Barr's Fox News interview drives critics nuts: Ingraham: Barr's Fox News interview drives critics nuts https://youtu.be/ezfMx43DAxo Are the liberal network talking heads; losing their...

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Ingraham: Barr's Fox News interview drives critics nuts
https://youtu.be/ezfMx43DAxo

Are the liberal network talking heads; losing their heads?
It sure seems so.

woodguru

It drives people nuts because the AG is supposed to be apolitical, which Barr is obviously anything but. Barr is supposed to represent the FBI, and look for what was done right, not what they they did wrong so as to undermine the Mueller report.

I don't think Barr is paying any attention to the evidence any prosecutor could use to make a case against Trump for obstruction except to hide it.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

woodguru wrote:

It drives people nuts because the AG is supposed to be apolitical, which Barr is obviously anything but. Barr is supposed to represent the FBI, and look for what was done right, not what they they did wrong so as to undermine the Mueller report.

I don't think Barr is paying any attention to the evidence any prosecutor could use to make a case against Trump for obstruction except to hide it.

See, now your problem is obvious now. You don't think. Thank you for admitting it.

Does it not matter to you that a lot of partisan, sketchy crap was involved in this entire debacle? What about "rule of law"?
Does that only apply when convenient for you?
I want to know what went on, and who, how, and I know the why.
I guess you don't care much about any of that. You just want Trump gone.
That's fine with me. I wouldn't be mad at having a President Pence.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

woodguru wrote:

It drives people nuts because the AG is supposed to be apolitical, which Barr is obviously anything but. Barr is supposed to represent the FBI, and look for what was done right, not what they they did wrong so as to undermine the Mueller report.

I don't think Barr is paying any attention to the evidence any prosecutor could use to make a case against Trump for obstruction except to hide it.

woody. So much ignorant BE here.
Take off the blinders!!

Ingraham: Barr's Fox News interview drives critics nuts
https://youtu.be/ezfMx43DAxo

Are the liberal network talking heads; losing their heads?

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

archie bunker wrote:

See, now your problem is obvious now. You don't think. Thank you for admitting it.

Does it not matter to you that a lot of partisan, sketchy crap was involved in this entire debacle? What about "rule of law"?
Does that only apply when convenient for you?
I want to know what went on, and who, how, and I know the why.
I guess you don't care much about any of that. You just want Trump gone.
That's fine with me. I wouldn't be mad at having a President Pence.

I have no issue with the investigation, because like you I would also like to know what was going on. However, when the President tweets about treason, he is acting as judge and jury before any evidence was presented or the investigation completed. Puts the cart before the horse, don't you think?

Gatsby

woodguru wrote:

It drives people nuts because the AG is supposed to be apolitical, which Barr is obviously anything but. Barr is supposed to represent the FBI, and look for what was done right, not what they they did wrong so as to undermine the Mueller report.

I don't think Barr is paying any attention to the evidence any prosecutor could use to make a case against Trump for obstruction except to hide it.

It drives you liberals stark raving mad that A.G. Barr is working closely with DOJ IG Horowitz,

and IG Horowitz will be presenting his report on the Carter Page F.I.S.A. warrant application

in the very near future. The S. is about to H.T.F.

Brennan, Clapper, McCabe, and Comey are all currently under criminal investigation.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

working class stiff wrote:

I have no issue with the investigation, because like you I would also like to know what was going on. However, when the President tweets about treason, he is acting as judge and jury before any evidence was presented or the investigation completed. Puts the cart before the horse, don't you think?

Maybe, but he probably knows more than us, and there has been some really shady stuff going on.

Besides that, he's been called a Russian agent, traitor, and accused of committing treason himself for two years now. Now they changed tack to obstruction. What's next?

He's going scorched earth now, and I don't blame him a bit. He's been in a fight for his, and his families lives since before he was elected, and has held fast against it all. I kind of respect him for that.
Our politics have become a bare knuckle, no holds barred bloodsport, and I admire the way he's played the game. We live in interesting times, my friend!

