The Barr Report

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:16 am

This is amusing. Tomorrow Trump's cover up guy, William Barr, is releasing his blacked-out version of Mueller's Report but for some reason he's holding the press conference for it before it's released. Usually when documents are being released that require a presser it's released to the press a short time before the press conference but embargoed, this allowed the press to ask question relevent to the document but also allows the White House to be the one who makes it public. And yet for some reason this has to be different. Why? Why must the presser happen before the press have a change to read it?

Anyway, it comes out tomorrow. Followed soon, no doubt, by Trump's counter-report. Oh yeah, did you not know about that? Trump's having a counter report written to counter the report that he claims completely exonerates him. Because that makes sense, doesn't it?

Tomorrow's gonna be fun.

Barry_Chuckle · Post by **Barry_Chuckle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:24 am

Is that tomorrow, tomorrow or tomorrow today?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:36 am

Barry_Chuckle wrote:Is that tomorrow, tomorrow or tomorrow today?

Fair one. Today, Thursday. Just before the holiday weekend, because when you have terrible news to release you do it on Take Out the Trash day. Of course, if it was good news then you want it to consume a news cycle. So the timing of this release also points to it being a bad thing for the Trump regime.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 6:07 am

You getting your hopes up again friend?

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:22 am

http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... mp#p987279" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Already a thread about Trump, dossiers and reports, so quite why you thought it would need another thread about it I don't know...

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:35 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:This is amusing.....

Tomorrow's gonna be fun.

That’s all a matter of personal opinion.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:38 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Tomorrow's gonna be fun.

The Barr Report??

THE Barr Report!!!!!

How did I forget this!!!!!

Today's gonna be fun fun fun!

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:38 am

Anyone else throwing a Barr Report Party?

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:50 am

I am sure I read turtle that you only decide someone is guilty of something once a trial has taken place and a jury or some other body has found that person guilty, like the little terrorist who sneaked out of this country to join isis (which everyone knows) you still want her to come back and face a trial to see if she actually is guilty of anything.

Shouldn't you afford the same courtesy to a countries President or can you decide someones guilt if you dislike the person ?

CharlieinNewMexico · Post by **CharlieinNewMexico** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:51 am

If I'm on mountain time do I get to see the report 2 hours before the press conference?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:57 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:I am sure I read turtle that you only decide someone is guilty of something once a trial has taken place and a jury or some other body has found that person guilty, like the little terrorist who sneaked out of this country to join isis (which everyone knows) you still want her to come back and face a trial to see if she actually is guilty of anything.

Shouldn't you afford the same courtesy to a countries President or can you decide someones guilt if you dislike the person ?

Nope. What's happening here is you're making a bunch of **** up in order to personally smear another member of the forum with lies.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:57 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Nope. What's happening here is you're making a bunch of **** up in order to personally smear another member of the forum with lies.

It was a question

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:59 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:It was a question

Oh yeah, the question bit. I wasn't answering that. And i wont, because your premise is completely false since you made it up.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:00 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Oh yeah, the question bit. I wasn't answering that. And i wont, because your premise is completely false since you made it up.

That is fair enough, I will bear that in mind when skimming through your other replies demanding guilty people face trial first. Cheers for replying

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:00 am

Lads, lads.

Let's not fight on Barr Report Day!

SmudgetheClaret · Post by **SmudgetheClaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:06 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:This is amusing. Tomorrow Trump's cover up guy, William Barr, is releasing his blacked-out version of Mueller's Report but for some reason he's holding the press conference for it before it's released. Usually when documents are being released that require a presser it's released to the press a short time before the press conference but embargoed, this allowed the press to ask question relevent to the document but also allows the White House to be the one who makes it public. And yet for some reason this has to be different. Why? Why must the presser happen before the press have a change to read it?

Anyway, it comes out tomorrow. Followed soon, no doubt, by Trump's counter-report. Oh yeah, did you not know about that? Trump's having a counter report written to counter the report that he claims completely exonerates him. Because that makes sense, doesn't it?

