Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 250

Thread: Judge Swamp strikes again

  1. #151
    Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano says the evidence appears to increasingly show that the Donald Trump presidential campaign did collude with Russia during the height of the 2016 race and that Special Counsel Robert Mueller can prove it.

    More at: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...150653763.html
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano says the evidence appears to increasingly show that the Donald Trump presidential campaign did collude with Russia during the height of the 2016 race and that Special Counsel Robert Mueller can prove it.

    More at: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...150653763.html
    “Yes,” Napolitano agreed. “Conspiracy is an agreement to commit a crime … Whether or not the thing of value arrives. The agreement is what is the crime.”

    So, lets assume the agreement was to remove the sanctions on Russia, is that a crime? Judge Nap has been acting very funny lately.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    “Yes,” Napolitano agreed. “Conspiracy is an agreement to commit a crime … Whether or not the thing of value arrives. The agreement is what is the crime.”

    So, lets assume the agreement was to remove the sanctions on Russia, is that a crime? Judge Nap has been acting very funny lately.
    He has gone full TDS Russiaphobe.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  6. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    He has gone full TDS Russiaphobe.
    But why? he has previously said he is close friends with Trump and in his past, he has been very rational, very accurate, unemotional, without hyperbole with his assessment of other presidents and hot button political topics. Why change his tune now?

    I think if they ever get Trump for this Russia issue, it would be for lying about the non crime as opposed to committing any real crime of collusion.

  7. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    But why? he has previously said he is close friends with Trump and in his past, he has been very rational, very accurate, unemotional, without hyperbole with his assessment of other presidents and hot button political topics. Why change his tune now?

    I think if they ever get Trump for this Russia issue, it would be for lying about the non crime as opposed to committing any real crime of collusion.
    I don't know if it is one of the videos Youtube took down but when talking about Kavanaugh he said he was surprised what the FBI dug up on him.(Napolitano)
    If he wasn't a sleeper who has been activated because Trump won then he is being blackmailed.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  8. #156
    Andrew Napolitano is getting more confusing or confused by the hour.
    I used to be super careful to say Judge Napolitano for years due to the name sake of
    the hideous character know as Janet Napolitano, now I'm not so sure how
    far apart the two are.

  9. #157
    At one time Napolitano said that he believes the Clinton Foundation is a criminal enterprise,
    but the media is still stuffed with the fantasy of 'Russia Gate' , while Hillary , admittedly guilty
    of espionage , as well as unwittingly being stated by idiot Comey himself (claiming intent wasn't there lol)
    is ignored along with the uranium for cash deal, the foundation coffers,.///// right I know , this
    is just a rhetorical quest/comment.
    We have a very dangerous woman who may become our next president running free while everyone knows
    that her rightful place is Prison, along with Comey, Mueller , Holder, Lynch , and probably Obama.....
    well lets not forget the Bush cabal......grrrrr.......ok thanks, I feel a little bit better now. eor.

  10. #158
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  11. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    The Judge is trying to appear to be anti-political in case he gets nominated.

    See if you can find any Constitutional issues that you part ways with him on.

    He is leaps and bounds better than any other Supreme Court Justice we have ever had, probably in the history of the country.
    Was he nominated?
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.

    "To learn who rules over you simply find out who you arent allowed to criticize."

  12. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I don't know if it is one of the videos Youtube took down but when talking about Kavanaugh he said he was surprised what the FBI dug up on him.(Napolitano)
    If he wasn't a sleeper who has been activated because Trump won then he is being blackmailed.
    What did the Judge say that wasnt based on constitutional law?

    He doesnt GAF about the individual, whether its Chump or Hitlery, his stances are based on the Constitution...
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.

    "To learn who rules over you simply find out who you arent allowed to criticize."



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown View Post
    What did the Judge say that wasnt based on constitutional law?

    He doesnt GAF about the individual, whether its Chump or Hitlery, his stances are based on the Constitution...
    I have listed and discussed many examples here in this thread.

    If you want to discuss one pick a comment and reply to it.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  15. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown View Post
    Was he nominated?
    Ask me again in 6 years.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  16. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Ask me again in 6 years.
    I'll believe it when he gets nominated, he didn't get either SCOTUS seat so far and he didn't get AG when Sessions left.

    Trump wants young Justices to protect liberty for a long time plus Nap is an AnCap and Trump isn't.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  17. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I'll believe it when he gets nominated, he didn't get either SCOTUS seat so far and he didn't get AG when Sessions left.

