Mueller does not find Trump campaign knowingly conspired with Russia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So will Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Roberts uphold or deny a congressional subpoena on the Mueller Report?

The law is pretty clear that the report has to be redacted. Judges interpret laws, especially the three you mentioned.

Actually, the law is pretty clear that it has to go to Congress unredacted!!!!

Redactions are only for the public

Unless Mueller files a detailed indictment charging members of the Trump campaign with conspiring with Russia, the public may never learn the full scope of what Mueller and his team has found — including potentially scandalous behavior that doesn't amount to a provable crime.

The reason: The special counsel operates under rules that severely constrain how much information can be made public.

Those rules require that the special counsel's report to the attorney general be "confidential." And, while the attorney general is required to notify Congress about Mueller's findings, the rules say those reports must amount to "brief notifications, with an outline of the actions and the reasons for them."

"Expectations that we will see a comprehensive report from the special counsel are high. But the written regulations that govern the special counsel's reporting requirements should arguably dampen those expectations," said Chuck Rosenberg, a former federal prosecutor and NBC News analyst.

When Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr released the report of his investigation of President Bill Clinton in 1998, all of Washington paused to digest the 453-page document (plus 2,000 pages of appendixes), with its salacious details of the president's sexual dalliance with an intern. It was made public at the same time it was sent to Congress.

The Mueller report won't be anything like that. Starr operated under the now-defunct independent counsel law, meaning he called many of his own shots, outside the purview of the Justice Department. Mueller is a special counsel under Justice Department supervision, subject to very specific regulations.

Here is the sum total of what the rules say about a final report:

"At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel."

What's more, a 1999 document outlining that rule in the federal register criticizes the way in which independent counsel reports like Starr's were made public, saying that a public prosecutors report "provides an incentive to over-investigate, in order to avoid potential public criticism for not having turned over every stone, and creates potential harm to individual privacy interests."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-departmen...pointed-mueller-report-n971601

[Anonymous]

I know it's a difficult concept but what you cite is in reference to the public NOT the Congress.

That law says what MUST go publically to Congress and what CANNOT go to the public. It does not mention anything about witholding from Congress itself. There's pretty much nothing the Gang of 8 can't see.

Sorry buddy, unless the SC decides to overturn 200+ years of precedent (including on point Watergate cases) and directly contradict the federalist papers then Congress is gonna get an unredacted copy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know it's a difficult concept but what you cite is in reference to the public NOT the Congress.

That law says what MUST go publically to Congress and what CANNOT go to the public. It does not mention anything about witholding from Congress itself. There's pretty much nothing the Gang of 8 can't see.

Sorry buddy, unless the SC decides to overturn 200+ years of precedent (including on point Watergate cases) and directly contradict the federalist papers then Congress is gonna get an unredacted copy.

Good to know. Thanks for posting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

You honestly think this is about winning or losing? You must be one of those spite voters, projecting.

Because the rest of us are worried about the lies and corruption.

Frankly? Yes I do. The moment Dems started talking about R's accepting the results of the election, feeling Hillary was imminent, it was clear where Dems stood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So will Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Roberts uphold or deny a congressional subpoena on the Mueller Report?

The law is pretty clear that the report has to be redacted. Judges interpret laws, especially the three you mentioned.

Actually, the law is pretty clear that it has to go to Congress unredacted!!!!

Redactions are only for the public

LOL, I was thinking a few steps ahead already. Sorry, let me explain - if there is indeed sensitive information the report, there is no way that Barr will release it underacted to congress, because they know doing so is as good as providing it to the public underacted. Congressional Democrats will absolutely leak the document to gain political advantage. There is no judicial remedy for enforcing a congressional subpoena so the original PP's question on the potential actions of the three judges is meaningless within that context. My money is on Barr playing hardball and not providing underacted report to congress. He will be held in contempt of congress, just like Eric Holder, Lois Lerner, and Bryan Pagliano were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

This is hardly a liberal conceit.

Trust what? The Mueller report? Y'all aren't doing that. Instead you are making stuff up because you don't like the results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

This is hardly a liberal conceit.

Trust what? The Mueller report? Y'all aren't doing that. Instead you are making stuff up because you don't like the results.

Trust but verify the AG, you dumbass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

This is hardly a liberal conceit.

Trust what? The Mueller report? Y'all aren't doing that. Instead you are making stuff up because you don't like the results.

Trust but verify the AG, you dumbass.

