Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Senator Lindsay Graham-Just like Barr

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Senator Lindsay Graham-Just like Barr

    Graham is bought and paid for. His old friend John McCain should be spinning in his grave:

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/opini...vic/index.html

  • #2
    Umm....I'm finding as much evidence in your article of Graham being 'bought and paid for' as Mueller found about Collusion.

    None.

    In point of fact, Graham told someone to do what about 85% of everyone ever brought in front of that committee does. Refuse to talk and plead the 5th on every question. Because it's not a court. It's a kangaroo court made up of politicians, who go about doing this sort of 'hearing' as a way to browbeat people and otherwise abuse judicial powers that legislators don't have to create soundbytes for their next election campaign. There have been very few on those committees over the years who have ever cared about ascertaining the truth, Trey Gowdy being one example that comes quickly to mind. I've personally been waiting for someone to get dragged up in front of that circus to testify and answer every question presented with a different species of fruit.

    And Graham's statement about anyone going back into 'that circus' (meaning House and Senate committees on the warpath) is a fool? That's common knowledge.

    And to reiterate, CNN made a hit piece assuming that Graham is in Trump's pocket and ASSERTING such without any shred of evidence. It's only a relevant article if you're an idiot. Or a Democrat. But I repeat myself.
    Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
      Umm....I'm finding as much evidence in your article of Graham being 'bought and paid for' as Mueller found about Collusion.

      None.
      Well, to be fair, it took two years of multiple posters telling him that nearly every day before the truth finally registered...

      There MUST be an evil plan! There MUST be corruption! Otherwise, the only explanation is that Trump won the election...
      Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

      Comment


      • #4
        Barr is not a good AG:

        https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/17/polit...mey/index.html

        Barr is doing two things: first he is acting as the president's attorney and, second, he is attempting to subvert the Mueller Investigation.

        Both of which are undermining his credibility as the AG.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
          Well, to be fair, it took two years of multiple posters telling him that nearly every day before the truth finally registered...
          ...doesn't sound like it registered. Still squawking the same mumble jumble as 2 years ago.
          "Stand for the flag ~ Kneel for the fallen"

          "A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer." ~ Bruce Lee

          Comment


          • #6
            It is a compliment to be compared to AG Barr. Just FYI.
            "Stand for the flag ~ Kneel for the fallen"

            "A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer." ~ Bruce Lee

            Comment


            • #7
              Here is a nice condensation of the Mueller report that makes it easy to discuss.

              https://www.lawfareblog.com/obstruct...eport-heat-map

              B. Conduct regarding the Flynn investigation

              Obstructive act (p. 43): Trump asked for Comey’s loyalty and pressured Comey to “let this go” regarding the FBI investigation into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. “In analyzing whether these statements constitute an obstructive act, a threshold question is whether Comey’s account of the interaction is accurate, and, if so, whether the President’s statements had the tendency to impede the administration of justice by shutting down an inquiry that could result in a grand jury investigation and criminal charge.” “[S]ubstantial evidence corroborates Comey’s account.”

              Nexus (p. 46): By the time Trump spoke to Comey, Trump had been informed that Flynn had been interviewed by the FBI and that his statements could violate 18 U.S.C. § 1001, the prohibition on lying to federal investigators. “[T]he President’s instruction to the FBI Director to ‘let[] Flynn go’ suggests his awareness that Flynn could face criminal exposure for his conduct and was at risk of prosecution.”

              Intent: “[E]vidence is inconclusive” as to whether Trump was aware of Flynn’s calls with Kislyak when they occurred. But “[e]vidence does establish that the President connected the Flynn investigation to the FBI’s broader Russia investigation.”

