The Mueller Report thread

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-26-2019, 04:10 PM)jj22 Wrote: Anyone want to guess what he will redact?!

Anything that should be redacted?

[jj22]

(03-27-2019, 04:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Well, if I'm McConnell, who's shown himself to be a pretty savvy political operative, I hold it back so the Dems can get into a froth and go on every news channel claiming the report must have damaging evidence.  Let Maxine Waters and the other extreme members go on tirades and make wild accusations.  The release it, it has nothing in it and the Dems look stupid all over again.  Constantly discredit them as they're easily manipulated on this issue.

It's a huge win for Dems if it's not released. 2020 Dems are already running saying if elected they will release the report.

Saying this to Americans who 92% of them in the most recent poll (and vast majority of them in other polls) say they want the report released.

Nobody is buying they are blocking this because they want to hide Trumps exoneration from the world. Which is basically what they are doing/saying.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-27-2019, 05:07 PM)jj22 Wrote: It's a huge win for Dems if it's not released. 2020 Dems are already running saying if elected they will release the report.

Saying this to Americans who 92% of them in the most recent poll (and vast majority of them in other polls) say they want the report released.

Nobody is buying they are blocking this because they want to hide Trumps exoneration from the world. Which is basically what they are doing/saying.

Yeah, you didn't get a word of the post you just quoted.

[jj22]

(03-27-2019, 05:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Anything that should be redacted?

See post 180. Thankfully Clinton didn't go through and redact what he didn't want us to know. Complete transparency.

[jj22]

(03-27-2019, 05:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, you didn't get a word of the post you just quoted.

Because Barr already stated his plans. And it has nothing to do with you trying to make McConnell to be setting Maxine or anyone else up. That's just more desperate talk to make sense as to why they are hiding Trumps "exoneration".

Trump will get the report, and he will redact what he doesn't want released. Which will again cause more questions than answers for someone who was "exonerated".

If you believe Trump was exonerated. You should be outraged with McConnell and demanding it be released. Trump supporters aren't because..... well... I think they know now that something is up, and would prefer everyone just take Trumps word (as if he's gained that kind of trust with his history of "honesty").

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-27-2019, 05:15 PM)jj22 Wrote: Because Barr already stated his plans. And it has nothing to do with you trying to make McConnell to be setting Maxine or anyone else up.

Trump will get the report, and he will redact what he doesn't want released. Which will again cause more questions than answers for someone who was "exonerated".

You do know the report has information that must be redacted by law, correct?  

[jj22]

(03-27-2019, 05:16 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You do know the report has information that must be redacted by law, correct?  

Incorrect.

If he was fully exonerated then what is there to discuss? Shouldn't be no evidence since it was a "witch hunt", fake news, bs, etc. Shouldn't be anything that shouldn't get out since there isn't anything there.... and thus why would there be anything classified to redact.

Again Clinton didn't redact anything (he didn't even get a chance as it was released in full) and there was enough in it to where he got impeached. Why not hide anything in that report?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that is a lot you want hidden about this "Hoax".

[fredtoast]

(03-27-2019, 05:16 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You do know the report has information that must be redacted by law, correct?  

No I don't.  Tell me what information must be redacted.

[fredtoast]

(03-27-2019, 04:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Well, if I'm McConnell, who's shown himself to be a pretty savvy political operative, I hold it back so the Dems can get into a froth and go on every news channel claiming the report must have damaging evidence.  Let Maxine Waters and the other extreme members go on tirades and make wild accusations.  The release it, it has nothing in it and the Dems look stupid all over again.  Constantly discredit them as they're easily manipulated on this issue.

Only problem with this plan is that 90% of the population will agree with the Dems that the Republicans must be hiding something.

Well maybe not 90%.  I'd say about 25% fall into that "I don't care if Trump shoots someone in the middle of the street" crowd he is so proud of.  But any rational person will assume that the only reason to hide the report is to hide bad things about Trump.

[Dill]

(03-27-2019, 04:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Well, if I'm McConnell, who's shown himself to be a pretty savvy political operative, I hold it back so the Dems can get into a froth and go on every news channel claiming the report must have damaging evidence.  Let Maxine Waters and the other extreme members go on tirades and make wild accusations.  The release it, it has nothing in it and the Dems look stupid all over again.  Constantly discredit them as they're easily manipulated on this issue.

Assuming there ISN'T something in it, that might indeed be a workable strategy, and very McConnell like. 

He could count on SOME Democrats doing exactly that, and we know how quickly some become "all" in political rhetoric.

[Bengalzona]

(03-27-2019, 04:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Well, if I'm McConnell, who's shown himself to be a pretty savvy political operative, I hold it back so the Dems can get into a froth and go on every news channel claiming the report must have damaging evidence.  Let Maxine Waters and the other extreme members go on tirades and make wild accusations.  The release it, it has nothing in it and the Dems look stupid all over again.  Constantly discredit them as they're easily manipulated on this issue.

The ongoing Grand Jury the Mueller empaneled may also have something to do with releasing it.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-27-2019, 05:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No I don't.  Tell me what information must be redacted.

You're the lawyer, Fred.  I bow to your superior expertise in this area.

(03-27-2019, 05:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Only problem with this plan is that 90% of the population will agree with the Dems that the Republicans must be hiding something.

