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…

    • Invisigoth says:

      What about the left’s claim that confiscating Manafort’s fortune paid for the Mueller probe? I haven’t seen anything to actually back that up.


      • Troublemaker10 says:

        Lol. 😀. Manafort’s crime from a decade ago didn’t have anything to do with Russia/Trump. Normal doj handling could have prosecuted that without spending $30 million in special counsel investigation.

        Liked by 1 person

  1. andyocoregon says:

    Rudy Giuliani said on Fox News four of President Trump’s attorneys, himself included, went to the D.O.J. on Tuesday night to read the entire report. So President Trump was then briefed by them afterwards and that’s why he knew what was in it.
    I’ll bet that preview just chafes the hide of all the Dem leaders, especially Pelosi and Schumer. And then there’s Nadler. Ha, Ha.

    Liked by 12 people

  2. henry says:

    Liked by 16 people

  3. SAM-TruthFreedomLiberty says:

    The guys over at quodverum , “REX”, Wictor and Saul-xyc owe SUNDANCE AND APOLOGY!
    They attacked him relentlessly for exposing Mueller and co. while they pushed the nonsense story about Mueller being a good guy.
    This is clearly debunked today with Muellers report trying to keep “obstruction” afloat.

    Liked by 8 people

  4. Nowut Ameen says:

    Best news of the day: Trump remains President. Second best news: Hillary continues not to be President. The rest is just noise.

    Liked by 24 people

  5. MaineCoon says:

    Liked by 6 people

  6. Lady in Red says:

    PDJT should poke Dems and tweet something like ” now the Dems want Mueller to testify, I have no problem with that. I am sure there will be many interesting questions, from BOTH sides.”

    Liked by 4 people

    • Chimpy says:

      Questions like: Mr Mueller,where you aware that Comey lied under oath and disclosed classified info? If so,why didn’t you refer his illegal actions or indict him yourself?

      I think the Dems will think twice before putting him under oath. I hope they do it.

      Liked by 3 people

  7. Maine says:

    Liked by 2 people

    • MaineCoon says:

      I don’t find this pure crap hoax funny. I just don’t 10 seconds into that video and I’m out of that video. No offence intended. Just my thoughts about it. These people are evil so are their words and actions.

      Liked by 2 people

      • henry says:

        I fully agree with you but to me, they are like junkies. They cannot stand to be told the word ‘no’ and they cannot stand to be told they are wrong.

        Never met a junkie that wouldn’t lie through his/her teeth and tell you the sky isn’t blue and that they could quit anytime they wanted to.

        Liked by 1 person

    • trialbytruth says:

      Why baby, why baby, why baby, why. You make me cry baby, cry baby, cry baby, cry.

      The tears so many tears. MUhahahaha

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dixie says:

      It really is a mental illness, isn’t it?

      Liked by 3 people

    • andyocoregon says:

      I LOL’d at her in that video as well, henry.
      I always enjoy watching loony liberals get their panties in a twist and cry out in pain.
      But, she’s a good actress and I’m sure there will be a little something extra in her paycheck this coming pay period for that performance.


    • InAz says:

      The Communist left is Projecting like crazy today. That female propagandist Wallace is proof.


  8. henry says:

    Major meltdown.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. jeans2nd says:

    MSNBC is distressed over all the “I don’t remember” that Pres Trump answered in the Mueller questions. MSNBC says it is not sufficient.

    Do they really want to go there? Bring on Crooked Clinton’s answers in the Clinton Email investigation.

    Poor MSNBC. “I feel so powerless…” actual quote

    Liked by 7 people

  10. henry says:


    Liked by 7 people

  11. wee2low says:

    Maybe I’m missing something here but doesn’t this all this seem like some sort of scripted play? Sorry if my tinfoil hat is on a little tight but this is just not adding up. Here’s what I mean:

    A bunch of black hats concock an elaborate 2 year long investigation which seems to only uncover the black hats nefarious activities which the black hats knew happened prior to the investigation. Furthermore the black hats must have known that if said nefarious activities were investigated, would expose said black hats and their nefarious activities, exonerate the POTUS, essentially assure a 2020 win for the POTUS and expose the level of corruption within the US Government.

