Replies

Geezer brain freeze: what does CLAS 1-99 signify?
_______________________

I’m in the freezer with you. I am wondering if it might be pages 1-99 of a classified document.

I suspect that the text in that drop (dialogue between Barr/Mueller and Barr/RR is a paraphrase, for brevity and confidentiality concerns, of Barr getting these two men on the official record (accountability) explaining the actions they undertook which can get them fired AND prosecuted.

Given the stakes, I don’t believe Barr would meet with RR and Mueller in private (one-on-one), I believe the men would have their lawyers present, that they did not have an option not to answer, and that Mueller knew Barr had adequate documentation to refute any attempt made to deny the truth (we don’t see RR’s response), so Mueller gave what would seem to be disastrous (for him) answers to Barr’s questions.

For example, “Bob, show me the evidence and reasoning for why this investigation was started and still ongoing,” is not written in the language needed for prosecution and/or firing, so I believe this is a form of deposition or closed hearing and Barr worked through the lengthy interview format needed for the official record and the text was distilled down to the sentence in the drop.

Note that RR does not answer these (paraphrased for us) clear, direct questions. When Barr asks, “justify why you did this,” RR basically responds, “We didn’t find anything.” Disastrous answer by RR, one I believe he would only give if he had no alternatives (Barr, et. al. have it all).
~~~~
“Barr to Mueller:
“Mandate was clear - verify and investigate reports of possible foreign collusion between Pres...” Again, this terse, telegraphic format doesn’t seem like the language of prosecution (not quoting the official transcript) but instead, a Cliff’s notes version (shout out to bagster) for public consumption.

Mueller’s disastrous response: “Steele dossier along w/ media corroboration of those findings.” I believe if Mueller had ANYTHING else he could have said in response, he certainly would have, or that he would decline to answer if he could, and that he never would give THIS response unless forced (legally) to go on record.
~~~~
“Barr to Mueller:
“Was the Steele report a ‘trusted and verified’ report per Intel to continue especially considering the funding party was the opposition party?” Of course, Barr knew the answer already, and as they say, prosecution never asks a question of a WITNESS (that’s the tone of this paraphrased dialogue - official testimony or deposition of Mueller) unless the prosecution already knows the answer.

I believe “on record” much groundwork was laid establishing the fact it was not trusted and verified (that’s partly why I think Clas 1-99 means “classified pages 1-99, this whole dialogue would have been padded with much legal fortification, presentation of exhibits and necessary verbiage).
~~~
“Mueller to Barr:
“Those facts were never taken into consideration.” (ransomnote: This is a fall-outta-your-chair bad answer, given the stakes, yet I believe it was phrased by an attorney to be repeated by Mueller) “FISC granted auth to conduct based on conclusions presented.” These were the best answers Mueller could give!!?? - Barr DOES has it all.
~~~~
Barr to Mueller:
“Was FISC made aware of all details surrounding the dossier?”
Mueller to Barr:
“No.” “We believe there was urgency placed....” More “concrete balloon” answers Mueller grips tightly as he sinks...

~~~
It took me awhile to write all this - if I click “post” now, I will probably discover other, better answers have already been provided by three separate FReeQs, two Anons and a few Tweeters and maybe 7 - 10 new Q drops....but if I bail out now I’ll end up writing small portions of this again to some other post in the next few days.
*sigh*
*click*