Source.

Quote:Well maybe not 90%.

 
I just got whiplash.

Quote:I'd say about 25% fall into that "I don't care if Trump shoots someone in the middle of the street" crowd he is so proud of.  But any rational person will assume that the only reason to hide the report is to hide bad things about Trump.

Ooohhhh.  This level of hyperbole leads me to think you don't have much of substance here.  Please do surprise me.

(03-27-2019, 06:28 PM)Dill Wrote: Assuming there ISN'T something in it, that might indeed be a workable strategy, and very McConnell like. 

He could count on SOME Democrats doing exactly that, and we know how quickly some become "all" in political rhetoric.

In my opinion, yes.  I thank you for your candor, but I don't think the "some" Dems comment was necessary.  Clearly there are good people on both sides. 

(03-27-2019, 06:49 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: The ongoing Grand Jury the Mueller empaneled may also have something to do with releasing it.

Possibly.

[Dill]

(03-27-2019, 07:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: In my opinion, yes.  I thank you for your candor, but I don't think the "some" Dems comment was necessary.  Clearly there are good people on both sides. 

Jus' sayin'.  That's how the world works.

[Benton]

(03-27-2019, 04:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Well, if I'm McConnell, who's shown himself to be a pretty savvy political operative, I hold it back so the Dems can get into a froth and go on every news channel claiming the report must have damaging evidence.  Let Maxine Waters and the other extreme members go on tirades and make wild accusations.  The release it, it has nothing in it and the Dems look stupid all over again.  Constantly discredit them as they're easily manipulated on this issue.

Thanks to the weird world we live in, the Mueller Report is one of the best tools the GOP has for 2020.

They gave tax breaks to the rich, worsened healthcare, shepherded insane drug costs, didn't prevent gun control (bump stocks), didn't end abortion, called for cuts that'll negatively impact the elderly and poor, called for cuts to negatively impact school, increased the deficit, increased spending and didn't get Trump his wall. Oh, and wages still suck.

The Mueller Report, if there's nothing in it, is one of the few cards they have. They can throw it out closer to the election and say 'see, nothing.' Or, if there's something in there ... and this is the best part... they can throw it out there and say 'the Dems only wanted this released because it slings mud on the POTUS. What a dirty, dirty tactic after the POTUS's appointee opted not to indict and all those shady figures were already dealt with. Shame on them. I say shame!'

Either way, it plays better than releasing the report now and getting nothing. 

[hollodero]

(03-27-2019, 05:16 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You do know the report has information that must be redacted by law, correct?  

(03-27-2019, 05:20 PM)jj22 Wrote: Incorrect.

(03-27-2019, 05:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No I don't.  Tell me what information must be redacted.

??? Well of course some things possibly can't be released to the public. There might be ongoing investigations, grand jury information, reveal of methods, or of source material. Even national interest could play into it. I mean, I know nothing about US law, but to claim it can be released fully and there's no doubt about that seems odd to me.

But sure some Democrat trustees need to see the same thing Barr saw. I wouldn't expect anyone to trust him or his summary or his words alone. But a full release without redactions might be negligent (and illegal. What if an informant or spy is unmasked?)

[*bfine32*]

Would the Dems buy that anything Trump deleted was simply about yoga?

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-27-2019, 09:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Would the Dems buy that anything Trump deleted was simply about yoga?

No. Because he believes the body is like a battery and there is a finite amount of energy to use up in a lifetime. So out of all the glaring lies he tells. They would know the dude who serves fast food on a silver platter and is afraid of physical exertion is once again full of shit.

[hollodero]

(03-27-2019, 09:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Would the Dems buy that anything Trump deleted was simply about yoga?

I don't know... would Reps have bought it from the husband?

That seems like the more accurate comparison. Hand over the report, Kenneth, I just quickly edit out the part about my yoga lessons with Monica and we're good to go...

....yeah i am never defending Hillary for her deeds, but deleting some personal emails that were sent through the wrong server strikes me as significantly different to deleting stuff out of a special council investigative report.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-27-2019, 08:52 PM)hollodero Wrote: ??? Well of course some things possibly can't be released to the public. There might be ongoing investigations, grand jury information, reveal of methods, or of source material. Even national interest could play into it. I mean, I know nothing about US law, but to claim it can be released fully and there's no doubt about that seems odd to me.

But sure some Democrat trustees need to see the same thing Barr saw. I wouldn't expect anyone to trust him or his summary or his words alone. But a full release without redactions might be negligent (and illegal. What if an informant or spy is unmasked?)

It's rather disturbing that "feroner" (tongue planted firmly in cheek) seems much more educated on this process than an attorney and a fellow US citizen.

[*bfine32*]

(03-27-2019, 09:49 PM)hollodero Wrote: I don't know... would Reps have bought it from the husband?

That seems like the more accurate comparison. Hand over the report, Kenneth, I just quickly edit out the part about my yoga lessons with Monica and we're good to go...

....yeah i am never defending Hillary for her deeds, but deleting some personal emails that were sent through the wrong server strikes me as significantly different to deleting stuff out of a special council investigative report.

Even deleting them after you have been instructed by a special counsel investigation to hand over the device? 

Folks will create their own rationality.