UPDATE: Transcript Added – AG William Barr Holds Press Conference on Mueller Report Release – 9:30am EST Livestream…

A much anticipated press conference today with Attorney General Bill Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as they release the report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller. When the actual report is released we can FIND IT HERE.

UPDATE: Video and Transcript Added


[Transcript of prepared remarks] Good Morning. Thank you all for being here today.

On March 22, 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded his investigation of matters related to Russian attempts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and submitted his confidential report to me pursuant to Department of Justice regulations.

As I said during my Senate confirmation hearing and since, I am committed to ensuring the greatest possible degree of transparency concerning the Special Counsel’s investigation, consistent with the law.

At 11:00 this morning, I will transmit copies of a public version of the Special Counsel’s report to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. The Department of Justice will also make the report available to the American public by posting it on the Department’s website after it has been delivered to Congress.

I would like to offer a few comments today on the report.

But before I do that, I want to thank Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for joining me here today and for his assistance and counsel throughout this process. Rod has served the Department of Justice for many years with dedication and distinction, and it has been a great privilege and pleasure to work with him since my confirmation. He had well-deserved plans to step back from public service that I interrupted by asking him to help in my transition. Rod has been an invaluable partner, and I am grateful that he was willing to help me and has been able to see the Special Counsel’s investigation to its conclusion. Thank you, Rod.

I would also like to thank Special Counsel Mueller for his service and the thoroughness of his investigation, particularly his work exposing the nature of Russia’s attempts to interfere in our electoral process.

As you know, one of the primary purposes of the Special Counsel’s investigation was to determine whether members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, or any individuals associated with that campaign, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.

Volume I of the Special Counsel’s report describes the results of that investigation. As you will see, the Special Counsel’s report states that his “investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

I am sure that all Americans share my concerns about the efforts of the Russian government to interfere in our presidential election. As the Special Counsel’s report makes clear, the Russian government sought to interfere in our election. But thanks to the Special Counsel’s thorough investigation, we now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign – or the knowing assistance of any other Americans for that matter. That is something that all Americans can and should be grateful to have confirmed.

The Special Counsel’s report outlines two main efforts by the Russian government to influence the 2016 election:

First, the report details efforts by the Internet Research Agency, a Russian company with close ties to the Russian government, to sow social discord among American voters through disinformation and social media operations.

Following a thorough investigation of this disinformation campaign, the Special Counsel brought charges in federal court against several Russian nationals and entities for their respective roles in this scheme. Those charges remain pending, and the individual defendants remain at large.

But the Special Counsel found no evidence that any Americans – including anyone associated with the Trump campaign – conspired or coordinated with the Russian government or the IRA in carrying out this illegal scheme.

Indeed, as the report states, “[t]he investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation.” Put another way, the Special Counsel found no “collusion” by any Americans in the IRA’s illegal activity.

Second, the report details efforts by Russian military officials associated with the GRU to hack into computers and steal documents and emails from individuals affiliated with the Democratic Party and the presidential campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton for the purpose of eventually publicizing those emails. Obtaining such unauthorized access into computers is a federal crime.

Following a thorough investigation of these hacking operations, the Special Counsel brought charges in federal court against several Russian military officers for their respective roles in these illegal hacking activities. Those charges are still pending and the defendants remain at large.

But again, the Special Counsel’s report did not find any evidence that members of the Trump campaign or anyone associated with the campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its hacking operations. In other words, there was no evidence of Trump campaign “collusion” with the Russian government’s hacking.

The Special Counsel’s investigation also examined Russian efforts to publish stolen emails and documents on the internet. The Special Counsel found that, after the GRU disseminated some of the stolen materials through its own controlled entities, DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0, the GRU transferred some of the stolen materials to Wikileaks for publication. Wikileaks then made a series of document dumps.

The Special Counsel also investigated whether any member or affiliate of the Trump campaign encouraged or otherwise played a role in these dissemination efforts. Under applicable law, publication of these types of materials would not be criminal unless the publisher also participated in the underlying hacking conspiracy. Here too, the Special Counsel’s report did not find that any person associated with the Trump campaign illegally participated in the dissemination of the materials.

Finally, the Special Counsel investigated a number of “links” or “contacts” between Trump Campaign officials and individuals connected with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign. After reviewing those contacts, the Special Counsel did not find any conspiracy to violate U.S. law involving Russia-linked persons and any persons associated with the Trump campaign.

So that is the bottom line. After nearly two years of investigation, thousands of subpoenas, and hundreds of warrants and witness interviews, the Special Counsel confirmed that the Russian government sponsored efforts to illegally interfere with the 2016 presidential election but did not find that the Trump campaign or other Americans colluded in those schemes.

After finding no underlying collusion with Russia, the Special Counsel’s report goes on to consider whether certain actions of the President could amount to obstruction of the Special Counsel’s investigation. As I addressed in my March 24th letter, the Special Counsel did not make a traditional prosecutorial judgment regarding this allegation. Instead, the report recounts ten episodes involving the President and discusses potential legal theories for connecting these actions to elements of an obstruction offense.

After carefully reviewing the facts and legal theories outlined in the report, and in consultation with the Office of Legal Counsel and other Department lawyers, the Deputy Attorney General and I concluded that the evidence developed by the Special Counsel is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Although the Deputy Attorney General and I disagreed with some of the Special Counsel’s legal theories and felt that some of the episodes examined did not amount to obstruction as a matter of law, we did not rely solely on that in making our decision. Instead, we accepted the Special Counsel’s legal framework for purposes of our analysis and evaluated the evidence as presented by the Special Counsel in reaching our conclusion.

In assessing the President’s actions discussed in the report, it is important to bear in mind the context. President Trump faced an unprecedented situation. As he entered into office, and sought to perform his responsibilities as President, federal agents and prosecutors were scrutinizing his conduct before and after taking office, and the conduct of some of his associates. At the same time, there was relentless speculation in the news media about the President’s personal culpability.

Yet, as he said from the beginning, there was in fact no collusion. And as the Special Counsel’s report acknowledges, there is substantial evidence to show that the President was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.

Nonetheless, the White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the President took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation. Apart from whether the acts were obstructive, this evidence of non-corrupt motives weighs heavily against any allegation that the President had a corrupt intent to obstruct the investigation.

Now, before I take questions, I want to address a few aspects of the process for producing the public report that I am releasing today. As I said several times, the report contains limited redactions relating to four categories of information. To ensure as much transparency as possible, these redactions have been clearly labelled and color-coded so that readers can tell which redactions correspond to which categories.

As you will see, most of the redactions were compelled by the need to prevent harm to ongoing matters and to comply with court orders prohibiting the public disclosure of information bearing upon ongoing investigations and criminal cases, such as the IRA case and the Roger Stone case.

These redactions were applied by Department of Justice attorneys working closely together with attorneys from the Special Counsel’s Office, as well as with the intelligence community, and prosecutors who are handling ongoing cases. The redactions are their work product.

Consistent with long-standing Executive Branch practice, the decision whether to assert Executive privilege over any portion of the report rested with the President of the United States. Because the White House voluntarily cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation, significant portions of the report contain material over which the President could have asserted privilege. And he would have been well within his rights to do so.

Following my March 29th letter, the Office of the White House Counsel requested the opportunity to review the redacted version of the report in order to advise the President on the potential invocation of privilege, which is consistent with long-standing practice. Following that review, the President confirmed that, in the interests of transparency and full disclosure to the American people, he would not assert privilege over the Special Counsel’s report. Accordingly, the public report I am releasing today contains redactions only for the four categories that I previously outlined, and no material has been redacted based on executive privilege.

In addition, earlier this week, the President’s personal counsel requested and were given the opportunity to read a final version of the redacted report before it was publicly released. That request was consistent with the practice followed under the Ethics in Government Act, which permitted individuals named in a report prepared by an Independent Counsel the opportunity to read the report before publication. The President’s personal lawyers were not permitted to make, and did not request, any redactions.

In addition to making the redacted report public, we are also committed to working with Congress to accommodate their legitimate oversight interests with respect to the Special Counsel’s investigation. We have been consulting with Chairman Graham and Chairman Nadler throughout this process, and we will continue to do so.

Given the limited nature of the redactions, I believe that the publicly released report will allow every American to understand the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation. Nevertheless, in an effort to accommodate congressional requests, we will make available to a bipartisan group of leaders from several Congressional committees a version of the report with all redactions removed except those relating to grand-jury information. Thus, these members of Congress will be able to see all of the redacted material for themselves – with the limited exception of that which, by law, cannot be shared.

