Adam Schiff rejects reports that Mueller indictments are over, says special counsel could be called

??
What is it that you think House committees haven't done?

 

Yeah open your eyes...we’ve seen it. Mueller is no longer getting indictments. He is working directly with Barr in getting a report for the public. The mueller team has said nothing, associates (whatever that means) said someone said they didn’t include enough but never challenged the final conclusions

 

Subpoenaed mueller

 

you have to be blind to not see that Donald Trump is the most corrupt president in a long long time he makes Richard Nixon look like a saint

 

'False' information? That's pure wishful thinking on your part. You remind me of Rachel Maddow waving Trump's tax records around or people desperately digging through Sarah Palin's governor emails. Frankly the proof is in the pudding but so far everyone in authority has agreed on the consensus.

 

We already know that Mueller's team members told us that Barr the hack left out their own summaries in his report . He deliberately left out any of the heinous acts Trump committed.
Barr could have sought a court order to release grand juru testimony 9 days ago. Ago so he is definitely protecting the president.
[/QUOTE]
The summary report is that of Barr and Rosenstein working with the Office of Legal Counsel and Mueller himself. And they may seek a court order to release some of the grand jury but there are specific circumstances that allow and this ain't one of them.

I support the Presidency and the Constitution and the Law.

Why do you keep saying it was just Barr, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstien, Mueller's bestest buddy who was over the Mueller investigation CO-WROTE the summary. Why would he lie about it?

 

Quote someone on the Mueller team saying that else retract it.

 

Legaleeze for eff you

 

It would have been outragous for them to have publicly decried the AG's statement.

Their outrage is now leaking out.

Mueller closed the investigation, so the fact that he hasnt issue indictments is exactly what one would expect.

That does not mean that there won't be more indictmennts based in whole or in part on the investigation when it finally becomes available.

Also, let's remember that the Mueller grand jury is still active.

 

Lol Trump and his minions have a 100% record of accusing any form of news no matter how large or small of being fake news if not favorable to Trump.. So repeat after me :" If it hurts Trump it's fake news. If it helps trump it's real news." Say that 10 times a day then rinse and repeat.

That's your opinion and means nothing to me.

. Of course you forget the zillions of times when the Times struck true. Ask Mueller and the House who used much of the Times' and the Post's reporting as a starting place for investigations.

Who admitted that? Barr in his have report? There are plenty of members of Mueller's team who say there is damaging evidence against Trump regarding obstruction and collusion. I'll believe them over Trump's hand picked lap dog.. It's a well know fact that not one of Mueller's team member's had their own summaries put into Barr's hack summary. I read Barr's hack summary and not once did I see him use a summary of one of Mueller's team members. Not once! The report was all Barr's interpretation. He reassured Trump in unsolicited memos to the Whitehouse in June that Mueller's use of obstruction was fatally flawed and also stated during his Senate hearing that no president can be held liable for Obstruction of Justice. The Mueller report was prejudged before Barr ever saw it. But Mueller made it clear in the report that Trump had never been exonerated. All we have is the lapdog's interpretation not the real report.

It was the Senate and Justice Department who told Trumpenstein that he had no proof that Obama conducted the wiretapping of his Trump Tower in NY.. That conclusion has not changed. You're rather dull and factless. The only thing Kafkaesque is the fact the you Swallow Barr's interpretation wholesale without having seen the report and without the Senate having seen the report.

Lol you haven't stopped being fooled.

 

Doing that without obtaining the Mueller report would be riddiculous.

Plus, it could be cconstrued that Mueller's testimony would be subject to Barr's exclusions, thus his testimony would be severely constrained.

 

The Mueller team is indicating that Barr's synopsis is false information.

If you want a consensus of some group on some issue, the group needs to be informed.

The public certainly is not informed. In fact, Congress isn't informed.

 

Who from Muellers team?

 

To my knowledge they have not made their names public.

However, there are multiple reports of statements off the record.

 

Him and Nadler are just making a lot of noise our of frustration at being wrong so much. It would be illegal for Barr to give them everything they want and they know it.

 

SO...more unnamed sources?

 

Of course Nadler knows Barr cannot give him the unredacted report. That is why he is harping on it so much. He is free to do his own leg work and continue on with his investigation instead of expecting someone else to do the work for him.

 

Funny how nobody seems to find corruption or crimes. Unlike the Clinton admin

 

Exactly. If they really wanted it they would pass a new law that allows it to be released, but they are just putting on a show for their rabid base.

Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), neither the attorney for the government nor anyone else may “disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury.” The exceptions involve disclosure to another federal grand jury or to an attorney for the government pursuing another criminal matter in certain circumstances, or to certain national security officials if the information involves foreign intelligence, terrorism, or threat of attack. If petitioned by the government or a defendant in another judicial proceeding, the court can also permit release in the other proceeding. Absent such very limited circumstances, Barr would run afoul of this almost blanket prohibition, and could be sanctioned by contempt of court if he disclosed to Congress any grand jury information in the Mueller report under Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(7).

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...bpoena-isnt-legit-without-impeachment-inquiry

And they of course know this, though they do seem very confident in the stupidity and ignorance of the hoax koolaid drinkers.

 

Yep he closed it, we know the results, keep that hope alive that someone out there will indict him.

Jus to now? Two weeks later? After The NY Times and post have been bashed? Sure I get it. Nobody from the team was quoted. The story says associates of some people...whatever that means. It should also be noted they aren’t challenging the conclusion. Remember they haven’t been shy in the past for calling out false statements in the last, they did with buzzfeed .

 

So why do you think the senate should?

 

No, the Barr piece isn't "the conclusion". It's Barr's opinion, and the news from the Muelller team is that itt is BS.

 

The silly claim was that Republicans could well win from the Muelller report.

Yet, Republiclans in the Senate are showing no interest, while Dems are showing serious interest.

You can say what you want, but the notion that the Senate has suddenly decided to refrain fro partisanship is so counter to history as to be preposterous.

 

wrong quote

 

It’s got direct quotes from mueller. If it was just his opinion don’t you think mueller wouldn’t be working with him now??