Barr's Book Report On The Mueller Report Is In
Adam Schiff says Trump's order to declassify intelligence documents on the Russia investigation is a new phase of the "cover-up."
Huh?
https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1131740851909083137
Where in Schiff's tweet does he say "Trump's order to declassify intelligence documents on the Russia investigation is a new phase"?
Why must you constantly rephrase what people say to fit YOUR narrative?
Trump is giving Barr the power to selectively declassify items, so Barr can hide those that expose Trump's crimes and expose those that make the investigation look like a witch hunt. This is what Paul has yet to grasp.
dave said:
Trump is giving Barr the power to selectively declassify items, so Barr can hide those that expose Trump's crimes and expose those that make the investigation look like a witch hunt. This is what Paul has yet to grasp.
Two years of media hysteria about false allegations by anonymous sources is a witch hunt. Now -- if Barr does his job -- we'll find out who was responsible and why they did it.
Calling declassification of documents a "cover-up" is perhaps the most irrational idea to emerge yet in Russiagate.
jamie said:
Where in Schiff's tweet does he say "Trump's order to declassify intelligence documents on the Russia investigation is a new phase"?
Why must you constantly rephrase what people say to fit YOUR narrative?
The part that I bolded from Schiff's tweet:
While Trump stonewalls the public from learning the truth about his obstruction of justice,
Trump and Barr conspire to weaponize law enforcement and classified information against their political enemies.
The coverup has entered a new and dangerous phase.
This is un-American.
Thanks for confirming that you completely reworded what Schiff actually said.
paulsurovell said:
dave said:Two years of media hysteria about false allegations by anonymous sources is a witch hunt. Now -- if Barr does his job -- we'll find out who was responsible and why they did it.
Trump is giving Barr the power to selectively declassify items, so Barr can hide those that expose Trump's crimes and expose those that make the investigation look like a witch hunt. This is what Paul has yet to grasp.
Calling declassification of documents a "cover-up" is perhaps the most irrational idea to emerge yet in Russiagate.
It is the SELECTIVE declassification that is the problem, done outside of normal channels, exacerbated by the fact that it is that pillar of honesty Barr who will be doing it.
Do you honestly not get this?
Of course not, because you fell for the first Barr memo on the Mueller investigation hook line and sinker.
drummerboy said:
paulsurovell said:It is the SELECTIVE declassification that is the problem, done outside of normal channels, exacerbated by the fact that it is that pillar of honesty Barr who will be doing it.
dave said:Two years of media hysteria about false allegations by anonymous sources is a witch hunt. Now -- if Barr does his job -- we'll find out who was responsible and why they did it.
Trump is giving Barr the power to selectively declassify items, so Barr can hide those that expose Trump's crimes and expose those that make the investigation look like a witch hunt. This is what Paul has yet to grasp.
Calling declassification of documents a "cover-up" is perhaps the most irrational idea to emerge yet in Russiagate.
Do you honestly not get this?
Of course not, because you fell for the first Barr memo on the Mueller investigation hook line and sinker.
What I get is that you are so invested in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax that you don't want the FBI and CIA to be investigated to find out who was responsible for that hoax and why.
jamie said:
Thanks for confirming that you completely reworded what Schiff actually said.
Of course I did, we don't always talk about what people said by quoting them word for word.
What matters is if our re-wording is accurate, and in this case mine was.
Yes - truly is Mate's reporting tactic 101 - rewrite quotes to fit your narrative.
Personally, I don't see what he said and your phrasing close at all- but you say it's accurate. It's like Trump says if you repeat something often enough - people will believe it.
It's like you telling me I'm wrong with what I think of Tulsi because of others views - it's just plain odd.
If you want to quote someone - quote them. Providing your accurate rendition of what they say is fake news. You do this often with posters here as well.
paulsurovell said:
jamie said:Of course I did, we don't always talk about what people said by quoting them word for word.
Thanks for confirming that you completely reworded what Schiff actually said.
What matters is if our re-wording is accurate, and in this case mine was.
So you get caught lying, and your response is "of course I am lying, and so are you, but my lies are better than yours". You just out-trumped trump.
paulsurovell said:
drummerboy said:What I get is that you are so invested in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax that you don't want the FBI and CIA to be investigated to find out who was responsible for that hoax and why.
paulsurovell said:It is the SELECTIVE declassification that is the problem, done outside of normal channels, exacerbated by the fact that it is that pillar of honesty Barr who will be doing it.
dave said:Two years of media hysteria about false allegations by anonymous sources is a witch hunt. Now -- if Barr does his job -- we'll find out who was responsible and why they did it.
Trump is giving Barr the power to selectively declassify items, so Barr can hide those that expose Trump's crimes and expose those that make the investigation look like a witch hunt. This is what Paul has yet to grasp.