I believe that this accommodation, together with my upcoming testimony before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, will satisfy any need Congress has for information regarding the Special Counsel’s investigation.

Once again, I would like to thank you all for being here today. I now have a few minutes for questions.


The anticipated start time for the press conference is 9:30am EST; with the release of the Mueller report around 11:00am to Noon at the Special Counsel website HERE.

Fox News Livestream LinkRSBN Livestream LinkFox Business Livestream Link

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, FBI, Live Streaming, media bias, President Trump, Press Secretary - Trump, Russia, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

895 Responses to UPDATE: Transcript Added – AG William Barr Holds Press Conference on Mueller Report Release – 9:30am EST Livestream…

  1. fractionalexponent says:

    They gave the Clinton crew immunity.
    They gave the Trump crew 4 AM raids

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Publius2016 says:

    AG Barr is speaking like the AG! Who exactly did these fools think they are???

    Another thing…how do they know 45 said anything to AG Sessions? was it taped too?

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Louisiana Tea Rose says:

    Please, please, please go for it, Nadler…..GO FOR IT!!!


  4. Louisiana Tea Rose says:

    Please, please, please go for it, Nadler…..GO FOR IT!!!


  5. CoHoBo says:

    While this report is uplifting, and certainly will be a turning point from what we have endured the last few years, it is slightly unsettling to realize the level of detachment and lack of cognizance in many of the people around us.

    “It is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.”

    Liked by 2 people

  6. mtk says:

    Who is the guy on the left of AG Barr, the one Barr motions to over his shoulder after introducing Mr. Rosenstein. It is most definately not Mr Mueller. Yet, AG Barr allows a never introduced assiocation to prevail as he goes on to thank Mr. Mueller.

    Is it someone on his team standing in for him? If so, why was never a formal introduction?
    If it is truely is Mr. Mueller, why the hair dye and a six month old grown beard?


  7. Did you notice the look of disgust on Barr’s face when he had to explain to the dumbo reporter the meaning of unprecedented…haha…I love it when Barr shows expression to ridiculous questions.

    The other thing I noticed is how infrequently Rosenstein blinks…at a few points he had those weird eyes that so many Dems have. And who is the other guy on the stage?

    Liked by 2 people

  8. FishtheDish says:

    Rosenstein looks hollow. He knows now where this is headed. He knows that he is kept now to get his fingerprints on exoneration – after having signed off on a FISA and amendment 25 attempt. He knows…


    • Sunshine says:

      He’s emptied of all his power. He’s under Barr’s control. I wonder what does Barr have on him? The answer would be the truth.


      • Amy2 says:

        RR has to be getting something out of this, or he could have bolted immediately after Barr became AG. I would LOVE to know what it is. There’s no way he would just “hop to” with everything he has his fingerprints on, unless a deal (unspoken or otherwise) was made.


  9. Tiffthis says:

    Too bad the Q&A isn’t transcribed- some hilarious gems in that part for sure 💯🤣


  10. visage13 says:

    I listened on my headphones at work. I loved how AG Barr basically dropped the mike when the idiot asked about him “spinning the report” prior to its release. bwahahaha Also, ABC broke in to General Hospital to share the “breaking news” of Nadler’s press conference. We DEMAND Mueller testify, careful what you wish for. Me thinks you will not like his answers. I find it too funny how the Dems demand Mueller testify, no one said he couldn’t. You don’t need to demand, just ask but it is all kabuki, they could have already “made” him testify. Even the trolls on Twitter are giving their Dem heroes crap for not getting Mueller in there already.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Shame, shame, shame!

    At every Trump rally from now on, the President should call out the Press Corps, and the crowd should respond, “shame, shame, shame.”

    Every time we see a press set-up in public, our response should be “shame, shame, shame!”

    Not only is it wholly appropriate, it will also be the only response that adequately describes our disgust with them, how they have squandered the public’s trust, as well as their constitutionally privileged powers granted them.

    Early on, they, by their voluntary actions, became part of the story—so much so that they became invested in the story—so much so that they couldn’t extract themselves from the story. In addition to the real possibility of corrosive and criminal wrong-doing, same is true of many in the IC, DOJ, and FBI.

    That embarrassment, nay…humiliation, is why publicly shaming narcissists like them, is one of the few measures that will precipitate the soul-searching (as President Obama would say)so desparately necessary for any possible restoration. The same is true of many in the Democrat party.

    Shame, shame, shame.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s