              Trump attempted to have Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland “draft an internal email” stating that Trump did not ask Flynn to discuss sanctions with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak, which McFarland did not do because she was not sure if the statement would be accurate. Though “evidence does not establish” that Trump was trying to make McFarland lie, the incident “highlights the President’s concern about being associated with Flynn’s conduct,” and McFarland was disturbed by the request and felt it was “irregular.”
              If you compare the way Trump associates and Clinton associates were "interviewed", Trump for Collusion and Clinton for the email scandal, it's pretty clear that Flynn was the victim of a "perjury trap". The Strzok-Page testimony clearly indicates hostility towards Trump in the FBI and reason for Trump to believe that bias may effect how his associates were treated. If as "liberals" suggest Papadopoulos was the justification for investigation of Trump then the case for bias is even stronger as Papadopoulos was clearly set up by the intelligence community in the hope he would bite on them dangling Russian "intel" in his face. Trump could not have obstructed what is proving to be an investigation that was constructed on illegitimate grounds. Since Trump knew he had not engaged in collusion it is only reasonable that he would question Comey's reluctance to investigate the corruption that had lead to the investigation. Comey's refusal to hold anyone at the FBI responsible would seem to justify dismissal. The only counter argument would be if Comey knew that Trump was guilty which the Mueller report proves would have been impossible.


              C. Conduct regarding public confirmation of the Russia investigation

              Obstructive act (p. 60): Though “evidence shows” that Trump reached out to intelligence community leadership, that outreach was “not interpreted … as directives to improperly interfere with the investigation.” Mueller notes that Trump’s outreach to NSA Director Mike Rogers was “significant enough that Rogers thought it important to document the encounter in a written memorandum.”

              Nexus (p. 60): The outreach took place following FBI Director James Comey’s announcement of the FBI’s counterintelligence and criminal investigation of Russian election interference.

              Intent (p. 60): “The evidence does not establish that the President asked or directed intelligence agency leaders to stop or interfere with the FBI’s Russia investigation[.]” However, “the President’s intent in trying to prevent Sessions’s recusal, and in reaching out the Coats, Pompeo, Rogers, and Comey following Comey’s public announcement of the FBI’s Russia investigation, is nevertheless relevant to understanding what motivated the President’s other actions towards the investigation.” In other words, while Trump’s actions here do not indicate intent as to the specific potentially obstructive conduct at issue in this section, they are relevant to understanding his intent as to his broader pattern of conduct toward the investigation.
              Trump knew there was no collusion and as the intelligence agencies work for him he had a duty to question why they were engaged in a pointless investigation. Most if not all of the "evidence" used to start the investigation was of such poor quality and absurd that it is hard to understand why he would need to ask the intelligence agencies to investigate the investigators. Now that the Mueller report is over and the Democrats have given the Russians what they wanted in the way of disrupting the political process Barr is finally trying to get to the bottom of what appears to be at the very least gross incompetence.


              D. Firing of James Comey

              Obstructive act (p. 74): “Firing Comey would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural and probable effect of interfering with or impeding the investigation.” Trump’s handling of the Comey firing and his actions in the subsequent days “had the potential to affect a successor director’s conduct of the investigation,” though removing Comey “would not necessarily … prevent or impede the FBI from continuing its investigation.”

              Nexus (p. 75): By the time of the Comey firing, Trump was aware of both the FBI investigation into Russian election interference and the investigation into Flynn.

              Intent (p. 75): “Substantial evidence” indicates that Trump fired Comey because of “Comey’s unwillingness to publicly state that the President was not personally under investigation.” Mueller notes that “[s]ome evidence indicates that the President believed that the erroneous perception he was under investigation harmed his ability to manage domestic and foreign affairs”—but “[o]ther evidence … indicates that the President wanted to protect himself from an investigation into his campaign.” “The initial reliance on a pretextual justification [for Comey’s firing] could support an inference that the President had concerns about providing the real reason for the firing, although the evidence does not resolve whether those concerns were personal, personal, or both.”
              Again Trump knew there was no collusion so it was reasonable for him to ask Comey why he was not reviewing the "evidence" for starting the investigation. Asking Comey if he was personally vested in what appeared to be a politically motivated investigation starting with ludicrous opposition research seems perfectly reasonable. Comey's refusal to public state that Trump was not being personally investigated was probably the only way Trump had to clear Comey of collusion in a falsely predicated investigation. Comey's refusal to either make the public statement or explain to Trump why he would not do so was reasonable grounds for dismissal as we all now know and as Trump certainly knew at the time the collusion charge was predicated on false premises that a competent FBI director should have at least been suspicious of.



