Mueller personally told AG that he had mischaracterized the investigation's findings

Discussion in 'World News, Current Events & Politics' started by Xzi, May 1, 2019.

  1. Xzi
    OP

    Xzi All your base are belong to the proletariat

    pip Contributor
    20
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...apture-context-nature-and-substance-of-probe/

    It's beginning to look like we're going to need to start another criminal investigation, this time focused on Mr. Barr.
     
    Last edited by Xzi, May 1, 2019
    heavyd2244 likes this.
  2. KingVamp

    KingVamp Haaah-hahahaha!

    Member
    13
    Sep 13, 2009
    United States
    Netherworld
    So, is this the part where I call you crazy and delusional or maybe buttery males? Maybe somehow reading the opposite of what this says. Is this the part where I suddenly flip on rather Mueller report is reliable or not?

    The government is going to need so much clean up.
     
    CallmeBerto and Xzi like this.
  3. chrisrlink

    chrisrlink Intel Pentium III Hamster inside

    Member
    9
    Aug 27, 2009
    United States
    inside your crappy old PC
    oooo i hope this goes well (as in bad for Barr and trump)
     
  4. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    11
    Nov 21, 2005
    United States
    Did you just read the headline, or the whole article?

     
  5. regnad

    regnad Button Masher

    Member
    8
    May 19, 2008
    Days after the letter and subsequent phone call, Barr was asked under oath if Mueller agreed with his characterization, and he said straight up that he didn't know what Mueller thought.

    That's perjury. Simple and unequivocal.

    At the VERY least this should require Barr to recuse himself from any further involvement with anything related to the Mueller investigation or any of its ongoing offshoot investigations. But better would be that he step down from his position as AG.

    As Ted Lieu said, maybe he could take over SHS's job as Press Secretary where he can lie to the public all he wants.
     
  6. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    13
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    I have to be honest: I never read that "no collusion" in Barr's summary that Trump touted all the time. Yes, it grossly downplayed a lot of mayor things in the report (as now illustrated by Mueller himself), but I don't jump to the conclusion that just because Barr downplayed the investigation result and withheld the report for some more weeks, he is therefore an accomplice.

    At this point, I think he's "merely" being extremely naive. And...he did release the (redacted) report in the end, right? :unsure:
     
  7. Xzi
    OP

    Xzi All your base are belong to the proletariat

    pip Contributor
    20
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    Barr testified today in front of the Senate and was very dodgy about answering a lot of questions directly, if at all. The answers we did get seemed to indicate that Barr barely read the Mueller report at all before issuing his summary, and he may still have yet to read most of it.

    Barr was scheduled to testify in front of the House tomorrow, but he's already announced he won't be attending. Needless to say, there are already calls for his resignation, but they'll be starting with a subpoena, and then presumably, contempt hearings.
     
  8. willebug

    willebug Member

    Newcomer
    2
    Jan 12, 2013
    United States
    Orange man bad.
     
  9. Xzi
    OP

    Xzi All your base are belong to the proletariat

    pip Contributor
    20
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    William Barr isn't orange, he's a Fred Flintstone-looking skinsuit.
     
  10. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    13
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    Hmm... I have no answer to that (haven't seen much of that testification).

    And not attending further hearings... Won't that just prove that something's amiss?

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    ROFL... I always thought he looked like John Goodman. Who effectively played Fred Flintstone once. :rofl:
     
    Xzi likes this.
  11. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    11
    Nov 21, 2005
    United States

    I haven't been following super closely, but wasn't his objection that it wasn't members of the House who were going to question him, but lawyers tuned for attack? I count it as a sign of wisdom when someone knows not to walk into a trap that actually has a "TRAP!" sign hanging on the door.
     
  12. Xzi
    OP

    Xzi All your base are belong to the proletariat

    pip Contributor
    20
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    Several members of the House are seasoned lawyers themselves. His excuse might as well have simply been, "I'm scared."
     
  13. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    11
    Nov 21, 2005
    United States
    But I believe Barr explicitly stated that he would make himself available to members of Congress only, not their designated inquisitors. The Special Counsel regs state that the AG reports "to Congress."
     
  14. Lacius

    Lacius GBAtemp Legend

    Member
    18
    May 11, 2008
    United States
    Using lawyers happens all the time in these situations, even to attorneys general. Republicans used one during the Kavanaugh hearing in the Senate, for example. Barr is scared, and I would be too after, among other nonsense, perjuring myself.
     
    Josshy0125, IncredulousP and Xzi like this.
  15. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    11
    Nov 21, 2005
    United States
    The Kavanaugh hearings weren't subject to the Special Counsel regs. Different ballgame.

    And as for that perjury claim you've been flogging, even CNN doesn't think it holds water.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/01/politics/fact-check-william-barr-lie-to-congress/index.html

    Besides the requirement of an explicit false statement, note that it must also be a material fact that is falsified. And whether Mueller agreed with Barr's conclusion or not wasn't material, since Mueller's report waived providing an answer to the obstruction question. As far as I've seen it reported, Mueller doesn't believe he even can provide an answer. So his opinion 1) shouldn't be known, and 2) isn't relevant. And the materiality of the question is further diluted by the fact that the report, including Mueller's summaries, has been released.
     
    the_leg likes this.
  16. WD_GASTER2

    WD_GASTER2 I tinker and code.

    Member
    7
    Jun 17, 2018
    France
    you have to admit that if you look at this impartially for even one second....this has been an absolute crap show.
    Can they just get Mueller to give his 2 cents and be asked "ok dude, what the F did you actually mean with the darn report"
    Republicans are claiming this will hurt democrats and pound on that point consistently....ok...then if this is politics why not let them?
    that way everyone call it a day. This whole thing is absurd at this point.

    Wrong person dude. this would be more like "yabba dabba do man bad"
     
    Last edited by WD_GASTER2, May 3, 2019
    Xzi likes this.
  17. SG854

    SG854 If It Bleeds, We Can Kill It

    Member
    12
    Feb 17, 2017
    Comoros
    Mueller is limited on what he can say because of the legal framework he set up in the report. It allows him to find him innocent, but doesn’t allow him to indict, to acuse Trump of a crime, or to find him guilty. He’s leaving it to congress and the people to decide.
     
  18. WD_GASTER2

    WD_GASTER2 I tinker and code.

    Member
    7
    Jun 17, 2018
    France
    my point is, he can still be called in to testify afaik. If the report didnt capture his meaning he should straight up be asked what the meaning is.

    Also you change avatars and flags a lot.
     
    Xzi likes this.
  19. Lacius

    Lacius GBAtemp Legend

    Member
    18
    May 11, 2008
    United States
    First, there is prescendent for the use of lawyers in comparable circumstances, and it's completely allowed by law and regs. The most recent Supreme Court nomination was just a high profile example fresh in most people's heads.

    Second, it is a material fact that Mueller did not support Barr's conclusions as presented to Congress and the public, that Mueller told Barr in writing, and Barr lied about it. From Mueller:

    "The summary letter... did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations."

    Barr lied. His credibility is more gone than it already was, and I don't want to hear from Barr anymore. I want to hear from Mueller.
     
    Last edited by Lacius, May 3, 2019
    Josshy0125 and Xzi like this.
  20. Xzi
    OP

    Xzi All your base are belong to the proletariat

    pip Contributor
    20
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    Hanafuda, IncredulousP and Lacius like this.
Quick Reply
Draft saved Draft deleted
Loading...