quote: (post)

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Litttle Schitt the pencil neck

quote: (post)

Originally posted by snowdragon
Churlish to the bitter end. Yes, that's right I read the summary that stated Trump and his campaign didn't collude with Russia. Now to the point of this particular thread:

Schiff made accusations prior to the completion of Muellers report (months prior) stating Trump was guilty. I am calling on the fact Schiff made accusations without the investigation being completed, hence he had no report to reference at the time of his false accusations.

So your feeble attempt to pretend the summary isn't accurate has no impact on Schiff's comments made months prior to the conclusion of said report, in other words, Schiff lied.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Emperordmb
IIRC the federal law surrounding such matters is that personal information unrelated to the evidence or lackof for criminal matters be redacted, because it is beyond the purview of the Justice Department to damage someone's reputation or violate their personal privacy in matters irrelevant.

So for example, if they discovered Trump was ****ing another pornstar but not doing anything illegal, that would be redacted, because it is not criminally relevant information.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
How is it feeble when you cannot compare the summary to the report and determine if it is accurate, because you only have the summary? Someone did not think about this too hard.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by mike brown
I have no problem with them making redactions for info like that, though TBH that wouldn't hurt Trump at all. But yeah... The question is basically that since Trump wasn't completely exonerated, what was the evidence against him? All we can gather from Barr's letter is that the evidence wasn't good enough to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't mean there's nothing that would be pertinent for Congress or even the electorate to look at.

One of the big reasons this investigation became what it was an drew so much attention is because Trump consistently acts like he has something to hide. There's no telling where any of this might have led if he didn't fire Comey, lie about specific details, etc. If he's clean then releasing the full report will be a huge PR win. Fighting that outcome only helps sew seeds of doubt and mistrust.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by snowdragon
This isn't about the entire Mueller report now is it? This is specifically about Schiff's statements prior to the conclusion of the Mueller summary, where Schiff stated there was obvious evidence of collusion months prior to the conclusion of the Mueller investigation.

So, one more time. This is about Schiff making statements that were false without supporting his claims, now the end result is Mueller has said no collusion. That means Schiff lied, it doesn't matter what is in the full Mueller report when it's already been declared no collusion vs Schiff stating undeniable proof of collusion (prior to the completion of the Mueller investigation.)

In synopsis, Schiff lied, he used his position of authority to extend credibility to his statements w/o supporting documents even now when the investigator has said otherwise. There isn't any spin from that.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Surtur
This strikes me as naive. It's not hard to see how this plays out: democrats will conclude he did obstruct beyond a reasonable doubt, republicans will agree with Barr and Rosenstein that he didn't.

And then...where are we? More partisan divides.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by mike brown
It's unlikely that there will be an actual indictment, I just think we will all be better informed if we can look at the actual evidence. It's unlikely that if it proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he obstructed that Mueller wouldn't have said so. That doesn't mean there is no circumstantial evidence that might be politically damaging. Until we see the report, Dems will assume the worst and reps will assume the opposite. At least with some sense of transparency we will have more specific factual information to provide the necessary context for exactly what the report revealed.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Surtur
It does indeed come off like they're on a witch hunt to find any politically damaging information they can.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by mike brown
It's politics as usual. They want whatever dirt on him Mueller dug up, and frankly I'd like to see what there is myself. It's not a witch hunt though... Or else he would already be in jail.