    Why would the black hats do this?


    • L_Dave says:

      Gong from memory here. Seems like a few days ago I read about some information / propaganda which was supposed to be released prior to the 2018 election which – they thought – would cause Republicans to lose the Senate as well as the House. Someone stopped them. Impeachment was always the plan.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Chimpy says:

      Answer: Because the liberals act on emotions. Not logic.

      Liked by 6 people

    • woohoowee says:

      Why would the black hats do this?

      Because the black hats have been running everything for who knows how long, so they never entertained the notion their coup would be unsuccessful.

      Liked by 7 people

      • jmclever says:

        Which infers that they have done same in the past and WERE successful. Maybe same m.o. applied in other arenas. Maybe others just resigned and they expected Trump to do the same.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Deb says:

          See Nixon. They tried to create an entrapment scenario for PDJT just like they did with Nixon. That’s the problem with dirty tricks, they only work so many times before people realize you are fighting dirty and react accordingly.


      • wee2low says:

        So that means that the deep state is much weaker than it used to be? Citizens access to information has crippled their ability to carry out these coups?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Deb says:

          Also people’s realization that black hats exist. We no longer blindly trust the CIA, NSA, etc.

          Liked by 1 person

        • woohoowee says:

          Dunno about weakening deep state, but that is coming. I like how Sundance phrases citizens crippling deep state (my paraphrase), “They’re not used to anyone watching them, so they don’t know what to do. Toto has pulled back the curtain and they’re exposed, but still keep working the levers as if we can’t see them.”


    • David A says:

      1. They were certain JRC would win.
      2. They were certain they could find and create dirt on anybody, especially a billionaire.

      They found out, just like J Assange answered when asked why he did not get dirt on Trump; “There was not any.”

      Liked by 2 people

    • iswhatitis says:

      wee2low says: “Why would the black hats do this?

      Because they’re all bought-and-sold COMMIES, and their paymaster/puppet-string-pullers demand results for their investments.

      Failure to comply has consequences.

      Liked by 1 person

    • dd_sc says:

      Maybe the Black Hats figured the Reublican wing of the Uniparty would quickly turn on Trump and he would resign after 6-8 months. It didn’t happen, but the conspirators had too much invested to quit so they kept going. Losing in the Senate was the last straw, so Team Meuller packed it up and set Team Democrat up to start 2020 campaign.


      • Dutchman says:

        Actually, that much ALMOST happened. The Republicons in charge in Congress, were salivating at the prospect of either; being the “leading Republican to go tell the President “You must resign, or you will be impeached”
        Or, runner up, be the one to first say;
        “WHAT did the President KNOW, and WHEN did he know it?”

        Of coarse, they had no idea that question would be asked about Obama, not Trump.


    • InAz says:

      The black hats know that they will not be held accountable. The calls to “move on” started weeks ago.


  12. henry says:

    Real Democrat presidential material.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. jeans2nd says:

    MSNBC and CN&N are now psycho-analyzing (analysis done by psychos) all the Presidents answers and supposed intentions.
    Now they are mind-reading.
    “It is impeachable looking…” not kidding, Nicole Wallace just said that. (sigh…)

    None of them realize that Mueller turned all the CIA spies into Russian operatives. We will hear no more of spying by CIA and FBI. Guaranteed. The spies were all Russian operatives.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. nbkilgore says:

    Pelosi and company continue to beat a very well dead horse, every time a maggot falls out they scream it just moved and start beating it even harder.