Tomorrow's gonna be fun.

WOOP WOOP

Trump derangement syndrome..

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:20 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:That is fair enough, I will bear that in mind when skimming through your other replies demanding guilty people face trial first. Cheers for replying

Why shouldn't guilty people get a trial? Begum should be tried. Trump should be tried. I have no need to wait until the outcome of a trial to know that they are both guilty as ****, but just because i'm pretty sure they're both guilty that doesn't mean I think we should punish them without a trial.

So, answer me this, were you stupidly wrong, or were you deliberately lying when you accused me of hypocrisy?

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:25 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Why shouldn't guilty people get a trial? Begum should be tried. Trump should be tried. I have no need to wait until the outcome of a trial to know that they are both guilty as ****, but just because i'm pretty sure they're both guilty that doesn't mean I think we should punish them without a trial.

So, answer me this, were you stupidly wrong, or were you deliberately lying when you accused me of hypocrisy?

At no point have you been begging for a trial for Trump as you did with Begum, you had him as guilty the day he won the election. Maybe I could have been clearer calling you a hypocrite, perhaps I should have said liar as well.

Now you are "pretty sure they are both guilty" let me guess which one is casting doubt for you. For me they are both guilty and I am not bothered if they lost some human rights and were found guilty if the evidence is there. Still keep up your hard work you will win one day.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:28 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:At no point have you been begging for a trial for Trump as you did with Begum, you had him as guilty the day he won the election. Maybe I could have been clearer calling you a hypocrite, perhaps I should have said liar as well.

Now you are "pretty sure they are both guilty" let me guess which one is casting doubt for you. For me they are both guilty and I am not bothered if they lost some human rights and were found guilty if the evidence is there. Still keep up your hard work you will win one day.

Do you know what impeachment includes? A ******* trial. Or are you going to turn around and claim that i haven't been calling for impeachment? Because that would be a funny turn.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:32 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Do you know what impeachment includes? A ******* trial. Or are you going to turn around and claim that i haven't been calling for impeachment? Because that would be a funny turn.

I probably won't be turning round can't really see any point to it, you have been calling for him to be jailed, removed and impeached. Stop swearing we both know it doesn't make you any cleverer or braver.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:39 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:I probably won't be turning round can't really see any point to it, you have been calling for him to be jailed, removed and impeached. Stop swearing we both know it doesn't make you any cleverer or braver.

Nope. You're making **** up again. I called for him to be investigated and impeached. I've tentatively opposed using the 25th amendment to remove him because i wanted him investigated and the evidence put forward publicly, which wouldn't happen is he was removed by his cabinet and VP. I've wanted (and still want) him to be indicted for whatever crimes he is suspected of.

Do i want him jailed? Of course, but only as a consequence of a trial. Obviously. But I've rarely, if ever, brought up the prospect of him ending up in prison because there's no way a former US president will end up behind bars. At most he'd end up spending his remaining days under house arrest.

You've made an awful lot of **** up about me in this thread already, and it's not even 9am. Has it crossed your mind that perhaps you should apologise for these lies? Do you not feel any kind of shame in lying so opening like this?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:41 am

STOP TRYING TO SNEAK IN POSTS ABOUT TRUMP ON TO OTHER THREADS THAT ARE CLEARLY NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP ROWLS. I'VE REPORTED THIS TO THE MODS.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:46 am

Now, claretonthecoast, if you had made honest mistakes (they happen) then what you would do after your accusations were thoroughly refuted is to apologise and remember not to make those mistakes again. And as a mature adult i would accept your apology and we can both think nothing more of it.
However, if your intention was to lie about me then you clearly wouldn't apologise.

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:47 am

Are IT and Pstotto the same person ? Maybe the Mods would be able to check their IP addresses.

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:48 am

HatfieldClaret wrote:Are IT and Pstotto the same person ? Maybe the Mods would be able to check their IP addresses.