    Trump wants young Justices to protect liberty for a long time plus Nap is an AnCap and Trump isn't.
    "Protect liberty"???

    WTF are you talking about?

    Dafuq does Trump know about liberty let alone "protecting it", LOL.

    Holy $#@!ing $#@! thats funny.

    Early entry for most insane statement RPFs 2019.
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.

    "To learn who rules over you simply find out who you arent allowed to criticize."

  18. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown View Post
    "Protect liberty"???

    WTF are you talking about?

    Dafuq does Trump know about liberty let alone "protecting it", LOL.

    Holy $#@!ing $#@! thats funny.

    Early entry for most insane statement RPFs 2019.
    Gorsuch is the best Justice on the court and while Kavanaugh is not nearly so good he is an improvement over Kennedy who probably only agreed to retire in return for getting to help pick his replacement.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  19. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by susano View Post
    While Napolitano begins with saying what he thinks Adam Schiff is thinking, he makes his own statement:


    Napolitano went on to note that if “there were no evidence of conspiracy and no evidence of obstruction, the attorney general would have told us so,” adding that Barr didn’t, so “there is something there” that Democrats and Trump opponents want to see. And they’ll have a “field day” with it.

    Video at link: Fox’s Judge Napolitano: ‘There Is Something There’ on Conspiracy in Mueller Report


    So, in those 700 pages or two million pages, there must be some allegation in there that makes Trump guilty of something which cannot be proven. Therefore, anyone accused is guilty unless they can prove otherwise.

    F*** this guy. Did Fox send him to a re-education camp or something?
    ...
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  20. #167
    ...

    Quote Originally Posted by PAF View Post
    Sanctuary Cities and the Rule of Law

    by Judge Andrew Napolitano


    Earlier this week, the Trump Department of Justice told the mayor of Chicago that it would cease funding grants to the Chicago Police Department that had been approved in the Obama administration because Chicago city officials were not cooperating with federal immigration officials.


    The DOJ contended that Chicago officials were contributing to lawlessness by refusing to inform the feds of the whereabouts of undocumented foreign-born people, thereby creating what the feds derisively call a "sanctuary city," and Chicago officials have argued that their police officers and clerical folks are not obligated to work for the feds.


    Who is correct?


    The concept of a sanctuary city does not mean it is a place where federal law is unenforced by the feds. Rather, it is a place where local authorities have elected not to spend their tax dollars helping the feds to enforce federal law. The term "sanctuary city" is not a legal term but a political one. The Trump administration has used the term to characterize the governments of towns and cities that have created safe havens for those who have overstayed their visas by refusing to tell the feds who these folks are and where they can be found.


    Can local authorities refuse to help the feds enforce federal law? In a word, yes. There is no legal obligation on the part of local authorities to help the feds with manpower or resources or data to enforce federal law within the jurisdiction of those local authorities.


    During the Clinton administration, when Congress passed legislation that directed local law enforcement to enforce a federal gun registration scheme, the Supreme Court invalidated the statute. It ruled that the feds cannot commandeer local and state officials and compel them to enforce federal laws; the feds can enforce their own laws.


    The federal compulsion, the court held, violated the Guarantee Clause of the Constitution, which guarantees a representative form of government in every state. If the feds could enter a state and nullify the will of elected state officials not to spend state tax dollars, that would unconstitutionally impair representative government in those states.


    Can the feds withhold federal funds from cities that refuse to cooperate in the enforcement of federal law? Yes and no. In the post-World War II era, Congress began purchasing state compliance with its wishes in areas that the Constitution did not permit it to regulate. Stated differently, since Congress can spend money on any matter it wishes, as long as it is arguably for the general welfare, but it cannot regulate for the general welfare, it has used its power of the purse as a way around the constitutional limitations on its regulatory powers.


    This is legalized bribery of the states.


    In the Reagan administration, Congress offered hundreds of millions of dollars to the states to repave federal highways if the states lowered their maximum speed limits to 55 miles per hour. South Dakota objected. Its government wanted the federal cash for the highway repaving but did not want to lower its speed limits.


    The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the feds. It held that South Dakota is free to reject federal dollars, but if it accepts them, it must accept the strings that accompany them, as long as those strings are clearly spelled out before the cash flows and rationally related to the expenditure of the federal funds. Because repaving highways and the maximum speeds that vehicles would travel on them were rationally related, South Dakota had to choose between its cherished liberal speed limits and federal cash. No surprise, it chose the cash.