Calling declassification of documents a "cover-up" is perhaps the most irrational idea to emerge yet in Russiagate.
Do you honestly not get this?
Of course not, because you fell for the first Barr memo on the Mueller investigation hook line and sinker.
poor attempt at deflection.
What is clear is that you trust Barr, which is really bizarre.
btw, isn't the DOJ IG already investigating the investigation?
jamie said:
Yes - truly is Mate's reporting tactic 101 - rewrite quotes to fit your narrative.
Personally, I don't see what he said and your phrasing close at all- but you say it's accurate. It's like Trump says if you repeat something often enough - people will believe it.
It's like you telling me I'm wrong with what I think of Tulsi because of others views - it's just plain odd.
If you want to quote someone - quote them. Providing your accurate rendition of what they say is fake news. You do this often with posters here as well.
We'll have to just disagree on every one of these points.
We all characterize what others say frequently without quoting them. Here's an example of where you did it*
All of Paul's arguments boil down to one main issue - he hates Hillary. And he most wants someone in office who has said stuff like this: "This war of deception and hatred against my mom is being waged by homosexual activists because they know, that if elected, she will not allow them to force their values down the throats of the children in our schools".*inaccurately
drummerboy said:
poor attempt at deflection.paulsurovell said:
drummerboy said:What I get is that you are so invested in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax that you don't want the FBI and CIA to be investigated to find out who was responsible for that hoax and why.
paulsurovell said:It is the SELECTIVE declassification that is the problem, done outside of normal channels, exacerbated by the fact that it is that pillar of honesty Barr who will be doing it.
dave said:Two years of media hysteria about false allegations by anonymous sources is a witch hunt. Now -- if Barr does his job -- we'll find out who was responsible and why they did it.
Trump is giving Barr the power to selectively declassify items, so Barr can hide those that expose Trump's crimes and expose those that make the investigation look like a witch hunt. This is what Paul has yet to grasp.
Calling declassification of documents a "cover-up" is perhaps the most irrational idea to emerge yet in Russiagate.
Do you honestly not get this?
Of course not, because you fell for the first Barr memo on the Mueller investigation hook line and sinker.Click to Read Morepaulsurovell said:
drummerboy said:What I get is that you are so invested in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax that you don't want the FBI and CIA to be investigated to find out who was responsible for that hoax and why.
paulsurovell said:It is the SELECTIVE declassification that is the problem, done outside of normal channels, exacerbated by the fact that it is that pillar of honesty Barr who will be doing it.
dave said:Two years of media hysteria about false allegations by anonymous sources is a witch hunt. Now -- if Barr does his job -- we'll find out who was responsible and why they did it.
Trump is giving Barr the power to selectively declassify items, so Barr can hide those that expose Trump's crimes and expose those that make the investigation look like a witch hunt. This is what Paul has yet to grasp.
Calling declassification of documents a "cover-up" is perhaps the most irrational idea to emerge yet in Russiagate.
Do you honestly not get this?
Of course not, because you fell for the first Barr memo on the Mueller investigation hook line and sinker.
What is clear is that you trust Barr, which is really bizarre.
btw, isn't the DOJ IG already investigating the investigation?
I didn't trust Barr on the first Assange indictment and I don't trust him on the second one, because of what I've seen.
I haven't seen anything he's done or said about the Trump-Russia investigation that I find questionable. In fact I think his review of the Mueller report (jointly with Rod Rosenstein) and his intention to learn why the FBI and CIA utilized a fraudulent document in their investigation are spot on.
Re:the IG -- my understanding (could be wrong) is that the DOJ IG has limited jurisdiction and powers. For example, he is not authorized to interrogate former employees of the DOJ (including the FBI) nor is he authorized to interrogate any current or former CIA employees. And I don't think he has the power to indict and prosecute nor does he have subpoena power for what he's authorized to investigate.
Again you and Aaron completely missed the point.
2019 Schiff does not want "to weaponize law enforcement and classified information:.
2016 - Schiff wants it all declassified.
so - where is Schiff against declassifying everything vs allowing Barr and Trump to decide what gets declassified. Are you just joking with us on this?
paulsurovell said:
I haven't seen anything he's done or said about the Trump-Russia investigation that I find questionable. In fact I think his review of the Mueller report (jointly with Rod Rosenstein) and his intention to learn why the FBI and CIA utilized a fraudulent document in their investigation are spot on.
Perhaps you should read the actual report prepared by Mueller. Barr's statements about it have been rather egregiously at odds with the report's contents.
PVW said:
paulsurovell said:Perhaps you should read the actual report prepared by Mueller. Barr's statements about it have been rather egregiously at odds with the report's contents.
I haven't seen anything he's done or said about the Trump-Russia investigation that I find questionable. In fact I think his review of the Mueller report (jointly with Rod Rosenstein) and his intention to learn why the FBI and CIA utilized a fraudulent document in their investigation are spot on.