No we're not

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:40 am

^^^^^

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:42 am

what about wsxc12567 ? The Barr report could be one from that poster.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:18 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Now, claretonthecoast, if you had made honest mistakes (they happen) then what you would do after your accusations were thoroughly refuted is to apologise and remember not to make those mistakes again. And as a mature adult i would accept your apology and we can both think nothing more of it.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:59 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Now, claretonthecoast, if you had made honest mistakes (they happen) then what you would do after your accusations were thoroughly refuted is to apologise and remember not to make those mistakes again. And as a mature adult i would accept your apology and we can both think nothing more of it.
However, if your intention was to lie about me then you clearly wouldn't apologise.

That is probably your funniest post yet. I tried reading it in a Krays kind of post put ended up reading it via the tone of the krankies.

I ain't the one lying and I won't be apologising on your behalf

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 2:46 pm

AG puppet

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:22 pm

So after all the fuss, he isn't getting impeached, or sent to prison etc?

Well, that's just hilarious.

Dark Cloud · Post by **Dark Cloud** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:55 pm

And there's still a chance the Clarets could go down. Some people need to get their bloody priorities right on here!!

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:56 pm

Someone clearly isn't looking forward to his diet of Warnock juice!

Dark Cloud · Post by **Dark Cloud** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:02 pm

I couldn't give a flying F about Barr. I'd never heard of him until IT mentioned him. How on earth can somebody worry about this goon Barr when we might become only the third club since the history of football even began to be relegated on 39 points! Get focused (And I bet Colin is more worried than I am!!)

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:05 pm

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... 355bba12d7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Worth a read, as its pretty clear that Trumps Attorney General is doing exactly what Trump wants him to do (no shock there!)

Reckoner · Post by **Reckoner** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:29 pm

Its just weird. The Attorney General of the US acting as if he is Trump's personal PR/Lawyer. And redneck Americans will probably just keep chewing twigs.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:31 pm

Reckoner wrote:Its just weird. The Attorney General of the US acting as if he is Trump's personal PR/Lawyer. And redneck Americans will probably just keep chewing twigs.

Not just redneck americans judging by this thread.

Some proper throbbers about at the moment.

Reckoner · Post by **Reckoner** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:35 pm

cant argue with that.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:37 pm

I wonder if they will be drinking "Lemonade" while reading the "Barr Report"

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:39 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Why shouldn't guilty people get a trial? Begum should be tried. Trump should be tried. I have no need to wait until the outcome of a trial to know that they are both guilty as ****, but just because i'm pretty sure they're both guilty that doesn't mean I think we should punish them without a trial.

So, answer me this, were you stupidly wrong, or were you deliberately lying when you accused me of hypocrisy?

Just a quick question IT. If we are so certain Begum is guilty (of what exactly) then why, if we can strip her of her nationality (because she has another anyway so therefore not stateless) would we allow her back to have an expensive trial at the taxpayers expense just to prove what we allegedly know anyway? Would be be punishing her at all? She is still free is she not? As for Trump are you possibly guilty of pre-supposing the result of an inquiry?

Actually that's 4 quick questions but they are all related I suppose. Please note that I'm not having a go - I'm just an innocent bystander.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:48 pm

Bosscat wrote:I wonder if they will be drinking "Lemonade" while reading the "Barr Report"

No! irn bru surely.

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:53 pm

Houseboy, just a quick note on Begum. She doesn't have another nationality and so is being made stateless by the Home Office's decision. What she does have is the right to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship, but Bangladesh is not bound to accept her application. Why should they? She is a British citizen and has lived all her life in Britain, so why should they accept one of our problems being dumped on them?

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:56 pm

Incidentally there seems to be a lot of talk about wanting to see Trump imprisoned. Whether you like him or not (I don't incidentally) there is no earthly reason to assume it will happen. It has never happened and apparently, if you look at the politics of America and look at the processes involved there is little chance it will ever happen, whatever comes out of the report. There is no precident for this and the likelihood is it wouldn't happen, even if he lost the presidency. Apparently what would likely happen IF he was thrown from office is that he would be pardoned, as HAS happened in the past when a president has resigned over a legal issue. There has apparently been a long running argument in the US as to whether a president is 'above the law' and the conclusion appears to be 'yes, he is'.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:56 pm

Hmm

"Page 370: "The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests."