    AG Barr will be able to get more work done as long as Pelosi, Nadler, Cummings, Schiff and Mad Max continue to beat the very very very dead horse. For good measure Barr will tie a #28 fishing line to the hoof of the very very very dead horse while the Pelosi gang are taking a short breather and Barr will advise Jordan, Nunes & Meadows to tug on the fishing line every once in a while.

    2021, Pelosi and Gang will be wondering what happened to their once flushed bank accounts with Cumming muttering “we waz Kangz”….”I want de troof”…” I-I-I HOLD THE GAVEL!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Caius Lowell says:

    Rosy Rod — what a loser…

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Bubby says:

    Amen John Solomon! The msm will now seamlessly transition to President Trump being guilty of obstruction of justice until proven innocent which isn’t of course the basis of our common law – innocent until proven guilty. The Democrats and msm will announce shortly that President Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice therefore the only option is therefore impeachment!

    Liked by 6 people

    • jmclever says:

      Then there’s all that unfettered access to his associates, uber compliance with document requests and not asserting presidential privilege…

      Liked by 1 person

    • Maquis says:

      I take exception to this conclusion:
      “Mueller’s whiff on a final, independent call actually may have been a disservice to us all.”

      Failing to make the call on obstruction serves the Demons, by design, as an exploitable loophole. A weak one, but the best he could give them. He’s no angel.

      Liked by 3 people

  17. I made this comment this morning on this thread. Its worth repeating. Have a MAGA day!

    H&HC, 2nd-16th says:
    April 18, 2019 at 8:13 am
    If the Barr presser is really a “nothingburger” the Dems will be on suicide watch.


  18. Flipped to CNN to see the Splodey heady. The argument now is a version of Comey’s statement of July 16. They say Mueller is punting to Congress but they’ve laid out the whole obstruction case. Wonder how they’re gonna feel when the investigation into obstruction by not only Hilliary but the DNC and the IC?


  19. Bruce_Dern's_Finger says:

    Barr put a stop to the ‘collusion’ nonsense and at the same time erected a barrier to prevent further investigation and indictment of the UniParty perps that were responsible for spying on (President) Trump.


  20. TMonroe says:

    So let’s say in 2006 or 2007, W’s administration started an investigation of Barry on any number of fronts: citizenship, relationship to Bill Ayers/Louie/Soros/etc. Let’s say because of the national security angle of any of those, a “counterintelligence investigation” was started’ which involved the FBI director at the time (someone named Bob Miller or something; it’s been such a long time ago, and what does it matter since we know how nonpartisan and by the book their leadership is).

    Let’s say in this scenario that Barry’s opponent John McCain started making accusations about the threat to the election process posed by Barry’s associates like Ayers and foreign founders like George. (These questions make the election closer and keep the senate from swinging to the Dems. This also followed multiple recounts funded by a third-party candidate who took donations for that purpose and hung over the pre-inauguration day time period, in which republicans lobbied electors not to seat Barry because of the looming questions.) Let’s say that multiple fisa warrants were issued on the basis of a mimeograph of a birth-related document as well as a publisher’ bio of Barry stating he was born outside the USA.

    Let’s say that FBI director Bob Miller is fired by Barry, at which time memos and leaks emerge, prompting every session of congress and press conference to contain calls for a special counsel. Previously, the past associations of AG nominee Eric Holder had prompted a demand for him to recuse himself from all matters relating to Barry’s country of birth, radical domestic ties, and foreign campaign funding ties. (We know how he likely would’ve reacted, but stay with this for the sake of the eventual comparison to today’s situation.)

    Let’s say Ben Rhodes, David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, Cass Sunstein, and others are the subject of dawn raids and prison holds. Let’s say one of his attorneys also gets the same treatment. Let’s say Congress refuses to seat most of Barry’s administration appointees. Let’s say that that family members are targeted by the Indiana AG for their campaign and business dealings. Let’s say the deputy AG had a meeting with Barry and William Barr shortly after the Miller firing, whereupon Barr was named the special counsel a day later.

