|
|
#1
05-05-2021, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
The mueller report is catching up
Why would someone obstruct justice if they did nothing wrong? Weird.
Why would Bill Barr lie to america and history if mueller found nothing? I wonder what those 10 cases of obstruction were about... Since he did nothing wrong and russia is a fake country, what could it be about? | ||
|
|
|||
|
#3
05-05-2021, 06:19 PM
|
|||
|
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
__________________
P99 Wiki
No longer active, thank you for the years of fun. No alt account and I do not post on the P99 forums. Told this to Rogean, Nilbog & Menden. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
05-06-2021, 12:13 AM
|
|||
|
A federal judge in Washington accused the Justice Department under Attorney General William P. Barr of misleading her and Congress about advice he had received from top department officials on whether President Donald J. Trump should have been charged with obstructing the Russia investigation and ordered that a related memo be released.
Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the United States District Court in Washington said in a ruling late Monday that the Justice Department’s obfuscation appeared to be part of a pattern in which top officials like Mr. Barr were untruthful to Congress and the public about the investigation. The department had argued that the memo was exempt from public records laws because it consisted of private advice from lawyers whom Mr. Barr had relied on to make the call on prosecuting Mr. Trump. But Judge Jackson, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2011, ruled that the memo contained strategic advice, and that Mr. Barr and his aides already understood what his decision would be. “The fact that he would not be prosecuted was a given,” Judge Jackson wrote of Mr. Trump. She also singled out Mr. Barr for how he had spun the investigation’s findings in a letter summarizing the 448-page report before it was released, which allowed Mr. Trump to claim he had been exonerated. “The attorney general’s characterization of what he’d hardly had time to skim, much less study closely, prompted an immediate reaction, as politicians and pundits took to their microphones and Twitter feeds to decry what they feared was an attempt to hide the ball,” Judge Jackson wrote. lolololol | ||
|
|
|||
|
#6
05-06-2021, 12:27 AM
|
|||
|
Gravy man buying into the spin
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
05-06-2021, 01:36 AM
|
|||
|
Hundreds of millions of dollars, 2+ years of work, utilizing the best and brightest detectives in the country and all they uncovered was a few cases of personal bank fraud by Paul Manafort completely unrelated to the election and occurring during Obama’s term
Makes perfect sense to me. Democrats waste shitloads of money and manpower to accomplish nothing constantly Edit: BTW are you questioning the results of an election? I heard that wasn’t allowed. Do you need to be referred to Twitter’s fact checker explanations on how our United Stares elections are very secure? | ||
|
Last edited by unsunghero; 05-06-2021 at 01:55 AM..
|
|
||
|
#9
05-06-2021, 01:49 AM
|
|||
|
Now imagine if we had hundreds of millions of dollars, the best and brightest detectives in the country and 2 FULL YEARS to audit the results of this new much more widespread mail in voting system used in the 2020 election, instead of just a period of a few weeks and no central organizing body to facilitate it
I’m sorry, I’m sorry. Here I go being a crazy conspiratorist. Please don’t cancel me, Mark Zuckerburg | ||
|
|
|||
|
#10
05-06-2021, 02:00 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
