Mueller complained that Barr’s letter did not capture ‘context’ of Trump probe

[pete311]

This is why it's not over and congress needs to keep digging. Barr is a Trump lackey.

“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,” Mueller wrote. “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-complained-that-barrs-letter-did-not-capture-context-of-trump-probe/2019/04/30/d3c8fdb6-6b7b-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.9b4fafcf7a70


And yes yes I know all of you have read the redacted report and think there was nothing wrong, but Mueller even stated in the report that he could not exonerate Trump of OoJ.

[pete311]

Sen Nadler just tweeted

"I note with interest AG Barr’s 4/10 Senate testimony. “Q: Did Bob Mueller support your conclusion? A: I don’t know whether Bob Mueller supported my conclusion.” Now it appears that Mueller objected in this 3/27 letter."

Looks like Barr lied to congress.

[Elessar]

Seems as if you found yet another windmill to tilt at, in spite of lots of comments to the contrary, Don Quixote.

[STTAB]

I believe this is yet more fake news.

Petey, when will you and other idiotic liberals learn not to trust anything that begins with "according to sources familiar with ........?" Seriously, how many times must you be burned before you think to yourself "Self, THIS time , I'm going to wait until the facts are out?" This is why regular Americans would like to see Democrats locked up in mental institutions

It very well may be true that Mueller was not all that pleased with Barr's letter to Congress, but you sure don't know that for fact at this point, and the many media sources have proven that they will tell any lie over the course of the last 3 years.

[pete311]

I believe this is yet more fake news.

Petey, when will you and other idiotic liberals learn not to trust anything that begins with "according to sources familiar with ........?" Seriously, how many times must you be burned before you think to yourself "Self, THIS time , I'm going to wait until the facts are out?" This is why regular Americans would like to see Democrats locked up in mental institutions

It very well may be true that Mueller was not all that pleased with Barr's letter to Congress, but you sure don't know that for fact at this point, and the many media sources have proven that they will tell any lie over the course of the last 3 years.

The letter has been released, so it is fact
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/read-mueller-s-letter-attorney-general-william-barr-n1000601

[STTAB]

The letter has been released, so it is fact
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/read-mueller-s-letter-attorney-general-william-barr-n1000601

Great, now show me where in that letter Mueller complained that Barr's letter to Congress didn't capture the "context of the probe" You can't because that is not what the letter does at all. You are , once again, perpetuating fake news. Mueller's letter merely says that he hopes the entire report can be made public quickly, with appropriate redactions of course, and it WAS.

Pete come on man, I know you hate Trump, but is he REALLY worth giving up YOUR credibility over?

[CSM]

Great, now show me where in that letter Mueller complained that Barr's letter to Congress didn't capture the "context of the probe" You can't because that is not what the letter does at all. You are , once again, perpetuating fake news. Mueller's letter merely says that he hopes the entire report can be made public quickly, with appropriate redactions of course, and it WAS.

Pete come on man, I know you hate Trump, but is he REALLY worth giving up YOUR credibility over?

The letter does state that the release did not "completely capture...."

Then there is this: "The Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading,"

Sounds like whining to me. It is clear to me that Meuller and his henchmen intended to imply more than they could prove with evidence. I would expect as much from them given how the team was stacked with libs/Dems.

[STTAB]

The letter does state that the release did not "completely capture...."

Then there is this: "The Special Counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General’s March 24 letter was inaccurate or misleading,"

Sounds like whining to me. It is clear to me that Meuller and his henchmen intended to imply more than they could prove with evidence. I would expect as much from them given how the team was stacked with libs/Dems.

Oh, it's quite clear in reading the entire report that it was written for Congress ,not as a confidential report about a criminal investigation.

And I'm of the opinion that Trump did attempt to obstruct at times. I mean it seems clear that he told people to lie, for example ( I simply don't care that he did)

The entire report fairly well screams "Trump didn't collude , but impeach him anyway"

The letter was unnecessary and just fed into the narrative that Mueller was out to get Trump, rather than to get to the truth.