    Meanwhile, the media from WSJ to Fox News contains updates and allegations of “bombshell” “tipping point” revelations that call into question the administration’s legitimacy and viability on a daily basis. This seeps into press conferences with international leaders, and even an unprecedented threat to cancel the State of the Union as well as rebuttals by GOP congressmen to presidential national addresses.

    In such a scenario:

    Would Jeffrey Toobin tweet that Barry’s frustration at leaks and investigation are evidence of guilt, not innocence?

    Would Barry’s taking issue with the process like the dawn raids, possible fisa abuse, secret FBI investigations etc. be evidence of guilt?

    Liked by 2 people

  21. FofBW says:

    The Dems only hope for 2020 is obstruction.

    They have ALL bought into this strategy hook, line and sinker….no matter what the evidence.

    Unfortunately for them, it is noose around the party’s neck.

    Remember, the liberals never consider the consequences of their decisions or actions.

    Liked by 3 people

  22. Zorro says:

    All this obstruction talk.

    No crime committed and corrupt origins of investigation.

    Name one witness who couldn’t be subpoenaed and interrogated or anything else that couldn’t be done because of a Trump tweet.


  23. Barr toyed with the media like a cat toys with a mouse. The snarky questions thrown out with such vitriol were deflected right back down the throats of these truly ignorant fools. The clear distinction between intellect was on display for the world to see, and I, for one, am very proud to have AG Barr as my Attorney General.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Chimpy says:

      I could not have expressed my thoughts better than you just did!

      He completely destroyed that female questioner and I don’t think his pulse changed a bit.

      Liked by 2 people

    • William Schneider says:

      Deployed, I am with you 100%. This AG Barr is the real deal-a true man of integrity and a man who respects the rule of law. He is the perfect man to stand up to the mob rule sought out by the vengeful /hate filled dems of our current congress and MSM. Let us keep this man in our prayers to remain strong in his defense of the laws and lawfully elected president Trump. Praise God during this exciting Easter season.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. WeThePeople2016 says:

    Liked by 3 people

  25. Pew-Anon says:

    Anyone else a little nauseated by the continued “Russia interefered with the election” gaslighting so late in the process? …without a single meaningful detail of what exactly they did to date?

    Liked by 2 people

  26. sunnyflower5 says:

    President Trump was really upset they were Fuc***** with his plans as President……so much for the media selling their stories that he didn’t want to be President narrative.
    Look at how much President Trump has accomplished dealing with the party of Resist and Obstruction and Never- Trumpers.

    Liked by 3 people

  27. Dr.Jay says:

    That is forging evidence by Mueller team.

    Liked by 4 people

  28. Dr.Jay says:

    Who claimed that again?

    Liked by 1 person

  29. jmclever says:

    Time to pull this out again

    Liked by 2 people

  30. JonS says:

    Rosey did not look like he was up there voluntarily. That was the face of an uncomfortable man.
    Barr did a great job. He’s cool, professional, and takes no shit. He headed off any reasonable misinterpretations of this hack report

    Liked by 1 person

  31. Newhere says:

    I officially love Barr.

    He twice made critical points that (of course) flew over heads, but must be reinforced as the days (and weeks drag on): We don’t convene grand juries and compulsory process to throw the information out to the public. We do it for one reason, and that is to bring (or not bring) charges. It is our obligation.

    This man is serious. I absolutely believe he’s not done today. I’m also not despondent on over the Russia-origin confirmation on the leaked emails. It’s clear that he’s straight-reporting the Mueller report, for now. It could change. He also emphasized no Trump person had anything to do with the email hacks or leaks. That’s enough for now. Severing the imagined link to Trump and his people is enough for now. He can’t very well go down that road without throwing it all open, can he?

    My favorite: Barr: “Well is there another precedent?” Sputtering dumb press actor: “no.” Well then it was an accurate description, wasn’t it?”