Liberty Tree

working class stiff wrote:

I have no issue with the investigation, because like you I would also like to know what was going on. However, when the President tweets about treason, he is acting as judge and jury before any evidence was presented or the investigation completed. Puts the cart before the horse, don't you think?

Democrats have consistently condemned before investigation have been completed or hearings held so do not be hypocritical.

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

working class stiff wrote:

I have no issue with the investigation, because like you I would also like to know what was going on. However, when the President tweets about treason, he is acting as judge and jury before any evidence was presented or the investigation completed. Puts the cart before the horse, don't you think?

What would you call attempting to overthrow a duly elected president? Treason is the only definition that fits if no crime has been committed.

Trump has a lot of influence but he will never be the judge or on the jury. He has a right to speak his mind about what has happened to him and the people who voted for him. Take a chill pill. He just doesn't fit the normal politician mold. No parsing his speech and he wins.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Peewee wrote:

What would you call attempting to overthrow a duly elected president? Treason is the only definition that fits if no crime has been committed.

Trump has a lot of influence but he will never be the judge or on the jury. He has a right to speak his mind about what has happened to him and the people who voted for him. Take a chill pill. He just doesn't fit the normal politician mold. No parsing his speech and he wins.

Since the issues being discussed happened during the campaign, it was not an attempt to overthrow a duly elected President. Since everyone, including Mr. Trump, expected Mrs. Clinton to win, what motivation would 'the deep state' have in undermining the Trump campaign? Did they have polls that showed Trump winning?

Like I said, I have no issue with finding out how all this played out, but it makes no sense, since Trump was expected to lose, that the effort was to deny him the Presidency. There would have been no reason for that motivation.

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

working class stiff wrote:

Since the issues being discussed happened during t... (show quote)

Maybe like the Pentagon, the opposition likes to have contingency plans? Some evidence is coming out it started before he even announced. I think the DNC knew he had an excellent chance to win. But between cheating and the MSM, they thought they had a lock on the election. So they rolled out the fail-safe operation Crossfire Hurricane.

Abel

working class stiff wrote:

I have no issue with the investigation, because like you I would also like to know what was going on. However, when the President tweets about treason, he is acting as judge and jury before any evidence was presented or the investigation completed. Puts the cart before the horse, don't you think?

When the President tweets anything he is expressing his opinion. He has the same right to express his opinion as any one else on OPP. Opinions are like anuses, nearly everyone has one, and most people fart no matter what odor is generated. Don't worry about horses and carts, just don't step in the horse hockey and grin and bare it!

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

working class stiff wrote:

Since the issues being discussed happened during t... (show quote)

"...it makes no sense, since Trump was expected to lose, that the effort was to deny him the Presidency. There would have been no reason for that motivation."

They tried to guarantee that Trump would not win.
After all; he was a big threat to the Deep State, as we all know now.

A review is in order:
Holy Batman! Watch Rachel Maddow get that STUPID SMIRK wiped off her face
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVogLdbfOfQ

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Peewee wrote:

Maybe like the Pentagon, the opposition likes to have contingency plans? Some evidence is coming out it started before he even announced. I think the DNC knew he had an excellent chance to win. But between cheating and the MSM, they thought they had a lock on the election. So they rolled out the fail-safe operation Crossfire Hurricane.

Yep!
It no worky. LOLOLOL

Holy Batman! Watch Rachel Maddow get that STUPID SMIRK wiped off her face
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVogLdbfOfQ

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Gatsby wrote:

It drives you liberals stark raving mad that A.G. Barr is working closely with DOJ IG Horowitz,

and IG Horowitz will be presenting his report on the Carter Page F.I.S.A. warrant application

in the very near future. The S. is about to H.T.F.

Brennan, Clapper, McCabe, and Comey are all currently under criminal investigation.

Let the squirming continue!
Even Preparation H wont help.