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:58 pm

Erasmus wrote:Houseboy, just a quick note on Begum. She doesn't have another nationality and so is being made stateless by the Home Office's decision. What she does have is the right to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship, but Bangladesh is not bound to accept her application. Why should they? She is a British citizen and has lived all her life in Britain, so why should they accept one of our problems being dumped on them?

I have been led to believe she has - if I am wrong accept my apologies. .

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:07 pm

Erasmus wrote:Houseboy, just a quick note on Begum. She doesn't have another nationality and so is being made stateless by the Home Office's decision. What she does have is the right to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship, but Bangladesh is not bound to accept her application. Why should they? She is a British citizen and has lived all her life in Britain, so why should they accept one of our problems being dumped on them?

Hadn't she accepted citizenship in the "state of ISIL"?

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:08 pm

Erasmus wrote:Houseboy, just a quick note on Begum. She doesn't have another nationality and so is being made stateless by the Home Office's decision. What she does have is the right to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship, but Bangladesh is not bound to accept her application. Why should they? She is a British citizen and has lived all her life in Britain, so why should they accept one of our problems being dumped on them?

Legally the UK cannot make her stateless, so I'm not sure our government would do it if they didn't have something saying she's Bangladeshi.
I know they're rubbish most of the time, but you'd hope they'd get this one right..

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:09 pm

As for this investigation, I know opponents of Trump were optimistic about its outcome but I always felt it was unlikely to go against him. I was living in California at the time of the investigation into Reagan's involvement in the Iran-Contra scandal. A lot of my American friends were very confident about the outcome because it was pretty clear Reagan was implicated, but he was able to wriggle out of it and deny all knowledge, blaming underlings who were later pardoned by Bush Sr. who was Reagan's vice-president.

We will probably never know whether or not the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. I think probably some members dabbled but Trump himself kept out of it and is rightly in the clear. Of course, it does leave the question open as to why such a disreputable regime as Putin's in Russia would be so much in favour of Trump.

The real issue about Trump is his fitness or otherwise to hold the position of President of the USA. I think there are three areas that would determine this:

1. His policies. Whether or not one likes his policies depends on one's own political views so it is not really an issue.
2. His competence. Some will say that his financial success proves that he is highly competent, but his business record is patchy at best. More to the point, he has shown himself lacking in the ability to compromise with both opponents and supporters as well. The fact that so many of his cabinet have resigned tends to indicate a lack of competence in running an administration and suggests that most of his bold promises will remain unfulfilled. America is no greater now than when he took office.
3. His character. The President not only governs but also represents the country as a whole and hence a certain sense of dignity is essential. Trump has shown himself to be a person of the lowest type, a sleazy fellow who you wouldn't have in the house. His low character degrades the good name of the USA. How could you have a person who openly admitted grabbing women's private parts representing the country? Or his involvement with the porn star Stormy Daniels? Or his instinctive recourse to lying, as with the Stormy Daniels affair and more recently Wikileaks? Or his racist tendencies as revealed by his vulgar criticism of Sadiq Khan and his comments after the Nazi violence in Charlottesville?

God forbid that we would ever allow such a person to be Prime Minister in Britain. He brings shame on the nation.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:22 pm

Erasmus wrote:Houseboy, just a quick note on Begum. She doesn't have another nationality and so is being made stateless by the Home Office's decision. What she does have is the right to apply for Bangladeshi citizenship, but Bangladesh is not bound to accept her application. Why should they? She is a British citizen and has lived all her life in Britain, so why should they accept one of our problems being dumped on them?

Hadn't Begum married a Netherlands Citizen in her ISIL husband?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co ... k-47431249" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:43 pm

“The President slumped back in his chair and said, ‘Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my presidency. I’m ******.’”

Which is what an innocent person would say