    Barr doesn’t respond to the BS. He zooms in on the binary question, answers it with a binary answer. Or even better, like here he turns it on the twit asking in.

    He’s a pro.

    I’m going to tune out the noise and rest easier from the evidence today that he’s on this.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Maquis says:

      “I’m also not despondent on over the Russia-origin confirmation on the leaked emails”

      I’d go with “assertion” rather than “confirmation.”
      Mueller did not prove that case.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Newhere says:

        Critical point — thanks. In fact, that helps Bar thread the very thin needle here. He’s straight-reporting the Mueller report. To the extent it contains fact vs. assertion is evident on its face and Barr’s not parsing the distinction for anybody (though we know it will be mischaracterized by others to the point assertion is treated like fact).

        Barr doesn’t need to parse it now. What’s important for truth-seekers is that Barr has done nothing that would preclude, or create contradiction, were the next part of the investigation to reveal assertions in the Mueller report to be wrong. In short, by not buying into what’s in the Mueller report one way or another (*except* the obstruction part, which is separate), Barr is unencumbered by what’s in it and can continue to straight report where the origin investigation leads.

        Even on obstruction — Barr has essentially conducted the strongest possible legal conclusion available, the equivalent of summary judgment: he’s saying, let’s suppose for the sake of argument that every assertion and legal theory in the Mueller report is true; there is no basis to charge obstruction.


  32. Right to reply says:

    I honestly, honestly believe, that the DNC leaks were from the DNC staffers themselves, and not from Russia. I believe they were Bernie Sander’s supporters.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Zippy says:

    Ten post-Mueller questions that could turn the tables on Russia collusion investigators
    17 Apr 2019


    Liked by 1 person

  34. sunnyflower5 says:

    Kellyanne Conway is doubling down requesting Adam Schiff produce his evidence or step down.
    And she stated “ people on TV are not under oat but everyone in this report was…Thank You!”

    Liked by 7 people

  35. magatrump says:

    Their was no evidence of Russian influence in the election. It is all hear say. Their is no impartial evidence that the DNC was hacked by the Russians. It was all based on what the DNC told Mueller.
    Seth Rich was the one who provided the information to Wikileaks.


  36. magatrump says:

    I noticed that during the Barr press confernece, Catherine Herridge asked Barr if he would speak to the origins of the investigation into potential collusion/obstruction between POTUS and Russia.
    Barr said he will not talk about this NOW but wanted to get this Muller BS report out today.
    Justice is comming!!! Pray for Justice!!!


  37. sunnyflower5 says:

    There it is— count on Judge Nap to state it. 🤡


  38. andyocoregon says:

    This is funny.


  39. William Schneider says:

    I love this man Barr. He is the man we need for this time of chaos in our country He is at the center of the storm and he is handling it like a true warrior with God at his side. He is deflecting his detractors like David did with Goliath and many other enemies. Let us keep Barr in our prayers as his task is far from over.

    Liked by 5 people

  40. Mark McQueen says:

    Brilliant move by Barr. Get out in front with “Just the facts, Ma’am.” This release, exposing all the exculpatory evidence, will likely cause the subversives much more damage than they hope to inflict with the innuendo game.

    Liked by 5 people

  41. Blue Ridge Mts. Va says:

    So I saw this “report” on fake WDBJ -7 out of Roanoke, where I get my weather besides a few reports. WDBJ, the AP and CNN are really spinning this report.

    “…WASHINGTON (AP) — Public at last, special counsel Robert Mueller’s report revealed to a waiting nation Thursday that President Donald Trump tried to seize control of the Russia probe and force Mueller’s removal to stop him from investigating potential obstruction of justice by the president. Trump was largely thwarted by those around him….”



    • Robert Smith says:

      The media trying to bump their ratings. Because they were wrong and reported crap for years with anything having to do with Trump.


