What exactly did he distort? — NOS4A2

You’ll have to ask the judge.

The Mueller report was released to the public. — NOS4A2

Yes, and apparently Barr’s summary before its release was misleading.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barr_letter

After the release of the redacted report, Barr's letter was criticized as a deliberate mischaracterization of the Mueller Report and its conclusions, and as an attempt at spinning the media narrative to undermine Mueller's investigation.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26] Numerous legal analysts concluded that Barr's letter did not accurately portray some of the findings of the investigation, casting Trump in a better light than was intended in the report. The New York Times reported instances in which the Barr letter omitted information and quoted sentence fragments out of context in ways that significantly altered the findings in the report, including:[20]

Omission of language that indicated Trump could be subject to indictment after leaving office, inaccurately suggesting that Trump was "totally exonerated".[27][28][29]
A sentence fragment described only one possible motive for Trump to obstruct justice, while the Mueller Report listed multiple possible motives.
Omission of words and a full sentence that twice suggested there was knowing and complicit behavior between the Trump campaign and Russians that stopped short of direct coordination, which may constitute conspiracy.
CNN wrote that while Barr in his letter took it upon himself to deliver a ruling on whether Trump had committed obstruction, the redacted report indicates that Mueller intended that decision to be made by Congress, not Barr.[30][clarification needed]

Numerous other political and legal analysts, including Bob Woodward[31] and Brian Williams,[32] observed significant differences in what Barr said about Mueller's findings in his letter, and in his April 18 press conference, compared to what the Mueller Report actually found. This commentary included a comparison of Barr to Baghdad Bob, calling him "Baghdad Bill".[32][33][34][35]

Barr wrote that his letter provided "the principal conclusions" of the Mueller Report. Ryan Goodman, a professor at the New York University School of Law and co-editor of Just Security, observed that in 1989, Barr also wrote a letter which he stated contained "the principal conclusions" of a controversial legal opinion[which?] he worked on as head of the OLC. Barr declined to provide the full opinion to Congress, but it was later subpoenaed and released to the public, showing that the 1989 letter did not fully disclose the principal conclusions.

It's nice to see you Dutch people trying to develop a sense of humor. This is old, but it's the kind of thing you could be shooting for:

Here’s the judge’s “concerns”.

Specifically, Attorney General Barr’s summary failed to indicate that Special Counsel Mueller “identified multiple contacts—‘links,’ in the words of the Appointment Order—between Trump [c]ampaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government,” Def.’s Mot., Ex. D (Mueller Report – Volume I) at 66, and that Special Counsel Mueller only concluded that the investigation did not establish that “these contacts involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump [c]ampaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the [Trump] [c]ampaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future,” because coordination—the term that appears in the Appointment Order—“does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law,” id., Ex. D (Mueller Report – Volume I) at 2, 66.

Attorney General Barr also failed to disclose to the American public that, with respect to Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation into whether President Trump obstructed justice, Special Counsel Mueller “determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment[,] . . . recogniz[ing] that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting [p]resident would place burdens on the [p]resident’s capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct,” but nevertheless declared that:

“if [he] had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that [ ] President [Trump] clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, [he] would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, [he] [is] unable to reach that judgment. The evidence [he] obtained about [ ] President[] [Trump’s] actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent [him] from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while th[e] [Mueller] [R]eport does not conclude that [ ] President [Trump] committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Id., Ex. D (Mueller Report – Volume II) at 1–2.

He Says that he agrees with Mueller’s letter:

Special Counsel Mueller himself took exception to Attorney General Barr’s March 24, 2019 letter, stating that Attorney General Barr “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of th[e] [Special Counsel’s] Office’s work and conclusions,” EPIC’s Mot., Ex. 4 (March 27, 2019 Letter) at 1, and a review of the redacted version of the Mueller Report by the Court results in the Court’s concurrence with Special Counsel Mueller’s assessment that Attorney General Barr distorted the findings in the Mueller Report.

