(03-25-2019 04:51 PM)Boston Owl Wrote: I'm with Lad, and I don't care how old or young he is.
We still need to see the Mueller Report, whenever the Esteemed Right Honourable Infallible Knight of the Realm Sir William Barr gets around to releasing it.
It is a mistake to rely on Sir Bill's summary. Especially because he explained what he would conclude in his 19-page job application in June 2018. Here is a real quote from his memo:
"Apart from whether Mueller [has] a strong enough factual basis for doing so, Mueller's obstruction theory is fatally misconceived."
Here is another passage: "As elaborated below, Mueller's theory should be rejected for the following reasons..."
Look, Sir Bill may be a great carpool dad. He plays the bagpipes! That is really wonderful. And he clearly believes what he wrote in his memo. That's the problem. He prejudged the situation. He telegraphed what he would do. He was nominated on that basis. And he did it. Hooray for him! Now let's see the full Mueller Report so that we can see what other evidence exists that has not already been in plain sight.
Good for you. 18 words and another 12 words from 19 pages.
Here is some of that 'number mumbo jumbo' that you wave around like a Jedi sword when you are retreating from actually answering questions:
30 words --- 19 pages -- probably 200 words per page. From my short shelf life math that works out to 3800 words, and you choose about 30 the characterize the entire document.
Here is the answer to your 'magic +4 sword of Barr slaying' excerpt skills -- less than 1 per cent.
Dude, even a quick skim notes that Barr is commenting on a *lot* of topics and sub-topics in that letter. I suggest you take up a little bit more on the 'in depth' read instead of the 'selective excerpt' skill you seemingly have a Yoda master grasp of.
And you have the gall to complain that 'not enough material is presented' re: the Mueller report. Here is another answer to your 'selective excerpting' leet skillz --- lolz.
You want to blow off the relationship of the Justice Department to the rest of the government as well? Well, if your 'excerpting skills' are an indication of your knowledge of the Justice Department, well, I would fathom about a 6-sigma certainty that I know the answer to that one as well. (Feel free to comment on the appropriateness or, more likely, the lack thereof on my 'stat insight', which is something I am reasonably certain you *do* have a decent grasp on).
Edited to add: the entire Barr memo that posted to was a discourse on the Constitutional implications of *potential* Mueller theories and/or facts. Funny thing, as I pointed out to lad, when you read the *first* finding regarding collusion (or whatever the fk the nom de jure today is for the actus), when you know what the *basic* elements are of obstruction, the finding isnt even 'Constitutional' or needs a definitional stance in the Presidential powers. So, while a cute lil ol read that has a couple of 'choice words' interspersed in its 5k words or so, the subject matter doesnt even reach the actual merits. But please keep tossing out cherry-picked words in pile, or, yet better, cherry-picked words in a pile that has zero confluence with the actual subject matter.