Posted on Mar 6, 2020
Judge slams Barr, orders review of Mueller report deletions
549
14
12
5
5
0
Judge
Republicans
Democrats
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
2
2
0
As I remember events AG stated he disagreed with Muellers statements in the Executive Summary because there was not sufficient evidence to support them in the following report. How is that a lack of candor? If he never made that statement and just redacted parts of the Executive Summary I could understand that judgement but the AG made the statement repeatedly. The AG was within his rights to change any aspect of the Executive Summary in my view as long as he did not change the contents of the report itself and what it presented to the public. That is what is being argued over here weather he had the right to change the Executive Summary or not. If the reports findings and the Executive Summary were in sync to begin with you can't change the presentation of one by changing the presentation of the other. In effect this judge proved AG Barr's points about the report he made when it was released.
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
“ The AG was within his rights to change any aspect of the Executive Summary in my view as long as he did not change the contents of the report itself and what it presented to the public”.
I’d recommend you read the opinion of the Court, as that is essentially what the Court is stating with this ruling. Again, I’d highly recommend you read it for yourself, but the Court wrote:
“And, the Court cannot reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report. The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary”.
Translation: ‘before the report was publicly available, the AG issued some statements about the report. When comparing those statements to the actual report, they really don’t match up. The Court is calling b*llshit on that type of behavior’.
Also, This ruling isn’t really political; the Judge is Republican-appointed.
I’d recommend you read the opinion of the Court, as that is essentially what the Court is stating with this ruling. Again, I’d highly recommend you read it for yourself, but the Court wrote:
“And, the Court cannot reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report. The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary”.
Translation: ‘before the report was publicly available, the AG issued some statements about the report. When comparing those statements to the actual report, they really don’t match up. The Court is calling b*llshit on that type of behavior’.
Also, This ruling isn’t really political; the Judge is Republican-appointed.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Dems are getting restless and starting smoke screen tactics because of John Durham.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
JESUS CHRIST. We're back to this.
This feels like a desperate attempt to try and pin something unlawful on AG Barr. You'd think people would maybe move onto some more productive endeavors, like figuring out policy. Nope.
There's got to be blood in this turnip somewhere...
I'd file this in the same place I'd put the recent notion that Hillary is going to be deposed for her email practices.
This is stupid. But I guess this is what passes for action in politics these days.
This feels like a desperate attempt to try and pin something unlawful on AG Barr. You'd think people would maybe move onto some more productive endeavors, like figuring out policy. Nope.
There's got to be blood in this turnip somewhere...
I'd file this in the same place I'd put the recent notion that Hillary is going to be deposed for her email practices.
This is stupid. But I guess this is what passes for action in politics these days.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google