              E. Efforts to fire Mueller

              Obstructive act (p. 87): Former White House Counsel Don McGahn is a “credible witness” in providing evidence that Trump indeed attempted to fire Mueller. This “would qualify as an obstructive act” if the firing “would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.”

              Nexus (p. 89): “Substantial evidence” indicates that, at this point, Trump was aware that “his conduct was under investigation by a federal prosecutor who could present any evidence of federal crimes to a grand jury.”

              Intent (p. 89): “Substantial evidence indicates that the President’s attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel’s oversight of investigations that involved the President’s conduct[.]”
              Since Trump knew there was nothing to investigate and Mueller's team was clearly made up of partisan hacks it was reasonable for him to conclude that Mueller was compromised. Mueller had fallen into the rather amateurish "insurance" scam making his competence or unbiased state doubtful. Almost a year before the investigation finished it was clear there was no collusion but since it was a politically motivated investigation Mueller apparently allowed it to continue without cause proving that his interest was not in clearing a wrongly accused president but in promoting a hoax and hiding the misconduct in the FBI, especially of his friend Comey for as long as possible.


              F. Efforts to curtail Mueller

              Obstructive act (p. 97): Trump’s effort to force Sessions to confine the investigation to only investigating future election interference “would qualify as an obstructive act if it would naturally obstruct the investigation and any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry.” “Taken together, the President’s directives indicate that Sessions was being instructed to tell the Special Counsel to end the existing investigation into the President and his campaign[.]”

              Nexus (p. 97): At the relevant point, “the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the Special Counsel was public knowledge.”

              Intent (p. 97): “Substantial evidence” indicates that Trump’s efforts were “intended to prevent further investigative structiny of the President’s and his campaign’s conduct.”
              The use of the term substantial evidence is telling, in matter as serious as this proof is the standard not substantial evidence. Mueller was not acting as a reporter looking for evidence to insinuate wrong doing he was acting as a prosecutor and was bound by a more substantial requirement for evidence. His opinion of what Trump was doing is of no legal standing and should never have been in the report. If the substantial evidence existed why was Sessions not required to testify? Even if Trump asked McGahn to pressure Sessions not to recuse himself it would be perfectly reasonable since there could be no reason for someone to recuse themselves from an investigation into a non crime. As pointed out earlier the real Russian collusion came from the investigation itself which gave the Russians an easy coup by tying the hands of the president. All of this substantial evidence nonsense is simply the Mueller teams way of trying to justify additional investigations to further impede the function of the Trump administration.


              G. Efforts to prevent disclosure of Trump Tower emails

              Obstructive act (p. 105): “[T]he evidence does not establish” that Trump sought to prevent information about the Trump Tower meeting from reaching Congress or the special counsel’s office. Rather, the obfuscation “occurred in the context of developing a press strategy.”

              Nexus (p. 105): “[T]he existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the Special Counsel was public knowledge, and the President had been told that the emails were responsive to congressional inquiries.” But “the evidence does not establish that the President sought to prevent disclosure” to the grand jury or to congressional inquiries.

              Intent (p. 105): “The evidence does not establish” that Trump intended to prevent Mueller or Congress from obtaining the information.
              If the FISA warrants were obtained under false pretext, which now seems evident, Trump was within his rights to try and prevent the disclosure of what was at the time the emails of a private citizen. This is one of the grounds for the Barr investigation.



              H. Efforts to have Sessions take over the investigation

              Obstructive act (p. 111): This question “would not turn on what Attorney General Sessions would actually do if unrecused, but on whether the efforts to reverse his recusal would naturally have had the effect of impeding the Russia investigation. … The duration of the President’s efforts … and the fact that the President repeatedly criticized Sessions in public and private for failing to tell the President that he would have to recuse is relevant to assessing whether the President’s efforts to have Sessions unrecuse could qualify as obstructive acts.”

              Nexus (p. 111): At the relevant point, “the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the Special Counsel was public knowledge,” as well as the existence of a second grand jury empaneled in July 2017. However, “[w]hether the conduct towards the Attorney General would have a foreseeable impact on proceedings turns much of the same evidence discussed with respect to the obstructive-act element.”

