
Lightly redacted!
How's it feel to lose what little credibility you had left?
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
This is such a joke. Glad Barr has wasted taxpayer money to silence Mueller. And I'm glad you and the other Trumpers on this site enjoy it.
Tell me what was redacted that wasn’t legally required to be redacted.
Barr doesn’t care if Mueller testifies.
They will release an unredacted copy to Congress.
Again - it’s clear. No Russian collusion. Meaning the whole investigation was bullshit.
How would you behave if you were falsely accused of a crime that didn‘t occur. Not just a crime that you didn’t commit ... but a crime that never hapened. You and I would both fight back. That’s not obstruction.
Trump turned over 1.4 million pages of documents. Did not prohibit anyone from testifying. Did not refuse any request. About some alleged crime that did not occur.
Game over.
Nah. You're wrong. Unfortunately since you support Russia and crooked Trump, we'll never know.
Have a good Thursday!
EDIT: To your point in bold:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cases-factbox/factbox-guilty-pleas-indictments-abound-in-trump-russia-probe-idUSKCN1RT1X3
God, I love being so right all the time.
Collusion.
Game over (but only because Trump supporters have emboldened a cheater).
LMAO So a Reuter’s article trump’s Mueller’s findings.
All that stuff wasn’t tied to Trump or russian collusion.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
Well, Barr was an accomplished public servant for decades before becoming AG. He was well-respected by everyone as a fair, tough guy who was not beholden to anyone. But as soon as he said something that people didn't like, suddenly he became a "Trump stooge". Can anyone find any evidence of Barr being corrupt- or partisan- prior to him becoming AG?
My point is: is Seth Abramson really worth following- as an unbiased source of truth? Or is he just someone that tells people what they want to hear?
Did you forget you already adked that question and had it answered before?
Barr is completely biased. He was already involved in one Presidenttial cover-up during Iran contra affair. That should have automatically disqualified him or at the least recused himself.
https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/pajd...-up-before
On top of that, Barr sent Trump attorneys a 20 page memo declaring a President can't be indicted for obstruction of justice a year ago. Trump read it, loved it, fired his own hand picked AG Sessions and hired Barr because of thst memo.
Barr exonerated Trump without ever seen one piece of evidence or the Mueller report. How the fuck he wasn't forced to recuse himself from the investigation after that memo is beyond fucked up.
Complete banana republic at work.
Quote: @SFVikeFan said:
@ pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
Well, Barr was an accomplished public servant for decades before becoming AG. He was well-respected by everyone as a fair, tough guy who was not beholden to anyone. But as soon as he said something that people didn't like, suddenly he became a "Trump stooge". Can anyone find any evidence of Barr being corrupt- or partisan- prior to him becoming AG?
My point is: is Seth Abramson really worth following- as an unbiased source of truth? Or is he just someone that tells people what they want to hear?
Did you forget you already adked that question and had it answered before?
Barr is completely biased. He was already involved in one Presidenttial cover-up during Iran contra affair. That should have automatically disqualified him or at the least recused himself.
https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/pajd...-up-before
On top of that, Barr sent Trump attorneys a 20 page memo declaring a President can't be indicted for obstruction of justice a year ago. Trump read it, loved it, fired his own hand picked AG Sessions and hired Barr because of thst memo.
Barr exonerated Trump without ever seen one piece of evidence or the Mueller report. How the fuck he wasn't forced to recuse himself from the investigation after that memo is beyond fucked up.
Complete banana republic at work.
LMAO
Mueller exonerated Trump on collusion ... the basis of this hoax!
Nothing!
BOOM!
Quote: @KingBash said:
@ pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
I don't have Twitter. Is there a website that this guy is connected to? I'm willing to read it, if you can post it.
If you really want to read it, follow that link. You don't need Twitter, it's open for anybody to read. All of Twitter is (unless your account is set to private).
It was Twitter link (I think), which- I thought- meant that I couldn't read it. Can I paste that address into my web browser and read it? I haven't tried.
OK. Now I tried- and, yes- it worked.
Problem (for me) is that the guy is citing Newsweek and NYTimes. Now, referring back to your previous comments: I pointed out that people believe what they want to believe (to which you made a comment). But let me point something out to you- which has been completely ignored so far: Seth Abramson is a far-left commentator. There is no semblance of unbaised, impartial reporting from him. He has written for various left- (to far-left) leaning publications... and even wrote a book about the fact that collusion with the Russians was already "proven". So why should this guy be listened to as an objective source. ON THE OTHER HAND... Barr has had a long and distinguished career with- to my knowledge- no previous suppositions of being a partisan hack.
So, again: liberals have NO basis for calling out Barr, other than they don't like what he said / did. But, much like Trump himself, there is no track record of being / doing all the things that he is accused of being / doing. Abramson, on the other hand, has a long history of partisanship. Yet we're supposed to trust him... while rejecting Barr? Someone is going to have to explain that with more than just their feelings.
Quote: @SFVikeFan said:
@ pumpf said:
@ KingBash said:
You know what, Fox News'ers? Here's a very good place to get some of your information:
twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118631217212067841 <<<<< This site for some reason won't let me post Twitter, so copy and paste.
An accomplished author who's followed this more closely than probably anybody. I've followed his daily feed since the day Trump fired Comey.
Don't say we haven't tried to show you the truth.
Well, Barr was an accomplished public servant for decades before becoming AG. He was well-respected by everyone as a fair, tough guy who was not beholden to anyone. But as soon as he said something that people didn't like, suddenly he became a "Trump stooge". Can anyone find any evidence of Barr being corrupt- or partisan- prior to him becoming AG?
My point is: is Seth Abramson really worth following- as an unbiased source of truth? Or is he just someone that tells people what they want to hear?
Did you forget you already adked that question and had it answered before?
Barr is completely biased. He was already involved in one Presidenttial cover-up during Iran contra affair. That should have automatically disqualified him or at the least recused himself.
https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/pajd...-up-before
On top of that, Barr sent Trump attorneys a 20 page memo declaring a President can't be indicted for obstruction of justice a year ago. Trump read it, loved it, fired his own hand picked AG Sessions and hired Barr because of thst memo.
Barr exonerated Trump without ever seen one piece of evidence or the Mueller report. How the fuck he wasn't forced to recuse himself from the investigation after that memo is beyond fucked up.
Complete banana republic at work.
Your link said that Barr was ACCUSED of it. Well whoop-dee-do. People get ACCUSED of things all the time. People here accuse me of being a racist. I can accuse you of being a martian. Accusations don't really mean anything (unless there are multiple, on-going such accusations; then it's possible that with all that smoke there is some fire). One biased article, citing an ACCUSATION is not proof of anything. Hillary has been ACCUSED of all kinds of things. And there is alot more evidence pointing to her guilt in those things... than in Barr being guilty of acting improperly... or Trump colluding with Russia for that matter.
So, no: he wasn't "involved". He was accused. Do you have anything more than that one accusation? From what I can see, that is the only possible blemish on the guy's career. Hardly a career, partisan hack. But, again: he didn't tell people what they wanted to hear... so now he's Hitler.
|
![[Image: giphy.gif?cid=790b76115cb8f5f46a754452410f5371]](https://media3.giphy.com/media/9y81i7SFuzhW8/giphy.gif?cid=790b76115cb8f5f46a754452410f5371)