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/03/05/uenrosj.pdf

According to Barr’s testimony, however, Barr stated that Mueller and him talked by phone, and Mueller “was very clear with me that he was not suggesting that we had misrepresented his report”, which Mueller never disputed and which the judge fails to cite.

Barr is such a slimey corrupt little fuck. Him, Pompeo, and Pence. Pure mercenary sycophants. :vomit:

Trump's Spaceball tweet was actually hilarious and shows how he would have stomped Bloomberg in a 1:1 debate.

I mean he obviously didn't write the tweet or anything but still

Rumor has it Boomberg is investing the rest of his billions into developing a microscope sufficiently powerful to detect one molecule of charisma in his body. Scientists are sceptical...

Less charismatic than a wet sponge

Well, we also had this one; after which the rest of the world followed:

That video caused me to be fond of the Netherlands. Strange.

Let me help you hate it again. Can't have this country overrun with Americans or we have to build another ocean and have the USA pay for it.

Every American has to make a pilgrimage to Amsterdam at least once. It's a religious thing.

Trump and GOP mount coordinated campaign to paint Biden as senile

The irony.

Have you seen this?

Trump and GOP mount coordinated campaign to paint Biden as senile — Michael

Do you have to mount a coordinated campaign to do that?`Isn´t it enough to watch some Biden clips?

is there any case to be made for Trump - any real case? Any whatsoever? Anyone? Anything?

he's pushing the right agendas.

These others will be corrupt. They're young minded still. I am not curropt, I am a man who senses other non corrupt politicians. As a business man Trump is perfect right now, little corruption.

These others will be corrupt. They're young minded still. I am not curropt, I am a man who senses other non corrupt politicians. As a business man Trump is perfect right now, little corruption. — xyzmix

Eh? Little corruption? Total corruption! At every level!

This thread's dead. Where's NOS4A2 to grease the wheels?

Trump and GOP mount coordinated campaign to paint Biden as senile — Michael

Not much painting necessary tbh, the dude's mental decline is there for all to see.

Anyway, here's to another 4 years of Trump. Fuck Americans.

Come home, come to the Netherlands.

I don't live in the States, luckily! Although my own backyard is getting worse and worse by the day, influenced heavily by US policy.

Anyway, here's to another 4 years of Trump. Fuck Americans. — StreetlightX

Probably, but if Biden is winning in the primaries then I guess he has a better chance to beat Trump than any other candidate?

All the more an indictment on the US.

True dat

I know some hopes are dashed, but Trump tested negative for coronavirus.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/14/politics/trump-press-conference-coronavirus/index.html

I know some hopes are dashed, but Trump tested negative for coronavirus. — NOS4A2

Maybe it's fake news.

How does everyone feel about Trump's handling of the pandemic? Is he rising to the occasion? This article was published 2 weeks ago:


Trump’s Playbook Is Terribly Ill-Suited to a Pandemic

"Americans should all hope [Trump] succeeds in mitigating the danger posed by the virus, though there are reasons to fear he is not up to the task. The new pandemic is a challenge for which his playbook seems uniquely unsuited.

"The Trump crisis playbook to date has involved bullying both political allies, to keep them in line, and potential opponents, to prevent them from talking. It has involved lying. It has involved the deflection of attention onto other matters. It has involved attacking the attackers, spinning conspiracy theories about and spawning investigations of the investigators. It has involved bombastic dismissals of serious issues as the latest “hoax” or “witch hunt” or instance of “presidential harassment.” And it has involved endlessly reminding people that the economy is humming along and their 401(k) plans are doing well.

"But a virus, unlike a Republican member of Congress, cannot be bullied. It doesn’t care about the president’s poll numbers. Nor does it pay any mind to whether the president describes his own handling of its presence as perfect."

DOJ moves to drop charges against Russians accused of funding troll farm

https://www.axios.com/justice-department-russian-trolls-internet-research-agency-9bf95c0d-2f6a-4377-84a5-c5f3eb8c4abb.html

The government drops the charges against the only Russians to show up for trial.