Is William Barr running a cover-up operation in regards to the Mueller Report and Donald J. Trump?

Yes

(star this post)

No

(star this post)

The problem is Mueller Round 1 was disappointing so you have to assume Mueller Round 2 will break our hearts as well. In light of the fact he won't lose one vote he got in 2016 regardless of what he does, the only way we get rid of the Orange Beast is to vote him out....if that is even possible. The End

Agree the only sure way to get rid of the Orange Turd Cake is vote him out. That said, no reason to ignore the rule of law and give him a pass. Cover-ups are bad for democracy.

I think another fair question is this:

Is the GOP running a cover-up Presidency?

I say YES. They didn't ever want him. He infiltrated and they've been too afraid of booting him, and have become complicit in his madness.

concordtom said:

---

I think another fair question is this:

Is the GOP running a cover-up Presidency?

I say YES. They didn't ever want him. He infiltrated and they've been too afraid of booting him, and have become complicit in his madness.

---

Oh, you're giving the GOP too much credit. They love Trump!

He basically breaks norms, does what he wants, and gets away with it. He always gets away with it. And he fulfills the GOP agenda. His supreme court pick is dead-on to them. So is Betsy Davos.

This article a few weeks back is the perfect description of the GOP.

Stop feeling sorry for the GOPers! This is their guy. And they absolutely love it.

Turtle Boy might be their man now but he faces extremely poor polls in Ken****y and his likely opponent is Amy McGrath, marine fighter pilot, unlike 4F Mitch the draft dodger. He might be for the run of his life...and if the GOP lose Mitch, I don't believe they have the leadership to keep it together.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Politico, 10/28/2010

From the WaPo:

Quote:

---

The (Mueller) report was prepared "so that the front matter from each section could have been released immediately or very quickly," the official said. "It was done in a way that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself."

Mueller's team assumed the information was going to be made available to the public, the official said, "and so they prepared their summaries to be shared in their own words and not in the attorney general's summary of their work, as turned out to be the case."

---

In other words, Barr doesn't need to redact, unless he wants to hide something.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/limited-information-barr-has-shared-about-russia-investigation-frustrated-some-on-muellers-team/2019/04/03/c98e8a02-567a-11e9-814f-e2f46684196e_story.html?utm_term=.67d2aad8c8fa

okaydo said:

---

concordtom said:

---

I think another fair question is this:

Is the GOP running a cover-up Presidency?

I say YES. They didn't ever want him. He infiltrated and they've been too afraid of booting him, and have become complicit in his madness.

---

Oh, you're giving the GOP too much credit. They love Trump!

He basically breaks norms, does what he wants, and gets away with it. He always gets away with it. And he fulfills the GOP agenda. His supreme court pick is dead-on to them. So is Betsy Davos.

This article a few weeks back is the perfect description of the GOP.

Stop feeling sorry for the GOPers! This is their guy. And they absolutely love it.

---

I don't feel bad for the folks who make politics a career and should know better. They are horrible sell-outs. Guys like Paul Ryan. shame!
I do feel sorry for millions of uneducated and unwise republicans who have been conned and manipulated.

okaydo said:

---

---

In a new interview with Ari Melber, Attorney General Eric Holder discusses Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, saying McConnell has done "a whole bunch of unpatriotic things" and that "history will not be kind to him".

This was a good interview. So nice to hear someone intelligent speak openly about a wide range of topics. In addition to the slam on McConnell, Holder says Trump is headed to being ranked by historians as the worst president ever, and that Obama will be looked at as a Top 5 President.

Trump is definitely a bottom 5 President and candidate for worst ever but no way do I put Obama in the top 5.

Another Bear said:

---

Turtle Boy might be their man now but he faces extremely poor polls in Ken****y and his likely opponent is Amy McGrath, marine fighter pilot, unlike 4F Mitch the draft dodger. He might be for the run of his life...and if the GOP lose Mitch, I don't believe they have the leadership to keep it together.

