Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2
Options
Comments
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 14444
Who needs the report when we can get the facts straight from you
To be fair, Barr and everyone around Trump has been hinting and suggesting about an "explosive" Durham report for weeks.
Barr has refused to commit to not releasing the Durham report in October , so given all that we know about him , he will absolutely release it before the election.
He will also publish a "summary" in advance of the full report just as he did with the Mueller report to ensure that he sets the narrative that he wants.
And that narrative isn't going to be "Nothing to see here", and just as with the Mueller report "summary" it will favour the Trump viewpoint over the actual facts.0 -
-
To be fair, Barr and everyone around Trump has been hinting and suggesting about an "explosive" Durham report for weeks.
Barr has refused to commit to not releasing the Durham report in October , so given all that we know about him , he will absolutely release it before the election.
He will also publish a "summary" in advance of the full report just as he did with the Mueller report to ensure that he sets the narrative that he wants.
And that narrative isn't going to be "Nothing to see here", and just as with the Mueller report "summary" it will favour the Trump viewpoint over the actual facts.
Barr has repeatedly and stridently attacked the Russia investigation — saying that what happened to Trump was “one of the greatest travesties in American history” — while hinting vaguely that he is “troubled” by what he knows Durham has found. That has drawn accusations from Democrats and legal analysts that he is inappropriately talking about an ongoing case and prejudging its outcome.
“There’s a real danger, in fact an urgent threat, that anything the Department of Justice does will be timed to aid the president,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D- Conn.) said in an interview, adding, “Barr has proven ready, willing and able to distort, distract and deceive.”
At a hearing Tuesday before the House Judiciary Committee, Barr was quizzed briefly by both sides on the matter but offered little to satisfy his questioners.
Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) pointed to what he saw as some of the failures of the Russia investigation and seemed to press Barr on how soon he would correct them.
“Are you going to be able to right this wrong before it becomes a precedent for future election interference by corrupt officials in our justice and intelligence agencies?” McClintock asked.
Barr said that Durham’s work had been delayed by the coronavirus crisis and added, “Justice is not something you order up on a schedule like you’re ordering a pizza.”
Barr recently told Fox News he expected developments in Durham’s investigation “hopefully before the end of the summer.” He has said that Durham is mainly focused on uncovering criminal wrongdoing but that he expects “there will be public disclosure in some form of report.”
Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-Fla.) asked Barr: Would he “commit to not releasing any report by Mr. Durham before the November election?”
“No,” Barr responded.
Justice Department policies and tradition generally counsel against taking steps in an investigation close to an election such that they might affect the outcome. But the guidance is vague and difficult to reconcile with an investigation like Durham’s — which apparently is not focused on any political candidates, though it has been seized on by politicians and involves law enforcement’s treatment of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
Donald Ayer, who worked as deputy attorney general under President George H.W. Bush, said that even if there was no explicit policy, Barr had a duty to take steps to avoid the appearance of political interference.
“You have to bring some common sense, and an attitude that says, ‘I’m actually trying to make the public think we’re being fair,’ ” Ayer said. “The problem with Barr is he’s not trying to do that.”
Spokespeople for Barr and Durham declined to comment.
Exactly what Durham is focused on is not clear. He has publicly questioned the cause the FBI had to open the 2016 investigation, noting in a 2019 statement that he disagreed with some of the Justice Department inspector general’s conclusions about “predication and how the FBI case was opened.”
Durham has questioned witnesses about why and how the case was opened, and about what happened in the months after it began. One focus, people familiar with the matter said, seems to be on why the bureau kept pressing forward after it came to have doubts about the credibility of Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer on whose work the FBI relied in part to get a secret court order to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Investigators were particularly interested in doubts raised about Steele by one of his sources of information, the people said, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing case.
The Justice Department inspector general already lambasted officials who it said repeatedly emphasized damaging information they heard about Trump associates and played down exculpatory evidence they found as they sought those warrants.
The inspector general referred one former FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, for possible criminal prosecution, alleging that he doctored an email as part of the application process. But beyond Clinesmith, it is unclear who — if anyone — might have criminal liability in Durham’s probe.
[...]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/john-durham-investigation-trump-russia-william-barr/2020/07/29/b9dd1e1a-d1b8-11ea-8d32-1ebf4e9d8e0d_story.htmly0ssar1an22 wrote: »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAHoul4IYMY
never knew sky news was in aus. interesting take on the upcoming election.
after about the 40 sec mark i dont see alot wrong with what biden said.
the words of a president matter. that's pretty bang on.
and the point about the masks? didn't really get that.
ETA: this report is from yesterday
Yeah that is some Rupert Murdoch inspired cherrypicking. Oh god, someone spent 3 seconds composing prose remarks off-script how dare he
Sky and Fox News, both coordinated by the same people up top.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Someone should remind Trump how term limits work and how Obama wasn’t running in 2016
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1289358246541553664?s=21
Oh and he’s finally moving reportedly to ban TikTok, which has set social media ablaze. The chief suspicion is he and the RNC have felt threatened by TikTok users registering all those Tulsa rally tickets they never planned to use; im not sure if it also had to do with the platform being used popularly to smear him and his Covid response.
Microsoft motioned they would buy the app to sever its ties to China but even that solution was seemingly not good enough for the President, just cementing the idea that he is doing so for political reasons and not a practical matter of cyber security concerns.
Was reading about it myself this morning
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-us-canada-53619287"As far as TikTok is concerned, we're banning them from the United States," Mr Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One.
He really is mad that a grandmother was able to use TikTok to ruin his little rally 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
unlike the revolving door of posters over the years who have 'marked their words' that Hillary was looking at jailtime just around every corner, etc. 
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement