Barr is on record that except for classified information the entire report will be made public. Asked if the White House could make any changes in the report; “That will not happen.”
The Mueller Report is separate from what members of congress have requested from Barr.
Same schit that they requested from Rosenstein and were told to f*ck off.
Barr was responding to Graham and Feinstein.
And there is this from his record; RESPONSE: As I stated in my June 8, 2018 memorandum and explained in my January 14, 2019 letter to Chairman Graham and my January 10, 2019 letter to Ranking Member Feinstein, my memorandum was narrow in scope. It was premised on an assumption based on public accounts – which the memorandum acknowledged may be incorrect – that the Special Counsel’s basis for questioning the President was that the firing of former FBI Director Comey constituted obstruction under a specific statute – namely, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c). In other words, the memorandum assumed, for purposes of analysis, that the Special Counsel’s sole predicate for interviewing the President was the single obstruction theory that it was addressing.
The memorandum did not address whether the President could be questioned under any of the other possible obstruction theories that have been publicly discussed in connection with the Special Counsel’s investigation, or any other theories of liability the Special Counsel may be pursuing. After drafting the memorandum, I provided copies to several officials at the Department of Justice who I thought would be in a position to assess whether it was actually relevant to the Special Counsel’s work, including Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, who by law at the time was charged with overseeing the Special Counsel.
In addition to sharing my views with the Department, I thought they also might be of interest to other lawyers working on the matter. As I have stated, I sent a copy to the President’s lawyers and spoke with them to explain my views. I do not know what impressions they had regarding my views or what, if anything, they did with my memorandum after receiving it. As I stated during my hearing before the Committee, I remain in the dark regarding the specific facts and legal theories currently at issue in the Special Counsel’s investigation.
If confirmed, I will approach the investigation with an open mind as to all issues and will make any decisions based on the relevant law and the facts at the time.
Leo of the Land of Dyr
NRA FOR LIFE
I MISS SARAH
“In Trump We Trust.” Right????
SOMEBODY please tell TRH that Netanyahu NEVER said "Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away."
How's it feel living like a walking talking human eeyore? I know you suffer with non stop chronic pain and that messes with a guys head. I feel sorry for you man. Also, in case you missed it, the Trump kids indictment was fake news. Try to keep up.
What part was proven to be "fake"? The part that Mueller indicted them, or the part that Barr agreed with Mueller?
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a welfare check, a forty ounce malt liquor, a crack pipe, an Obama phone, free health insurance. and some Air Jordan's and he votes Democrat for a lifetime.
Barr is on record that except for classified information the entire report will be made public. Asked if the White House could make any changes in the report; “That will not happen.”
The Mueller Report is separate from what members of congress have requested from Barr.
Same schit that they requested from Rosenstein and were told to f*ck off.
Barr was responding to Graham and Feinstein.
And there is this from his record; RESPONSE: As I stated in my June 8, 2018 memorandum and explained in my January 14, 2019 letter to Chairman Graham and my January 10, 2019 letter to Ranking Member Feinstein, my memorandum was narrow in scope. It was premised on an assumption based on public accounts – which the memorandum acknowledged may be incorrect – that the Special Counsel’s basis for questioning the President was that the firing of former FBI Director Comey constituted obstruction under a specific statute – namely, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c). In other words, the memorandum assumed, for purposes of analysis, that the Special Counsel’s sole predicate for interviewing the President was the single obstruction theory that it was addressing.
The memorandum did not address whether the President could be questioned under any of the other possible obstruction theories that have been publicly discussed in connection with the Special Counsel’s investigation, or any other theories of liability the Special Counsel may be pursuing. After drafting the memorandum, I provided copies to several officials at the Department of Justice who I thought would be in a position to assess whether it was actually relevant to the Special Counsel’s work, including Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, who by law at the time was charged with overseeing the Special Counsel.
In addition to sharing my views with the Department, I thought they also might be of interest to other lawyers working on the matter. As I have stated, I sent a copy to the President’s lawyers and spoke with them to explain my views. I do not know what impressions they had regarding my views or what, if anything, they did with my memorandum after receiving it. As I stated during my hearing before the Committee, I remain in the dark regarding the specific facts and legal theories currently at issue in the Special Counsel’s investigation.
If confirmed, I will approach the investigation with an open mind as to all issues and will make any decisions based on the relevant law and the facts at the time.
What does this have to do with the Freedom Caucus member of Congress requesting information from now confirmed AG William Bar.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a welfare check, a forty ounce malt liquor, a crack pipe, an Obama phone, free health insurance. and some Air Jordan's and he votes Democrat for a lifetime.
I would like the next 6 years to look something like the recent hearing with the House and Matt Whitaker. Matt owned that place and had the liberals pissing up their legs. I want to see some more of that.
kwg
I for one would be quite good with this^^^^
I think Matt is warming up to get Charles Grassley's spot in the Senate when Chuck decides to retire.
kwg
What an incredible replacement for the irreplaceable Chuck Grassley!
We may know the time Ben Carson lied, but does anyone know the time Hillary Clinton told the truth?
Immersing oneself in progressive lieberalism is no different than bathing in the sewage of Hell.
I would like the next 6 years to look something like the recent hearing with the House and Matt Whitaker. Matt owned that place and had the liberals pissing up their legs. I want to see some more of that.
kwg
I for one would be quite good with this^^^^
I think Matt is warming up to get Charles Grassley's spot in the Senate when Chuck decides to retire.
kwg
What an incredible replacement for the irreplaceable Chuck Grassley!
The same Chuck Grassley that didn't do jack shixt about Fast and Furious? The whole investigation of F&F read like some Q release. Basically a bunch of fantasy that is always just out of reach in the future and the future never arrives.