Turtle starts race slowly....amps up to where IT is leading the pack not letting anything
go past it...then gets run over by a girl on a motorized scooter

---

I do look forward to Turtle exiting and never returning.
Good riddance.

Mitch McConnell is destroying the Senate and American government
Robert Reich

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/06/mitch-mcconnell-senate-republicans-donald-trump-judges?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

The heat is going to get cranked up fast and hot. William Barr is set to testify before the House Appropriations Committee, on Tuesday to address budget stuff...so there will be questions about the Mueller Report...perhaps only questions about the report because Dems chair the committee.

I expect the Dubya line "I don't recall" or a Kavanaugh outrage of privilege. Or he might choke given he's been out of practice for a while.

Crazy how there's something every freakin' week. I guess that's the distraction part while the dismantling of America goes... or just the reality TV show stuff.

Barr to testify before Congress Tuesday on budget request

bearister said:

---

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Politico, 10/28/2010

---

He should only be a one-term president because of his radical policies.

Tell me how Obama Care is working. Some people I know lost their doctor, lost their policy and, for a family of 3 are paying $1,600 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible.

Sonofoski said:

---

bearister said:

---

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Politico, 10/28/2010

---

He should only be a one-term president because of his radical policies.

Tell me how Obama Care is working. Some people I know lost their doctor, lost their policy and, for a family of 3 are paying $1,600 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible.

---

I guess you preferred the old way, where if you have a preexisting condition, you suffer and die.

Also, a recent Fox News poll found that a majority of Americans like Obamacare.

It ain't perfect. But at least people are actually allowed to have medical insurance.

Sonofoski said:

---

bearister said:

---

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Politico, 10/28/2010

---

He should only be a one-term president because of his radical policies.

Tell me how Obama Care is working. Some people I know lost their doctor, lost their policy and, for a family of 3 are paying $1,600 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible.

---

There is widespread support for Obamacare amongst the public that use it, although it wasn't nearly as "radical" as it needed to be to be more successful because there needed to be concessions made to the Republicans to get it passed. Their(GOP) goal was to hamstring what would be good policy in order to see it fail and be able to say "see it was bad." There is plenty of documentation that this was the strategy at the time

Healthcare, reasonable healthcare, is a major concern from every American, minus the 1 to 5%ers.

Dotard L'Orange von Clownstick brought up the ACA repeal AGAIN last week...and the GOP crapped their collective pants thinking they'd have that as baggage going into the election. Healthcare was a big part of the Democrat's big midterm sweep. Thus, Trump quickly retreated realizing how toxic the idea is.

20 million people now have insurance since Obamacare.

Nobody of any political persuasion can deny that healthcare costs are running out of control.



We argue about it, but nobody seems to have a good answer.
It is ridiculous in my opinion that basic health insurance costs so much as it does. My friend's son was in Paris and suddenly had stomach pain. He needed an appendectomy, paid $200 and left. Wow. We were all shocked.
Meanwhile, my family pays thousands in premiums where all we need is a check-up for high school sports clearance.

Perhaps the problem is that we all expect to be saved from really expensive life saving diseases. Here is my potential solution. Please tell me what you think.

Universal health care coverage for all with a cap.
If you want Cadillac coverage for every last known disease cure (make your list), then you can purchase supplemental on the private market. Basic things such as setting a broken arm should not have to run our nation bankrupt.

When people like AOC make claims that Healthcare is a right, I say, "No, it's not. It's a privilege of modern technology." I am into genealogy, and I have MANY ancestors who died from simple diseases that today would never have killed them. It makes me mad to hear folks say that we should bend very backwards to save everyone of everything. Look, man, we are ALL going to die!

I've even heard some argue that 90% of healthcare expenses are used up by folks in the last few years of their lives. Perhaps we should save that money and let them die. So, in this thinking, the cap could decrease by age. Spend a lot to save a youngster with their whole life ahead of them, but don't be willing to spend so much on a 90 year old.

okaydo said:

---

Sonofoski said:

---

bearister said:

---

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Politico, 10/28/2010

---

He should only be a one-term president because of his radical policies.

Tell me how Obama Care is working. Some people I know lost their doctor, lost their policy and, for a family of 3 are paying $1,600 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible.

---

I guess you preferred the old way, where if you have a preexisting condition, you suffer and die.

Also, a recent Fox News poll found that a majority of Americans like Obamacare.

It ain't perfect. But at least people are actually allowed to have medical insurance.

You seem to believe the only way to cover preexisting contitions is to have a progam like Obamcare; there are other ways without basterdising the entire insurance industry.

What if there was legislation that passed and stated that once an individual is covered by a group health insurance policy, they can never lose their insurance coverage.

Do you think that might work?

---

Sonofoski said:

---

okaydo said:

---

Sonofoski said:

---

bearister said:

---

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Politico, 10/28/2010

---

He should only be a one-term president because of his radical policies.

Tell me how Obama Care is working. Some people I know lost their doctor, lost their policy and, for a family of 3 are paying $1,600 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible.

---

I guess you preferred the old way, where if you have a preexisting condition, you suffer and die.

Also, a recent Fox News poll found that a majority of Americans like Obamacare.

It ain't perfect. But at least people are actually allowed to have medical insurance.

You seem to believe the only way to cover preexisting contitions is to have a progam like Obamcare; there are other ways without basterdising the entire insurance industry.

What if there was legislation that passed and stated that once an individual is covered by a group health insurance policy, they can never lose their insurance coverage.

Do you think that might work?

---

---

Actually, it's not my belief. It's pretty much true. I and countless others were denied insurance due to preexisting conditions before Obamacare.

For a 2 time United States Attorney General not to know what the usage of the word "spying" brings with it is laughable at best and absolutely pathetic at worst. This is as almost laughable as Barr's not offering any evidence to back up his use of the word "spying". Barr put it out there so Trump and his co-conspirators could further Trump's ridiculous narrative of "No collusion and no obstruction" or "he was illegally spied on". Time to see the summaries of those who worked under the Special Prosecutor. The Trump administration had a obligation to inform the Gang of Eight of any illegal spying and none of the Democrats in the Gang of Eight know of any illegal spying. Hell, Rod Rosenstein testified to that fact when he went before the Republican committee and gave testimony on the FISA warrants.

Up until the spying claim, I thought Barr was more or less a straight shooter. Sure, he's a political creature, but he seemed to respect the system and have some moral fiber.

There are so many problems with the notion of "spying" on the campaign but let me start with the first one. When there were allegations of wrongdoing by Carter Page, Trump and everyone in his orbit vociferously denied that Page was ever associated with the campaign. Once they realized that there were FISA warrants to surveil him, they claimed he was part of the campaign and let the outrage machine churn. If Obama wanted to spy on Trump's campaign, which is a laughable assertion at best, why would he choose Carter effing Page as his conduit? I don't doubt that there could have been irregularities with how individuals handled the FISA warrants, but I would be genuinely surprised if there was any high level political motive related to Donald Trump's ****hole of a campaign.

Bill Barr's new position that the FBI was spying on Trump is frankly, pretty fccking amazing coming from an AG, past and current. For someone who stated in his coverup letter that there was Russian interference in '16 election, this amounts to self-contraction or a really screwy definition of spying.

Barr's statement on spying also seems like a preview of the Trump spin/defense/diversion strategy going forward.

Speculation is Barr gave Trump a break down of the report and thus today's latest conniption fit.

In any case, just have to wait this crap out. Otherwise I believe Bill Barr just sh*t all over his reputation and legacy.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Up until the spying claim, I thought Barr was more or less a straight shooter. Sure, he's a political creature, but he seemed to respect the system and have some moral fiber.

There are so many problems with the notion of "spying" on the campaign but let me start with the first one. When there were allegations of wrongdoing by Carter Page, Trump and everyone in his orbit vociferously denied that Page was ever associated with the campaign. Once they realized that there were FISA warrants to surveil him, they claimed he was part of the campaign and let the outrage machine churn. If Obama wanted to spy on Trump's campaign, which is a laughable assertion at best, why would he choose Carter effing Page as his conduit? I don't doubt that there could have been irregularities with how individuals handled the FISA warrants, but I would be genuinely surprised if there was any high level political motive related to Donald Trump's ****hole of a campaign.

---

I thought this was interesting...

Another Bear said:

---

Yes

(star this post)

---

That's a stupid and asine cartoon beause no one has read or seen the Mueller Report yet.

Beating a "dead horse" that does not exist or hasn't been yet is going full f'tard. Not advisable, particularly for the dumb and humorless.

Typical wing nut rhetoric, douschebaggery and ass sucking for the "Trump".

I disagree with the Republican philosophy but all kinds of people I respect are believers. With that said, anyone that thinks that tRump, his family members and Stephen Miller being at the helm is good for our country has to be either a greedy and selfish rich person, ignorant, a moron, evil or a traitor (or a combination of some or all of the foregoing). No one that has ever had a relationship with tRump, personal or professional, has ever gotten out alive.

concordtom said:

---

Universal health care coverage for all with a cap.
If you want Cadillac coverage for every last known disease cure (make your list), then you can purchase supplemental on the private market. Basic things such as setting a broken arm should not have to run our nation bankrupt.

---

This is basically the system in Switzerland. All insurance carriers are private companies, but laws dictate that they MUST sell a specific basic health plan to all customers who want it, and the parameters of that plan are defined by the government. They are not allowed to make a profit on this plan. After that, they can upsell whatever they want on other "Cadillac" health insurance.

And as under Obamacare, all citizens are required to carry health insurance. Their system is more expensive than nationalized health care in similar countries, but costs are reasonable and the system is highly-ranked.

I could see something similar taking hold in the US, though our constitution makes the "citizen requirement" part more difficult. We also already have larger public plans in Medicare and Medicaid, so it would be hard to roll those back. I think that's why the idea of opening up Medicare for voluntary purchase by people under 65 is becoming the popular "moderate" idea among Democrats. (In other words, it's the "public option" Obama originally talked about in 2008.)

sycasey said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Universal health care coverage for all with a cap.
If you want Cadillac coverage for every last known disease cure (make your list), then you can purchase supplemental on the private market. Basic things such as setting a broken arm should not have to run our nation bankrupt.

---

This is basically the system in Switzerland. All insurance carriers are private companies, but laws dictate that they MUST sell a specific basic health plan to all customers who want it, and the parameters of that plan are defined by the government. They are not allowed to make a profit on this plan. After that, they can upsell whatever they want on other "Cadillac" health insurance.

And as under Obamacare, all citizens are required to carry health insurance. Their system is more expensive than nationalized health care in similar countries, but costs are reasonable and the system is highly-ranked.

I could see something similar taking hold in the US, though our constitution makes the "citizen requirement" part more difficult. We also already have larger public plans in Medicare and Medicaid, so it would be hard to roll those back. I think that's why the idea of opening up Medicare for voluntary purchase by people under 65 is becoming the popular "moderate" idea among Democrats. (In other words, it's the "public option" Obama originally talked about in 2008.)

---

Will never happen. No matter how much bi-partisan it gets among the general public, Republicans will never let it happen. Democrats will never let any meaningful immigration reform pass that will be lit up as 'cruel'.

I predict no major legislation on key issue will ever be passed without one party have all 3 branches, including a super majority in the Senate. And the parties know this, which is why elections are so brutal and nasty. Win at all costs. Republican caught voting for any universal health care legislation that also shrinks the private insurance industry? Career over. Democrat caught voting for a 'wall'. Career over.

I hate it.

Another Bear said:

---

That's a stupid and asine cartoon beause no one has read or seen the Mueller Report yet.

Beating a "dead horse" that does not exist or hasn't been yet is going full f'tard. Not advisable, particularly for the dumb and humorless.

Typical wing nut rhetoric, douschebaggery and ass sucking for the "Trump".

---

HaHaHaHaHa