I've read both and they're not. Your turn.
jamie said:
Again you and Aaron completely missed the point.
2019 Schiff does not want "to weaponize law enforcement and classified information:.
2016 - Schiff wants it all declassified.
so - where is Schiff against declassifying everything vs allowing Barr and Trump to decide what gets declassified. Are you just joking with us on this?
No one can "allow" Barr and Trump "to decide what gets classified."
The President has the exclusive power to decide what gets classified and unclassified:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/politics/trump-classified-secrets.html
The designation of information as a restricted national security secret is considered part of the president’s constitutional powers as commander in chief. Because the classified information system was not established and is not regulated by congressional statutes, Mr. Trump has the power to declassify or disclose anything he wants.
“The classification system is not based on a law,” said Steven Aftergood, a government secrecy specialist with the Federation of American Scientists. “It is an expression of presidential authority, and that means that the president and his designees decide what is classified, and they have the essentially unlimited authority to declassify at will. The president defines the terms of the security clearance system and the parameters that determine who may be given access to classified information.”
It appears that the Vice President also has the power to declassify him/herself, but only the President can delegate others to declassify -- agency heads, committees of Congress, etc.
paulsurovell said:
jamie said:No one can "allow" Barr and Trump "to decide what gets classified."
so - where is Schiff against declassifying everything vs allowing Barr and Trump to decide what gets declassified. Are you just joking with us on this?
The President has the exclusive power to decide what gets classified and unclassified:
That’s a fine reminder. It’s beside the point jamie was making, but appreciated.
DaveSchmidt said:
paulsurovell said:That’s a fine reminder. It’s beside the point jamie was making, but appreciated.
jamie said:No one can "allow" Barr and Trump "to decide what gets classified."
so - where is Schiff against declassifying everything vs allowing Barr and Trump to decide what gets declassified. Are you just joking with us on this?
The President has the exclusive power to decide what gets classified and unclassified:
Jamie's point had a fatal flaw that needed to be corrected:
so - where is Schiff against declassifying everything vs allowing Barr and Trump to decide what gets declassified. Are you just joking with us on this?Maybe you can explain where the "where is Schiff against declassifying everything" comes from. I can't.
Ah sorry - yes - I meant Schiff was FOR declassifying everything. He's against selective declassifying. Even though it's a presidential prerogative - Trump will certainly weaponize his power.
paulsurovell said:
PVW said:I've read both and they're not. Your turn.
paulsurovell said:Perhaps you should read the actual report prepared by Mueller. Barr's statements about it have been rather egregiously at odds with the report's contents.
I haven't seen anything he's done or said about the Trump-Russia investigation that I find questionable. In fact I think his review of the Mueller report (jointly with Rod Rosenstein) and his intention to learn why the FBI and CIA utilized a fraudulent document in their investigation are spot on.
Well that's disappointing, as I can't attribute your position to ignorance. Now you're just the man who sticks his head out the window, gets wet, then proceeds to insist it's a bright and sunny day.
paulsurovell said:No one can "allow" Barr and Trump "to decide what gets classified."
The President has the exclusive power to decide what gets classified and unclassified:
Huh??? Say one thing, and then immediately refute it. Amazing.
PVW said:
paulsurovell said:Well that's disappointing, as I can't attribute your position to ignorance. Now you're just the man who sticks his head out the window, gets wet, then proceeds to insist it's a bright and sunny day.
PVW said:I've read both and they're not. Your turn.
paulsurovell said:Perhaps you should read the actual report prepared by Mueller. Barr's statements about it have been rather egregiously at odds with the report's contents.
I haven't seen anything he's done or said about the Trump-Russia investigation that I find questionable. In fact I think his review of the Mueller report (jointly with Rod Rosenstein) and his intention to learn why the FBI and CIA utilized a fraudulent document in their investigation are spot on.
You said "Barr's statements have been rather egregiously at odds with the report's contents."
Prove it.
paulsurovell said:
You said "Barr's statements have been rather egregiously at odds with the report's contents."Click to Read More
Prove it.
Dig that hole!
The proof's in the comparison between the two. You say you've read both, but if your memory needs a prod, I'd focus particularly on how Barr talked about the obstruction of justice questions, and what Mueller's report actually says. Beyond that, if you are asking me to prove that water is wet, I'm afraid I can't help you.
You would do better to go beyond MSM talking points. They didn't serve you well before Mueller and they aren't serving you well post-Mueller.
That's a weird response, as I referenced Barr and Mueller, neither of whom are part of the MSM. Are you doing a a callback to the discussion on non-sequiturs?
For Sale
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
Here's the rest of the thread from Mate - it helps when you put it all in context. He's very Trumpy in explanations. Where does Mate complain that Barr has the ability to selectively release and declassify whatever he wishes?