    Now back to sanctuary cities. When the Obama administration offered Chicago and other cities cash to purchase new police communication equipment, it attached strings to those offers -- but compliance with federal immigration authorities was not among them. Chicago's complaints about DOJ threats are constitutionally sound because federal strings can be imposed only by Congress and they cannot be imposed retroactively.


    Thus, federal funds awarded in the Obama administration without the string of cooperation with immigration authorities attached may not be interfered with by the Trump administration. If the feds do withhold committed funds that lack a cooperation condition attached, a court will invalidate that withholding.


    Is the refusal to cooperate with the feds a form of nullification? In a word, yes. Federal law is superior to local law in areas that are primarily or exclusively federal, and immigration is unambiguously federal. Yet having pockets throughout the country without local cooperation with the feds fosters what the courts have called "laboratories of democracy."


    Stated differently, if the local government in Manhattan or Chicago or Seattle aggressively protects undocumented immigrants who live there in return for the purchasing power and cultural diversity that immigrants bring, that may relieve social and legal pressure on governments elsewhere and will be a social experiment -- a laboratory of democracy -- worthy of cultural and political scrutiny and perhaps even indifference when it comes to the feds.


    Many Trump supporters see in the president a champion who will rid the country of those they see as unlawfully here, and they also see in liberal big-city mayors politicians pandering to interest groups. But there is a rich history to federalism, and there are two sides to its coin. The rich history is that of state and local resistance to the tyranny of the majority in Washington -- a resistance as old as the country itself. The refusal of Massachusetts authorities to cooperate with the feds in the enforcement of the federal Fugitive Slave Act comes to mind.


    The other side of the coin is unthinkable to my conservative brethren. If Hillary Clinton had been elected president along with a Democratic Congress and it had offered state and local governments federal funds with strings attached requiring cities to make abortions available on demand, they all would be whistling a very different and very federalism-based tune.



    https://townhall.com/columnists/judg...f-law-n2366474


    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Judge swamp strikes again.


    O'Bummer is no longer President and Trump may undo what O'Bummer did.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  21. #168
    Does the Judge post on RPF as @Superfluous Man?



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #169
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  24. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Ask me again in 6 years.
    Six or sixty, it ain't happening now. Never was, really, let's be real.
    NeoReactionary. American High Tory.

    The counter-revolution will not be televised.

  25. #171

  26. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  27. #173

    The Backstabbers

    The Judge linked to McCain and Mittens?


  28. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    The Judge linked to McCain and Mittens?

    Qweers stick together.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  29. #175
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Qweers stick together.
    May I suggest you two get a room.
    On Trump:
    How conservative Republicans can continue to support this arrogant imposter—the man who brags about inflicting the world with the Covid mark of the beast; the man who said, “Take the guns first, go through due process second”; and the man who deliberately played and then set up Stewart Rhodes (of course, Stewart was all too eager to be Trump’s patsy) for an 18-year prison sentence—is truly beyond my comprehension.” Chuck Baldwin

  30. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by AngryCanadian View Post
    Fox News Legal Analyst Unloads On Trump: ‘Unlawful, Defenseless And Condemnable’

    In a column on the Fox News website and in an accompanying video, Napolitano lit into Trump’s claim that he was exonerated by the Mueller report.
    “Mueller laid out at least a half-dozen crimes of obstruction committed by Trump,” Napolitano wrote, and listed them:



    Andrew Napolitano seems to off his relies again by attacking Trump and claiming that were at least a half-dozen crimes of obstruction committed by Trump even though in the report doesn't show that.

    Andrew Napolitano used to be the voice of sane, but now his behaving like a sellout.
    ...
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  32. #177
    The attorney general’s testimony was clearly accurate...


    I originally thought this was too stupid to write about. But stupid is like the plague inside the Beltway — one person catches it and next thing you know there’s an outbreak at MSNBC and the speaker of the House is showing symptoms while her delirious minions tote ceramic chickens around Capitol Hill.
    So I give you: the Bill Barr perjury allegation.
    We are all entitled to our own opinions. But are we entitled to our own facts? Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s bon mot says no, but Washington makes you wonder. Like when spleen-venting about the supposedly outrageous, unbelievable, disgraceful invocation of the word “spy” to describe episodes of government spying is instantly followed by a New York Times story about how the spying — er, I mean, court-authorized electronic surveillance — coupled with the tasking of spies — er, undercover agents — green-lighted by a foreign spy — er, intelligence service — was more widespread than previously known.
    If I were a cynic, I’d think people were trying to get out in front of some embarrassing revelations on the horizon. I might even be tempted to speculate that progressives were trotting out their “Destroy Ken Starr” template for Barr deployment (which, I suppose, means that 20 years from now we’ll be reading about what a straight-arrow Barr was compared to whomever Democrats are savaging at that point).
    The claim that Barr gave false testimony is frivolous. That is why, at least initially, Democrats and their media echo chamber soft-pedaled it — with such dishonorable exceptions as Mazie Horono, the Hawaii Democrat who, somehow, is a United States senator. It’s tough to make the perjury argument without any false or even inaccurate statements — though my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano did give it the old college try. As recounted by The Hill, he twisted himself into a pretzel, observing — try to follow this — that the attorney general “probably misled” Congress and thus “he’s got a problem” . . . although this purported dissembling didn’t really seem to be, you know, an actual “lie” so . . . maybe it’s not a problem after all. Or something.
    I assume that in his black-robe days, Judge Nap would have known better. When meritless perjury cases are thrown out of court, judges are often at pains to explain that the questioner who elicited the purportedly false testimony bears the burden of clarity; the terms of the question dictate the evaluation of the answer. In this instance, Barr’s April 9 testimony before the House Appropriations Committee was true and accurate; if a misimpression set in after, it is because the relevant questioning by Representative Charlie Crist (D., Fla.) has been ignored or distorted.
    Moreover, because perjury is a serious felony allegation, judges and legal analysts never rely on a general, selectively couched description of the testimony — much less on the likes of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s because-I-said-so refrain that Barr “lied to Congress” and “that’s a crime.” The testimony must be examined, with emphasis on the words that were used (the questions as well as the responses), and anything we can glean about the witness’s demeanor (stingy? dodgy? forthcoming?).
    The mindless, no-need-to-check-the-record allegation against Barr goes like this: The AG testified on April 9 that he had no idea why Special Counsel Mueller was upset over the way Barr’s March 24 letter described Mueller’s report; but, in fact, Barr knew exactly why Mueller was upset because he had received the latter’s March 27 letter complaining about Barr’s missive.
    Now, here is the exchange on which the perjury allegation is based, with my italics highlighting key portions:
    CRIST: Reports have emerged recently, General, that members of the special counsel’s team are frustrated at some level with the limited information included in your March 24th letter . . . that it does not adequately or accurately necessarily portray the report’s findings. Do you know what they’re referencing with that?
    BARR: No, I don’t. I think — I think . . . I suspect that they probably wanted more put out, but, in my view, I was not interested in putting out summaries or trying to summarize because I think any summary, regardless of who prepares it, not only runs the risk of, you know, being under-inclusive or over-inclusive, but also, you know, would trigger a lot of discussion and analysis that really should await everything coming out at once. So I was not interested in a summary of the report. . . . I felt that I should state the bottom line conclusions and I tried to use Special Counsel Mueller’s own language in doing that.
    When we look at the actual words of this exchange, Barr’s testimony is clearly accurate. And I don’t mean accurate in the hyper-technical, Clintonesque “depends on what the definition of is is” sense. I mean straightforward, unguarded, and evincing a willingness to volunteer information beyond what the question sought.
    Crist did not ask a general question about Mueller’s reaction to Barr’s letter; he asked a specific question about the reaction of Mueller’s “team” to the Barr letter’s description of “the report’s findings.” Regarding the March 24 letter’s rendering of this bottom line — namely, Russia meddled, Trump did not collude, and Mueller failed to resolve the obstruction question — Barr said he did not know what Mueller’s staff was complaining about.
