Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: pgkdan; Steven W.
StevenW: my impression of what he said was that the current candidates, Biden and TRUMP...

pgkdan: That as far as he knows nobody facing indictment is running for President. Everybody else is fair game.

Barr: AS TO PRESIDENT OBAMA AND VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN WHATEVER THE LEVEL OF INVOLVEMENT BASED ON THE INFORMATION I HAVE, I DO NOT EXPECT MR. DURHAM’S WORK WILL LEAD TO A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OF EITHER MAN. OUR CONCERN OVER POTENTIAL CRIMINALITY IS FOCUSED ON OTHERS.

Bagster: Barr seems to be saying that neither Obama or Biden are facing criminal investigation BASED ON INFORMATION HE HAS and due to the 'tit for tat' nature of any potential charges, along with it being an election year.

It troubles me that he calls ABUSE OF POWER not necessarily criminal.

The good news is, his CONCERN FOR CRIMINALITY is FOCUSED ON OTHERS.

My preliminary analysis:

Barr is trying to dampen the heat by 'clearing' Biden and Obama of any potential. That is a purely political statement, and not one grounded in the law.

He leaves the door wide open for criminal charges against OTHERS. You will notice he didn't name Hillary in his short list.

This is also in keeping with Q's CHESS ANALOGY of a few days ago. You don't attack the KING until the middle to the end of the game.

If I read Barr correctly, given all of this, there will be indictments, and plenty of them. He already knows.

#DeepBreath


682 posted on 05/18/2020 9:34:54 AM PDT by bagster ("Even bad men love their mamas".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 665 | View Replies ]


To: bagster

Barr did specifically refer to Durham’s work.

Any other ‘work’ going on out there? Whatever happened to Huber?


690 posted on 05/18/2020 9:39:47 AM PDT by truthluva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies ]

To: bagster
No criminal indictment of Obama based on information Barr already has.

Whence then the Tweets from President Trump, about "Obamagate"?

Whence Q's DECLAS brings down the White House? (Given that Trump gave Barr authority to DECLAS)?

Or is Barr saying "based just on the punisher's work" there are no criminal charges against 0moeba, but there will be some based on DECLAS? Or that 0moeba will be charged after the election?

725 posted on 05/18/2020 10:20:45 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change with out notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies ]

To: bagster

Agree mostly. Our laws ARE weak when it comes to abuse of power. IANAL and yet I can google and find this, for example:

Ҥ 11.448 Abuse of office.

A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor if, knowing that his or her conduct is illegal, he or she:

(a) Subjects another to arrest, detention, search, seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien or other infringement of personal or property rights; or

(b) Denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.”


Note the word “knowing” in this statute. How do you prove someone was “knowing”? Probably doesn’t take much of a defense lawyer to throw a lot of shade at that - “plausible deniability”.

But completely agree you don’t attack the king first and you don’t telegraph your moves in advance.

The Grenell declas of unmaskers was new information to Durham, he can no more get classified info than anyone else. So now he has it and we know someone committed a crime by leaking the phone call. So that’s one criminal matter that has only now just been added to Durham’s pile and there will be more.


752 posted on 05/18/2020 11:10:51 AM PDT by bigbob (Trust Trump. Trust the Plan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies ]

To: bagster
Barr is trying to dampen the heat by 'clearing' Biden and Obama of any potential. That is a purely political statement, and not one grounded in the law. He leaves the door wide open for criminal charges against OTHERS. You will notice he didn't name Hillary in his short list. This is also in keeping with Q's CHESS ANALOGY of a few days ago. You don't attack the KING until the middle to the end of the game. If I read Barr correctly, given all of this, there will be indictments, and plenty of them. He already knows.

I think you hit that nail right on the head.

777 posted on 05/18/2020 11:29:34 AM PDT by pgkdan (The Silent Majority STILL Stands With TRUMP! WWG1WGA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies ]

To: bagster

Yeah, I agree with your analysis. Didn’t see it before I threw in essentially the same ideas with less detail.


781 posted on 05/18/2020 11:33:59 AM PDT by Disestablishmentarian ("the right of the people peaceably to assemble")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies ]

To: bagster

you just reminded me ... I definitely think QUEEEN is/was #Killary or #FakeNews but *not* Lindsey; I think QUEEN is HRC.


804 posted on 05/18/2020 12:08:49 PM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies ]

To: bagster; little jeremiah

We will know if Obama is going down by the first round of criminals that go to prison. If they’re severe sentences then we might see something against Obama. If we see slaps on the wrist then it’s over.


972 posted on 05/18/2020 2:50:07 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson