Politicspoliticskekkeksistanshadilaythedemocratpartycannothandlethetruth

Sat May 4, 2019, 06:51 AM

The Big Lie That Barr Lied

By Andrew C. McCarthy May 3, 2019 2:37 PM

Oh, my.

"The attorney general’s testimony was clearly accurate.

I originally thought this was too stupid to write about. But stupid is like the plague inside the Beltway — one person catches it and next thing you know there’s an outbreak at MSNBC and the speaker of the House is showing symptoms while her delirious minions tote ceramic chickens around Capitol Hill.

So I give you: the Bill Barr perjury allegation.

We are all entitled to our own opinions. But are we entitled to our own facts? Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s bon mot says no, but Washington makes you wonder. Like when spleen-venting about the supposedly outrageous, unbelievable, disgraceful invocation of the word “spy” to describe episodes of government spying is instantly followed by a New York Times story about how the spying — er, I mean, court-authorized electronic surveillance — coupled with the tasking of spies — er, undercover agents — green-lighted by a foreign spy — er, intelligence service — was more widespread than previously known.

If I were a cynic, I’d think people were trying to get out in front of some embarrassing revelations on the horizon. I might even be tempted to speculate that progressives were trotting out their “Destroy Ken Starr” template for Barr deployment (which, I suppose, means that 20 years from now we’ll be reading about what a straight-arrow Barr was compared to whomever Democrats are savaging at that point).

The claim that Barr gave false testimony is frivolous. That is why, at least initially, Democrats and their media echo chamber soft-pedaled it — with such dishonorable exceptions as Mazie Horono, the Hawaii Democrat who, somehow, is a United States senator. It’s tough to make the perjury argument without any false or even inaccurate statements — though my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano did give it the old college try. As recounted by The Hill, he twisted himself into a pretzel, observing — try to follow this — that the attorney general “probably misled” Congress and thus “he’s got a problem” . . . although this purported dissembling didn’t really seem to be, you know, an actual “lie” so . . . maybe it’s not a problem after all. Or something."

Balance of article at the link: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/the-big-lie-that-barr-lied/

75 replies, 1529 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 75 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Big Lie That Barr Lied (Original post)
Muddling Through May 2019 OP
Carl May 2019 #1
EagleKeeper May 2019 #2
Muddling Through May 2019 #3
imwithfred May 2019 #4
Muddling Through May 2019 #7
EagleKeeper May 2019 #9
oflguy May 2019 #5
Charlie Mike May 2019 #6
EagleKeeper May 2019 #8
Charlie Mike May 2019 #11
swifty May 2019 #10
Muddling Through May 2019 #12
Charlie Mike May 2019 #13
EagleKeeper May 2019 #14
Muddling Through May 2019 #15
okletstalk May 2019 #16
EagleKeeper May 2019 #17
okletstalk May 2019 #20
EagleKeeper May 2019 #24
Muddling Through May 2019 #68
oflguy May 2019 #18
okletstalk May 2019 #21
oflguy May 2019 #22
okletstalk May 2019 #25
oflguy May 2019 #26
okletstalk May 2019 #32
Charlie Mike May 2019 #29
okletstalk May 2019 #30
Charlie Mike May 2019 #31
okletstalk May 2019 #36
Charlie Mike May 2019 #38
okletstalk May 2019 #42
Charlie Mike May 2019 #44
okletstalk May 2019 #48
Charlie Mike May 2019 #51
oflguy May 2019 #46
okletstalk May 2019 #52
oflguy May 2019 #34
Charlie Mike May 2019 #39
okletstalk May 2019 #41
oflguy May 2019 #47
okletstalk May 2019 #53
oflguy May 2019 #57
okletstalk May 2019 #59
oflguy May 2019 #60
okletstalk May 2019 #62
oflguy May 2019 #64
okletstalk May 2019 #65
Muddling Through May 2019 #66
Muddling Through May 2019 #67
Charlie Mike May 2019 #50
okletstalk May 2019 #40
oflguy May 2019 #43
okletstalk May 2019 #45
oflguy May 2019 #49
okletstalk May 2019 #54
oflguy May 2019 #55
okletstalk May 2019 #56
oflguy May 2019 #58
okletstalk May 2019 #61
oflguy May 2019 #63
okletstalk May 2019 #69
oflguy May 2019 #74
bernt-toast May 2019 #72
Fiendish Thingy-BC May 2019 #73
Charlie Mike May 2019 #19
okletstalk May 2019 #23
Charlie Mike May 2019 #27
EagleKeeper May 2019 #28
okletstalk May 2019 #33
EagleKeeper May 2019 #35
okletstalk May 2019 #37
Carl May 2019 #70
okletstalk May 2019 #71
Carl May 2019 #75

Response to Muddling Through (Original post)

Sat May 4, 2019, 07:56 AM

1. The left has been creating their own reality for decades but it went to warp drive following the

2000 election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Muddling Through (Original post)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:01 AM

2. Instapundit sums it up thusly...

"Well, I think it’s about the distraction from upcoming scandals. The attacks on Barr are in the nature of a spoiling attack, because the Democrats have a pretty good idea of what’s coming down the pike. In fact, everything they’ve done since election night is in that nature, really. Which gives you an idea of how bad it is."

And it's dead on correct.

Lefty knows as well as anyone else what is coming and is doing the battle space preparation.

No matter what Lefty says, this is what is happening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EagleKeeper (Reply #2)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:02 AM

3. Yup.

Instapundit is where I found the link to the article.

There's more than a whiff of desperation in the air from the Left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Muddling Through (Reply #3)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:12 AM

4. ".....There's more than a whiff of desperation in the air from the Left....."

Well, I wish I'd see that among the Democrats and primitives here, but I'm not.

They're all running around as if they're not expecting anything bad to happen.....and also they apparently don't think they've done anything bad in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imwithfred (Reply #4)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:51 AM

7. IMHO, whistling past the graveyard, Frank.

Time will tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Muddling Through (Reply #7)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:57 AM

9. The primatives over on skins island do the same thing...

We know they work in lockstep, this is just more of the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Muddling Through (Original post)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:20 AM

5. A forum Lefty accused Barr of lying

When I asked him to say what Barr said that was a lie, he never responded.

Typical

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #5)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:49 AM

6. The other one I've seen is: he didn't tell the whole truth as required by oath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #6)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:51 AM

8. It's kinda queer how the accuser gets to define "the whole truth" ain't it?*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EagleKeeper (Reply #8)

Sat May 4, 2019, 09:01 AM

11. "I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 37,642,173."

"Um...twelve?"

"PERJURY!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Muddling Through (Original post)

Sat May 4, 2019, 08:59 AM

10. Settle it with an impeachment of Barr

Barr clearly lied to Congress and our country, and he is also clearly running interference for Trump instead of doing the job of AG. If we impeach Barr, the people will mainly think, "Who is Barr?" That's the beauty of it. His impeachment will be where he is really introduced to the American people as a shill for Trump. No one will care that the AG is being impeached; they'll think it's novel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to swifty (Reply #10)

Sat May 4, 2019, 09:01 AM

12. "Barr clearly lied to Congress"

Horseshit.

Pure, unadulterated horseshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to swifty (Reply #10)

Sat May 4, 2019, 09:01 AM

13. "clearly" LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to swifty (Reply #10)

Sat May 4, 2019, 09:09 AM

14. Why don't they bring it Swifty?...

From my understanding there are 3 people now that need impeachin, yet, what.

So you folkes need to get your cats in a row and bring it, what are y'all waitin for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EagleKeeper (Reply #14)

Sat May 4, 2019, 09:26 AM

15. The same reason they won't be stacking and kicking in doors to confiscate firearms.

Those "fortunate sons" will always be sending others to do their dirty work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Muddling Through (Original post)

Sat May 4, 2019, 09:40 AM

16. That's a lot of explaining for a guy who supposedly didn't lie

The lie is, plain and simple, under oath Barr acted like he didn't know Mueller's concerns about his summary when he did know. It's plain and simple. Now the spin is to conflate the issue by claiming the question was technically about Mueller's team? Give me a break! Open those eyes folks! Open them and read! Here's a link
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955379-Redacted-Mueller-Report.html#document/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #16)

Sat May 4, 2019, 10:00 AM

17. I asked Swifty..no answer so I'll ask you...

If it's as obvious as you like to point out why don't your political betters impeach Barr?

It's clear cut isn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EagleKeeper (Reply #17)

Sat May 4, 2019, 10:58 AM

20. They just might do that

We will have to see. This all just happened, and there is a process.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #20)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:28 AM

24. So, the President just happened?...

What about him, 2 1/2 years just happened?

He's destroying the country, remember?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #20)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:54 PM

68. The collective Left spent the last 2 years

fapping themselves raw that "Saint Bobby Three Sticks" was going to come up with indisputable evidence
of Trump's collusion with Russia to steal the election.

Now they're trying to spin that giant goose-egg into something else.

Morons, all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #16)

Sat May 4, 2019, 10:19 AM

18. So what lie did Barr tell?

oops, you don't know

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #18)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:20 AM

21. Fair enough, even though I'm pretty sure you've heard this before.

Barr received a letter from Mueller that expressed concern that Barr had misrepresented his report. Later, under oath in front of Congress Barr was asked if he knew Mueller had concerns about his 4 page summary. Even though he had received a letter and had claimed to have had a phone call with Mueller, he went ahead under oath and said he didn't know about Mueller's concerns. Funny how he had two forms of communication and still didn't know what Mueller was concerned about. He then split hairs and deflected the issue to be a complaint about the media, and claimed he thought the letter was from "Mueller's team". But, then he claimed to have talked to Mueller over the phone but still didn't know.

Motive for lying you ask...

It was a right wing talking point that if Mueller didn't agree with Barr's summary he would be speaking out. The spin was that if Mueller wasn't complaining, then he must agree with Barr's summary. You can find posts right here on DI parroting that talking point. Well, the truth was Mueller was speaking out and complaining, not to the public, but to Barr himself. Barr knew Mueller was speaking out, but didn't want it to be known, and he certainly didn't want to tell anyone that Mueller was complaining about his take on the report. So he lied and said he didn't know what Mueller's concerns were.

He's a good liar there is no doubt, but even good liars can only get so far.

Now don't go around saying you didn't get it explained to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #21)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:24 AM

22. Maybe Mueller didn't express himself clearly

What were Mueller's concerns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #22)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:28 AM

25. His concern was that Barr was not representing his report in "context, nature, and substance".

From Mueller's letter:
"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about
critical aspects of the results of our investigation."



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #25)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:32 AM

26. I can see how Barr was left in the dark

What the hell does "context, nature, and substance" mean?

If somebody talks psychobabble to me, I'm telling people I have no idea what they mean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #26)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:55 AM

32. That's not "psychobabble". That's plain English.

Context- means the setting for an event, statement, or idea

Nature- the basic or inherent features of something

Substance- the most important or essential part of something; the real or essential meaning.


Substituting in the definitions of these words, Mueller's letter would read:

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the "setting", "the basic inherent features of", and "the most important part essential for meaning" of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation."

Wow, putting in those definitions really shows how much Mueller was actually bitching at Barr!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #25)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:35 AM

29. The context, nature, and substance is no collusion, no obstruction.

Everything else is just leftist antics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #29)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:41 AM

30. I don't think Mueller wrote his report based on leftist antics

Do you really think that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #30)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:45 AM

31. You mean apart from all the Hillary donors on his team?

But that's not what I wrote.

I said the Mewler REPORT is no collusion, no obstruction.

Everything ELSE is leftist antics trying to create crimes out of thin air.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #31)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:59 AM

36. The Mueller report does not say "no obstruction"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #36)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:03 PM

38. So, the indictments will be handed down any day now, right?

Indictments for allegedly obstructing an investigation that would ultimately show no collusion.

Cool story, bro!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #38)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:11 PM

42. Just saying read the report before you tell what's in it

It doesn't say "no obstruction". In fact it lays out a case for quite a bit of obstruction.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955379-Redacted-Mueller-Report.html#document/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #42)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:15 PM

44. It's a binary state. If there are no obstruction charges there's no obstruction.

What're you doing? Waiting for the Christmas break?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #44)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:18 PM

48. That's not even a logical statement

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #48)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:24 PM

51. Yeah it is. You're just in denial.

Wish harder. Maybe crimes will suddenly appear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #42)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:17 PM

46. On what page?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #46)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:27 PM

52. Volume 2 is where obstruction gets noted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #30)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:59 AM

34. Hell, his whole so called "investigation" was a Lefty antic

All a part of Lefty's coup attempt to overthrow an elected president

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #34)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:04 PM

39. Yep. And necks need to snap for it, lest they be tempted to try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #39)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:08 PM

41. Remember that whole innocent until proven guilty thing

And, don't go all executioner based on some kangaroo court either. Check out some History.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #41)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:18 PM

47. Is that what you was saying during the last Supreme Court nomination hearing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #47)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:29 PM

53. Nomination hearings are basically job interviews

Not the same as in a court of law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #53)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:34 PM

57. So that justified all the lies told about the man?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #57)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:35 PM

59. How do you know they were lies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #59)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:36 PM

60. If you were raped, would you remember where it happened?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #60)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:40 PM

62. Not sure I would

What makes you so sure you would?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #62)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:43 PM

64. I rest my case

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #64)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:45 PM

65. I'm glad you rested it

It didn't have much to it anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #59)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:51 PM

66. When one goes to a public forum and makes allegations of a forcible felony

but cannot remember the month of the incident, the year of the incident, the location of the incident
and cannot name any witnesses that saw you and the alleged assailant at the same location
it can be reasonably surmised that the allegation is nothing more than a lie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #53)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:52 PM

67. I'm trying to remember the last job interview

where I was accused of a forcible felony, which in many states is still regarded as a capital crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #41)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:23 PM

50. So, you left the "he didn't specifically say 'no obstruction'" thread to

plead for the presumption of innocence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #34)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:06 PM

40. It would have never gotten this far if that is all it was

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #40)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:13 PM

43. You are pretty naive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #43)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:16 PM

45. Too many connections to Russia that were lied about

That's what kept it going. It's not because the Dems were butt hurt. I know it's fun to think that, but really?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #45)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:19 PM

49. You mean like Hillary paying for a fake document full of lies about Trump?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #49)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:30 PM

54. No I mean like Flynn, Manafort, Trump Tower meeting etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #54)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:32 PM

55. What about it?

educate us

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #55)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:33 PM

56. The lies that were told in these situations kept the whole thing going,

as apposed to it all being about butt hurt liberals and a coup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #56)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:34 PM

58. what lies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #58)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:39 PM

61. You're asking for a long list. Many of these folks went to jail for lying. You can look them up.

Briefly, there's the lie that Trump didn't direct the response to the Tower Meeting, there's the Flynn lies about contacts with Russia, Manafort lied about contacts. Look 'em up. These folks went to jail for lying, I'm sure there are articles you can read.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #61)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:42 PM

63. Tell us about the lies in the Trump Tower meeting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #63)

Sat May 4, 2019, 01:47 PM

69. Trump originally claimed he knew nothing at all about the famous Trump Tower meeting with Jr.

Later, it was apparent Trump Sr. had helped craft the response that was given to the media. He wasn't charged for lying because it was only to the press and not to Congress under oath. But, such lies once they come out do tend to lead to more investigation. That is my point, the lies throughout the whole thing fueled the investigation on.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/mueller-report-no-evidence-trump-knew-about-trump-tower-meeting-n995816

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #69)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:05 PM

74. Do you realize how petty you sound?

Wah Wah Wah

Trump knew about the meeting

Wah Wah Wah

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #21)

Sat May 4, 2019, 03:48 PM

72. You may want to tell The Atlantic they got it wrong...

"Barr did not lie in any of these statements. He did not, as some people insist, commit perjury. I haven’t found a sentence he has written or said that cannot be defended as truthful on its own terms, if only in some literal sense."
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/bill-barrs-performance-was-catastrophic/588574/

Benjamin Wittes
Editor in chief of Lawfare and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution

Also New York Magazine
"Some eager commenters began to claim that the U.S. Attorney General’s April 10 comments could fall under the definition of perjury.

But as Lawfare executive editor Susan Hennessey wrote, the legal purview of perjury is incredibly narrow, and Barr had most likely worded his response in a way that would avoid such a charge."
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/05/bill-barr-didnt-commit-perjury-but-still-misled-congress.html?utm_source=undefined&utm_medium=undefined&utm_campaign=feed-part

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bernt-toast (Reply #72)

Sat May 4, 2019, 07:19 PM

73. Perhaps for the strict definition of perjury, but not for misleading congress, which is also a crime

And an impeachable offense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #16)

Sat May 4, 2019, 10:24 AM

19. The question was about Mewler's team, not Mewler.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #19)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:25 AM

23. That's what is called splitting hairs


We will get a better picture when and if Mueller gets to testify.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #23)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:33 AM

27. That is not splitting hairs. Perjury allegations do not rest on your subjective preferences.

"Well yeah, your Honor, we did specifically and explicitly ask about the team but what we really meant was Mewler himself and because the defendant didn't anticipate what we really meant we want you to find him guilty."

Do some good with all that bullshit and go fertilize the sub Sahara.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #23)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:33 AM

28. Mewler is just butthurt about the way the media is covering it....

Is he going to appear anywhere to testify about it and are you sure you would want him to?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EagleKeeper (Reply #28)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:58 AM

33. I am all about the truth

I don't care if it hurts left or right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #33)

Sat May 4, 2019, 11:59 AM

35. Good deal, I know I look forward to him appearing.*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EagleKeeper (Reply #35)

Sat May 4, 2019, 12:02 PM

37. I'm with you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #33)

Sat May 4, 2019, 01:52 PM

70. Can you show us where you talked about this lie?

&t=1s

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Carl (Reply #70)

Sat May 4, 2019, 02:02 PM

71. I don't agree with Obama lying either, doesn't mean we have to put up with new lies

As far as showing you where I talked about it... that's like the loaded question "when did you stop beating your wife?". Why don't you show me where I supported Obama lying and we'll go from there. The burden of proof is on the accuser.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okletstalk (Reply #71)

Sun May 5, 2019, 04:47 AM

75. Yet just yesterday you felt different with Kavanaugh.

Your own words are above.

It is proof that you have different standards of poutrage depending on who it is.
Obamas lie was about a grave national security breach that the 2016 dem Presidential candidate caused.

If you voted for her you supported it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticskekkeksistanshadilaythedemocratpartycannothandlethetruth