Posted on 03/28/2019 12:10:10 PM PDT by libstripper
WASHINGTON — The still-secret report on Russian interference in the 2016 election submitted by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, last week was more than 300 pages long, according to the Justice Department, a length that raises new questions about Attorney General William P. Barr’s four-page summary.
Mr. Barr wrote to Congress on Sunday offering what he called the “principal conclusions” of the report — including that Mr. Mueller had not found that the Trump campaign had taken part in a conspiracy to undermine the election. But he had notably declined to publicly disclose its length.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
4 pages of No Collusion
296 pages of Orange Man Bad, Democrat partisans say so
Does MSN take their wishful thinking and run it by a bunch of Junior High School kids to get them to write it up for them??
So true; that’s what every good author does and learns to do. An excellent, highly experienced lawyer like William Barr can do such things almost in his sleep.
The really questionable thing is the NYT using two authors to read and report on a four page letter.
Did the NY Slimes worry how many pages were in Obamacare, that had to be passed in order to know what was in it?
Questions ? Yes! For Brennan, Comey, Clapper, Lynch and the rest of the Cabal
“Not guilty,” or “No collusion” would have sufficed.
Delaying tactic and a desperate move by Democrats who have reached the bottom of the barrel on this.
That’s why two people reviewed it.
When a jury reaches their conclusion, dothey general speak for hours publicly or just release their conclusion and let it rest?
Was it double spaced with 1 inch margins?
What a ridiculous commentary
Sadly ,with the death of our system of justice, America died as well.
How many of you “journalists” read the Obamacare Act?
296 pages of BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH ?
It's the CliffsNotes version and it worked very well for me in high school......
300 page book, 4 page book report.
A 4 page book report on a 300 page book seems a little wordy to me.
In High School after reading a book that short I would have been expected to submit at most a 2 page report.
Outline the pertinent points of the book, explain (in your own words) the authors intent of the book, submit a very brief summary of the book, and lastly my impressions and thoughts of the subject matter.
All these things should be achievable in one to two paragraphs each, at most a 2 page report, three if you go into greater detail.
I groaned at the length of the report and felt that I could have written a 3 page one that did just as good a job summarizing this long, boring book.
One does not have to write a lengthy summary of a long, boring original...
we had a director in our department in CA state government. If you can’t summarize it on one page i don’t want to read the GD report
What a ridiculous commentary
*************
Yep. The only point made is this number of pages “raises new questions” about the 4-page summary.
Except:
1) There are no questions raised in the article. Seems like that is what the article ought to contain, based on its headline and lead paragraph.
2)Apparently, the only issue is the length of the summary relative to the length of the report. There are a lot of folks involved in preparing various sections of the Mueller report that would have read the summary. If one of them were to comment that they didn’t think the summary was accurate, then the Slimes might have some news to report. They’ve gone to anonymous sources for this kind of stuff multiple times throughout Trump coverage. Seems odd that they couldn’t even find a single anonymous source to point to for this.
Nothingburger.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.