Because you didn't get what you want the way you wanted it? LOL. Yes, I've heard Mueller screaming that Barr is lying all over the press!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know it's a difficult concept but what you cite is in reference to the public NOT the Congress.

That law says what MUST go publically to Congress and what CANNOT go to the public. It does not mention anything about witholding from Congress itself. There's pretty much nothing the Gang of 8 can't see.

Sorry buddy, unless the SC decides to overturn 200+ years of precedent (including on point Watergate cases) and directly contradict the federalist papers then Congress is gonna get an unredacted copy.

Good to know. Thanks for posting

Not good to know falsehoods. There is no law that says the underacted report by a special counsel must go to congress. There's nothing that congress can't issue a subpoena for, whether they'll see what they asked for is a different matter altogether.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

This is hardly a liberal conceit.

Trust what? The Mueller report? Y'all aren't doing that. Instead you are making stuff up because you don't like the results.

Trust but verify the AG, you dumbass.

Because you didn't get what you want the way you wanted it? LOL. Yes, I've heard Mueller screaming that Barr is lying all over the press!

Well, Barr did have to issue two additonal statements after his initial one, so someone or something must be prompting him to keep changing his message.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

This is hardly a liberal conceit.

Trust what? The Mueller report? Y'all aren't doing that. Instead you are making stuff up because you don't like the results.

Trust but verify the AG, you dumbass.

Because you didn't get what you want the way you wanted it? LOL. Yes, I've heard Mueller screaming that Barr is lying all over the press!

Well, Barr did have to issue two additonal statements after his initial one, so someone or something must be prompting him to keep changing his message.

OMG, really? I didn't KNOW that. Surely Barr then is lying through his teeth and Trump indeed colluded directly with Putin to change votes and STEAL the election

Use the brain God gave you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

This is hardly a liberal conceit.

Trust what? The Mueller report? Y'all aren't doing that. Instead you are making stuff up because you don't like the results.

Trust but verify the AG, you dumbass.

Because you didn't get what you want the way you wanted it? LOL. Yes, I've heard Mueller screaming that Barr is lying all over the press!

Well, Barr did have to issue two additonal statements after his initial one, so someone or something must be prompting him to keep changing his message.

OMG, really? I didn't KNOW that. Surely Barr then is lying through his teeth and Trump indeed colluded directly with Putin to change votes and STEAL the election

Use the brain God gave you.

Oh, that's rich. "Use the brain God gave you, and blindly accept the word of a partisan, prejudiced AG appointed by a lying, corrupt president. I'm so much smarter than you!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

This is hardly a liberal conceit.

Trust what? The Mueller report? Y'all aren't doing that. Instead you are making stuff up because you don't like the results.

I haven’t seen it yet so how I can trust or distrust it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russia!!!!

It's all Russia!!!!

Everywhere I look, I see Russia!!!!!!

You Dems have become crazier than Sarah Palin.

They said Rs would not accept the results of the election and the Mueller report. This is all hilarious to me. Liberals just can’t deal with losing. Give everyone a trophy mentality has damaged a whole generation

You honestly think this is about winning or losing? You must be one of those spite voters, projecting.

Because the rest of us are worried about the lies and corruption.

Frankly? Yes I do. The moment Dems started talking about R's accepting the results of the election, feeling Hillary was imminent, it was clear where Dems stood.

Wait, Trump is the one who seeded this with the whole "this election is rigged" thing. That is where it came from, so it is clear his seeding this worked in your mind. Because where he and Russia were concerned it WAS rigged. For him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So will Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Roberts uphold or deny a congressional subpoena on the Mueller Report?

The law is pretty clear that the report has to be redacted. Judges interpret laws, especially the three you mentioned.

Actually, the law is pretty clear that it has to go to Congress unredacted!!!!

Redactions are only for the public

LOL, I was thinking a few steps ahead already. Sorry, let me explain - if there is indeed sensitive information the report, there is no way that Barr will release it underacted to congress, because they know doing so is as good as providing it to the public underacted. Congressional Democrats will absolutely leak the document to gain political advantage. There is no judicial remedy for enforcing a congressional subpoena so the original PP's question on the potential actions of the three judges is meaningless within that context. My money is on Barr playing hardball and not providing underacted report to congress. He will be held in contempt of congress, just like Eric Holder, Lois Lerner, and Bryan Pagliano were.

I am old enough to remember JUST LAST YEAR when congressional republicans started this by selectively leaking classified material. See Nunes, Jordan and Gowdy. Are you really this obtuse?