  42. RyderLee says:

    Sundance , Thank You So Much for Transcript !
    Thank You for EVERYTHING 😊

    Liked by 2 people

  43. Scott says:

    I’m trying to be as serious about this as I can muster, but I just have to say….was DAG Rosenstein trying to send a message to the Deep State with his stare? If I hadn’t seen him actually walk into the room, I might have thought it was a cardboard cutout. It was creepy, unnerving.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I noted, and posted further down, that he doesn’t blink very often and at times he had that weird wide-open bug eyes similar to schifft or whatever his name is…


      • Dutchman says:

        Its because Barr WARNED him; I will be reviewing the tapes, and if you try sending a signal, by blinking in morse code, I will NEVER take the vice grips off, I have just put on your nether regions.
        No expressions behind my back, NOTHING!

        Liked by 1 person

        • I would be surprised if Rosenstein knows Morse Code…most people today have no idea…they used to teach that back in the days when we had an educational system..today they don’t even teach kids how to sign their names let alone Morse Code.


  44. sunnyflower5 says:

    Nads is about have his press conference
    Remember Mollie Hemmingway’s article on Jerry blabbering on Amtrak – Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., revealed plans for House Democrats to investigate and impeach Justice Brett Kavanaugh for alleged perjury and investigate and impeach President Donald Trump for alleged treasonous collusion with Russia.

    Talk about disingenuous and misleading – Jerry.


  45. botchedcasuality says:

    Barr made this comment: “the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.
    Hopefully the statement is a warning shot to the opposition, opening the door to a deep dig uncovering leaks and media co-option. I’m hoping it’s a preview of coming attractions.


  46. botchedcasuality says:

    Barr made this comment: “the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.
    Hopefully the statement is a warning shot to the opposition, opening the door to a deep dig uncovering leaks and media co-option. I’m hoping it’s a preview of coming attractions.


  47. botchedcasuality says:

    Barr made this comment: “the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.
    Hopefully the statement is a warning shot to the opposition, opening the door to a deep dig uncovering leaks and media co-option. I’m hoping it’s a preview of coming attractions.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dutchman says:

      Barr and Nunes have BOTH made similar statements regarding leaks; Kinda a “Go ahead, make my day!”

      Reminds me of the “Don’t you dare fire Mueller!” that sounded like a dare.

      It would be SOoo easy to leak trap the few, who will be permitted to see SOME unredacted portions.

      Barr is NOT stupid. The question is, are the dems. Answer, based on many years observation is Yes, they are exactly that stupid,…but
      We’ll see what happens.


    • JiminCO says:

      I have read enough of the long report to conclude:
      a. Mueller team included a lot of salacious detail about inside-the-oval-office happenings to allow the left to paint DJT as deranged, trigger happy, and meddling.
      b. a clear indictment of the Main Stream Press, that totally obstructed the presidency and the investigation, allowing Weissman to run down the “truth” of published articles and to compare them to DJT conduct
      c. A very CLEAR attempt to set up DJT for obstruction, with finely crafted inquiries to bait him into doing something nefarious while proclaiming his innocence.
      d. A detailed, finely cited dissertation of obstruction law, which brought to mind the actions of one Hillary Clinton, and the FBI/DOJ’s non-interest in her own obstruction of federal crime investigations

      The left will never, ever admit it, but the readable report shows an man who knows he did not collude, did not obstruct, and got piping mad when the concerted left accused him, hogtied him and precluded his agenda.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Thank you for this summary.
        I’m not able to dig into the report right now due to other compelling commitments-so I particularly appreciate your comments.

        This is not surprising at all to me; nor are the ridiculous comments/protests of the left.

        Thanks be to God for a strong AG that knows the ropes–such as Barr. Praising God for this resolution–even though the left won’t take no for an answer–we all know it is OVER!

        Liked by 2 people

    • with 12 criminal referrals….I would say, MOST DEFINITELY!


    • Jederman says:

      It will be conveniently ignored by the “news” media and the ever so ethical and professional “journalists” in this once great country.


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