              Intent (p. 111): “There is evidence that at least one purpose of the President’s conduct toward Sessions was to have Sessions assume control over the Russia investigation and supervise it in a way that would restrict its scope.”
              Someone clearly need to take control of an out of control investigation predicated on an obvious hoax.



              I. Order to McGahn to deny Trump’s order to fire Mueller

              Obstructive act (p. 118): This effort “would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural tendency to constrain McGahn from testifying truthfully or to undermine his credibility as a potential witness[.]” There is “some evidence” that Trump genuinely believed press reports that he had ordered McGahn to fire Mueller were wrong. However, “[o]ther evidence cuts against that understanding of the president’s conduct”—and the special counsel lists a great deal more evidence on this latter point.

              Nexus (p. 119): At this point “the Special Counsel’s use of a grand jury had been further confirmed by the return of several indictments.” Mueller’s office had indicated to Trump’s lawyers that it was investigating obstruction, and Trump knew that McGahn had already been interviewed by Mueller on the topic. “That evidence indicates the President’s awareness” that his efforts to fire Mueller were relevant to official proceedings. Trump “likely contemplated the ongoing investigation and any proceedings arising from it” in directing McGahn to create a false record of the earlier interaction.

              Intent (p. 120): “Substantial evidence indicates that … the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn’s account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny” of Trump.
              This is pure speculation on the Mueller teams part. They cannot read Trumps mind and if they had actual evidence the partisan hacks that made up the Mueller team would surely have moved for charges of obstruction.


              J. Conduct toward Flynn, Manafort, and unknown individual (Stone?)

              Obstructive act (p. 131): “The President’s actions toward witnesses … would qualify as obstructive if they had the natural tendency to prevent particular witnesses from testifying truthfully, or otherwise would have the probable effect of influencing, delaying, or preventing their testimony to law enforcement.” Though Trump’s lawyers exchange with Flynn’s lawyers “could have had the potential to affect Flynn’s decision to cooperate,” Mueller “could not determine” whether Trump had any knowledge of or involvement in the exchange. Regarding Manafort, “there is evidence that the President’s actions had the potential” to influence Manafort’s thinking on cooperation, and his public statements “had the potential to influence the trial jury.”

              Nexus (p. 132): Trump’s actions toward all three individuals “appear to have been connected to pending or anticipated official proceedings involving each individual.”

              Intent (p. 132): “Evidence concerning the President’s intent related to Flynn as a potential witness is inconclusive.” But “[e]vidence … indicates that the President intended to encourage Manafort not to cooperate with the government,” though “there are alternative explanations” for Trump’s comments during the Manafort trial.
              Since Flynn had clearly been the victim of a "perjury trap" Trump had no way of knowing how dishonest the investigators were willing to be in their report. He had reason to believe that the pressure the government was putting on potential witnesses would cause them to give false testimony. At no point was there any evidence that the Mueller team was interested in finding the truth but were rather engaged in finding the appearance of misconduct by Trump. The use of plea bargains and similar methods by prosecutors is well know to produce false testimony and all such testimony should require exceptional levels of proof.



              K. Conduct toward Michael Cohen

              Obstructive act (p. 153): “[T]he evidence available to us does not establish that the President directed or aided Cohen’s false testimony.” But “the evidence … could support an inference that the President used inducements in the form of positive messages in an effort to get Cohen not to cooperate, and then turned to attacks and intimidation to deter the provision of information or to undermine Cohen’s credibility once Cohen began to cooperate.”

              Nexus (p. 154): Trump was aware of investigations into Cohen by the Special Counsel’s Office, Congress, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.

              Intent (p. 155): “There is evidence that could support the inference that the President intended to discourage Cohen from cooperating with the government. … The evidence could support an inference that the President was aware of [Cohen’s efforts to continue the Moscow Project past January 2016] at the time of Cohen’s false statements to Congress. … The President’s public remarks following Cohen’s guilty plea also suggest that the President may have been concerned about what Cohen told investigators about the Trump Tower Moscow project. … The President’s concern about Cohen cooperating may have been directed at the Southern District of New York investigation into other aspects of the President’s dealings with Cohen rather than the investigation of Trump Tower Moscow. There is also some evidence that the President’s concern about Cohen cooperating was based on the President’s stated belief that Cohen would provide false testimony against the President in an attempt to obtain a lesser sentence for his unrelated criminal conduct. … Finally, the President’s statements insinuating that members of Cohen’s family committed crimes after Cohen began cooperating with the government could be viewed as an effort to retaliate against Cohen and chill further testimony adverse to the President by Cohen or others.”
              Cohen was a proven liar and it was obvious to everyone but the Mueller team that he should have been dismissed as a witness. It is absurd to suggest that Trump had no right to defend himself from being the victim of false testimony in an investigation that was not legitimate from the start.
              We hunt the hunters

              Comment


              • #8
                All this hate for Barr coming from the same guy that has scolded everybody who has been critical or suspicious about Comey, Clapper and Brennan because they had been in the CIA or the FBI,
                So has Barr, he worked for the CIA and when GHW Bush nominated him to AG in 1991, Biden said that Barr was "a throwback to the days when we actually had attorneys general that would talk to you."
                Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Massena View Post
                  Graham is bought and paid for. His old friend John McCain should be spinning in his grave:

                  https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/opini...vic/index.html
                  McCain who in 2016 received and accepted $ 2700 from Soros .

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Massena View Post
                    Barr is not a good AG:

                    https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/17/polit...mey/index.html

                    Barr is doing two things: first he is acting as the president's attorney and, second, he is attempting to subvert the Mueller Investigation.

                    Both of which are undermining his credibility as the AG.
                    What a load of bovine excrement Massena.

                    Attempting to subvert the Mueller investigation?
                    News flash - its over. Complete. Released to the public.
                    Do please explain how he's "subverted" the report by releasing it.
                    Try to avoid banal Liberal talking points, and cite facts.

                    He's not the Presidents personal attorney, but he does represent the Administration and its policies (that's actually his job)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Freebird View Post

                      What a load of bovine excrement Massena.

                      Attempting to subvert the Mueller investigation?
                      News flash - its over. Complete. Released to the public.
                      Do please explain how he's "subverted" the report by releasing it.
                      Try to avoid banal Liberal talking points, and cite facts.

                      He's not the Presidents personal attorney, but he does represent the Administration and its policies (that's actually his job)
                      Really? Then please explain why and/or how Barr misrepresented the Mueller Report in his four-page summary.

                      And, no, representing the administration is not Barr's job. The AG is the nation's attorney, not the president's nor the administration's. That is the job of the White House Counsel. I've already provided the information from the DOJ's website as to what the AG's job is.

                      So you're wrong on at least two counts.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Massena View Post

                        Really? Then please explain why and/or how Barr misrepresented the Mueller Report in his four-page summary.
                        It wasn't a summary of the Mueller Report, as Barr stated publically.
                        It was an "Advisement of principal conclusions"

                        Please describe exactly the misrepresentation.
                        How did he misrepresent the conclusions of Mueller, considering that he quoted him directly on the key findings in his letter?


                        Originally posted by Massena View Post
                        And, no, representing the administration is not Barr's job. The AG is the nation's attorney, not the president's nor the administration's. That is the job of the White House Counsel. .
                        No, the WHC doesn't go to court to defend the policies of the government (administration)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Freebird View Post
                          No, the WHC doesn't go to court to defend the policies of the government (administration)
                          No, he doesn't. The Solicitor General does. It is quite easy to actually look up what the duties and responsibilities of the AG, etc. are. The government websites are very forthcoming in explaining those duties and responsibilities.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Freebird View Post

                            It wasn't a summary of the Mueller Report, as Barr stated publically.
                            It was an "Advisement of principal conclusions"

                            Please describe exactly the misrepresentation.
                            How did he misrepresent the conclusions of Mueller, considering that he quoted him directly on the key findings in his letter?
                            Barr's representations regarding obstruction of justice were incorrect and thus a misrepresentation. There are ten instances of obstruction of justice named in the Report itself. Have you read it yet? If you have a copy I'd be glad to go over them with you.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X