    Barr has known Mueller for nearly 30 years; when Mueller was the Criminal Division chief in the Bush 41 Justice Department, he reported to Barr, who was attorney general. It should come as no surprise, then, that Barr was not getting his information from Mueller’s staff; he was getting it from Mueller directly. Nor should it come as any surprise that, before releasing his March 24 letter to the public, Barr gave Mueller an opportunity to review it; nor that Mueller declined that opportunity — given that he knows Barr well, and knew Barr would not misrepresent the report (especially given that the report would soon be public).
    Three days after Barr announced the report’s conclusions, Mueller sent his letter, undoubtedly written by his staff. Mueller could simply have called Barr on the phone, as he has done a million times; but the staff’s partisan Democrats wanted a letter, which makes for much better leak material. (The letter was, in fact, strategically leaked to the Washington Post Tuesday night, right before Barr’s Wednesday morning Senate testimony.) The day after receiving Mueller’s March 27 letter, Barr called Mueller and pointedly asked whether he was claiming that Barr’s March 24 letter articulating Mueller’s findings was inaccurate. Mueller responded that he was making no such claim — he was, instead, irritated by the press coverage of Barr’s letter. Mueller suggested the publication of additional information from the report, including the report’s own executive summaries, to explain more about why he decided not to resolve the obstruction issue. But he did not claim Barr had misrepresented his findings. (See Barr’s Senate testimony, starting at 39-minute mark.)
    Again, Barr’s contact was with Mueller, not Mueller’s team. His exchanges with Mueller gave Barr no basis to know about any objection to his description of the report’s findings — from Mueller or anyone else. The fact that Mueller’s staff was leaking like a sieve to the Times, the Washington Post, and NBC News does not mean they were sharing with the attorney general what the Times described as “their simmering frustrations.”
    That is what Barr said in answer to Crist’s question about the report’s findings. But to avoid the misimpression that he was parsing words deceptively, Barr volunteered his perception that Mueller’s staff wanted more information from the report to be publicized. That was consistent with what can be inferred from Barr’s phone call with Mueller on March 28. And it was not news: Crist’s questions were based on the aforementioned press accounts of leaks from Mueller’s staffers. They were irked at the bad press they were receiving over Mueller’s abdication on the question whether there was a prosecutable obstruction case, and they had groused that there was much more to their report than Barr’s letter conveyed. Of course, Barr never disputed this; as he repeatedly explained, he undertook to render the conclusions, not summarize the entire 448-page report.
    Barr decided that his way of making disclosure — the findings followed three weeks later by the full report — was superior to the proposal of Mueller’s staff that their own summaries be released. You can disagree with Barr on that, but that’s not grounds for a perjury claim. And it raises a point Barr made in his Senate testimony: The regulations do not require any disclosure of the special counsel’s report (which is supposed to be a confidential Justice Department document, as is typical of Justice Department deliberations over whether to charge or decline to charge). The decision of what, if anything, to disclose, and how that should be done, is exclusively the attorney general’s, not the special counsel’s. Mueller’s job was to make a prosecutorial judgment — to charge or decline to charge obstruction. Mueller failed to do that. Since Mueller didn’t do his own job, isn’t it a bit presumptuous of his staff (through press leaks) to tell Barr how to do his?
    Could what happened here be more obvious?
    Mueller received fawning press for two years on the expectation that he would slay Trump. Then, on March 24, Democrats and the media learned not only that there was no collusion case (which was no surprise) but that Mueller had been derelict, failing to render a judgment on the only question he was arguably needed to resolve: Was there enough evidence to charge obstruction? Journalists proceeded to turn on their erstwhile hero. This sent him reeling, and it brought to full boil the anger of Mueller staffers, who wanted to charge Trump with obstruction based on the creative (i.e., wayward) theory they had been pursuing — namely, that a president can be indicted for obstruction based on the exercise of his constitutional prerogatives if prosecutors (including prosecutors who are active supporters of the president’s political opposition) decide he had corrupt intent. The staffers put their pique in a letter that could be leaked, and Mueller was sufficiently irked by the bad press that he signed it. And now Democrats are using the letter as the launch-pad for The Big Lie that Barr lied, calculating that if they say it enough times, and their media collaborators uncritically broadcast these declarations, no one will notice that they never actually refer to the transcript of what they claim is the false testimony.



    Democrats are unnerved. Attorney General Barr is pursuing an inquiry into the Obama administration’s decision to conduct a foreign counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign. The time is now, they figure, to reprise the Ken Starr treatment: the ad hominem withering of an accomplished, highly capable official — in this instance, one who is daring to press questions that would have been answered two years ago if an incumbent Republican administration had spied on — er, monitored — a Democratic presidential campaign.


    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...-lie-barr-lied
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  33. #178
    Quote Originally Posted by UWDude View Post
    Trump is a neocon puppet now, and the neocons are levying their death blow to the left, and to opposition in general.
    It is the only way they get the world war III they want so bad. Destroy the opposition.
    As I said before, if Bernie wins, they'll false flag, and blame him for not keeping the country safe.
    Now, how in the hell the left, with all the real, wikileaks level evidence, survive a neocon attack, with neocon judges?
    And whats left of the left, will be able to raise how much of a cry, when America gets dragged into WW III? WTF, I love the Russians now?

    On one side is the murderous warmongering elite, and on the other side the sexually depraved and blackmailed elite.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I don't know if it is one of the videos Youtube took down but when talking about Kavanaugh he said he was surprised what the FBI dug up on him.(Napolitano)
    If he wasn't a sleeper who has been activated because Trump won then he is being blackmailed.

    EM.

    B-word allegations, theories and claims have been getting bit out of hand lately, perhaps Congress needs to take notice and completely ban its use as a political tactic or make punishment for it as harsh as things like hate crimes to deter its use.

    It was recently reported that some on Far Right even subscribed to theories that MAGA himself was being blackmailed, without providing any proof:

    PA Synagogue shooter Bowers shared anti-semitic meme suggesting President Trump was being blackmailed by Jewish interests




    Related

    “Morning Joe” co-hosts claim that Jared Kushner attempted to blackmail them
    “Kushner told Scarborough that he would need to personally apologize to Trump in exchange for getting Enquirerowner David Pecker to stop the story,” Sherman wrote. “Scarborough says he refused, and the Enquirer published the story in print on June 5, headlined ‘Morning Joe Sleazy Cheating Scandal!'”
    Jared Kushner Told ‘Morning Joe': Apologize to Trump to Kill National Enquirer Story (Report)

    Jared Kushner's dad tried to blackmail his brother-in-law and set up a honey trap in a motel room—fully equipped with video cameras—and paid a prostitute $10,000
    http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/207559/jared-kushner-shanda

    Jeff Bezos Claims the National Enquirer Tried to Blackmail Him With Nude Selfie

    Terry Crews sex assault claim: Did Enquirer use blackmail to protect pro-Israel figure?

    Terry Crews claims National Enquirer owner tried to ‘silence’ him with false prostitutes stories


    RONAN FARROW CLAIMS NATIONAL ENQUIRER ATTEMPTED TO BLACKMAIL HIM
    The Enquirer last month accused Bezos of having an extra-marital affair with former TV anchor Lauren Sanchez. Bezos claims AMI leveled the blackmail threat if he didn’t end an investigation into the company and its alleged political ties.
    Journalist Ronan Farrow said Friday he and another journalist have been threatened by the National Enquirer for breaking stories about the tabloid’s ties to President Trump. Pecker’s friendship with Trump goes back decades.

    Harvey Weinstein used ex Mossad Israeli agents to spy on actresses and journalists

    19 Mar 2018
    Trump's election consultants filmed saying they use bribes and sex workers to entrap politicians
    Channel 4 News
    An undercover investigation by Channel 4 News reveals how Cambridge Analytica secretly campaigns in elections across the world. Bosses were filmed talking about using bribes, ex-spies, fake IDs and sex workers.
    The company is at the centre of a scandal over its role in the harvesting of more than 50 million Facebook profiles.
    https://www.channel4.com/news/cambri...-investigation

    Mueller refers sex misconduct scheme targeting him to FBI for investigation
    Oct. 30, 2018By Brandy Zadrozny, Ben Collins and Tom Winter
    Special counsel Robert Mueller last week asked the FBI to investigate a possible scam in which a woman would make false claims that he was guilty of sexual misconduct and harassment, after several political reporters were contacted about doing a story on the alleged misconduct.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/jus...gation-n926301

    Firm Linked to Israeli Intelligence Ran Pro-Trump Propaganda
    Oct 10, 2018 - According to the NYT, Special Counsel Robert Mueller who ... had been revealed that Trump's team hired another Israeli spy firm – Black Cube.

    Israeli spies tried to get dirt on Obama aides tied to the Iran deal
    May 7, 2018 - Black Cube, a secretive Israeli intelligence firm enlisted by disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein to undermine women who made ...

  34. #179
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  35. #180
    Quote Originally Posted by Schifference View Post
    The judge is a friend of liberty!

    We can only hope Trump has a chance to appoint him as a Supreme Court Justice!


    Does "Liberty", in your opinion, allow ignoring the law and constitutional limitations?

    JWK

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Judge Swamp: McCabe firing could be seen as obstruction of justice
    By Swordsmyth in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 03-19-2018, 03:33 PM
  2. Judge strikes down Michigan ban on gay marriage
    By Cabal in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-22-2014, 07:39 AM
  3. Federal judge strikes down Virginia's ban on gay marriage
    By aGameOfThrones in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-14-2014, 11:50 AM
  4. California Judge Strikes Down Cap and Trade Law
    By FrankRep in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-25-2011, 01:28 PM
  5. Federal Judge Strikes Down Part of the Patriot Act!
    By Spirit of '76 in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-07-2007, 05:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •