Calling A Muellerigan? Barr To Release Special Counsel Report In April But Won’t Specify Year

In a legal loophole wrapped in a statutorial technicality, Attorney General William Barr is only compelled to name the month he intends to release the full Mueller Report, not the year. The year will remain redacted until *cough*, the year. This wouldn’t surprise me as he’s probably already in some reputational hot water after his recent summary, non-summary snap judgment, aka, an obvious effort to exonerate a sitting ass-clown. When I first heard about William It’s-not-illegal-if-a-president-does-it Barr, aka the Iran-Contra coverup guy, I immediately returned to the gangster analogy. He’s the ‘cleaner’, the guy the mob calls in to bleach the crime scene and burn all the evidence. I called Mueller honorable, but does this corporate lawyer’s lawyer deserve the same treatment? If key parts of this document remain hidden from view for “reputational reasons”, not ongoing investigational ones, we still have a problem. So a guy who believes presidents can’t commit crimes, who auditioned for Trump by defending his decision to fire Comey, has exonerated Trump of any and all crimes? Talk about stacking the deck, oh wait, Trump can’t open a casino on the Las Vegas strip either. Hmmm. We need to know who is making these decisions in redaction-land or: Who Watches the Redactmen?

In the comment section my friend claims I’m wrong and should just admit I’m wrong, and that I’m “grasping at straws.” But these are very large straws in a pile of unethical refuse. It’s also an effort to help the sea turtles. I’m standing by my take on events up and until the adults in the room are allowed to review the evidence. Hint of the day: not your people. Today The GOP is a criminal organization, nothing more. Being wrong all the time is not a coincidence, which may just be a coincidence.

“Doctors say Nordberg has a 50/50 chance of living, though there’s only a 10 percent chance of that.”

—Ed Hocken

You’re a supposed ‘truth seeker’, Pokey, one that follows a political party that requires no truth to function. That reminds me of a certain Alanis Morisette song …Jagged Little Pill. Why? What were you thinking? You have to admit Republicans are good at this. They’re political survivalists, subsisting for months at a time in the 24/7 news cycle on a diet of only Pizzagate and Whitewater.

I understand how national security or information pertinent to ongoing investigations should be kept from the public, but the judicial committee must receive the full version of the Mueller report. No one is saying this yet, but when Barr refuses to do just that, we’re facing yet another constitutional crisis.

William Barr is the same William Barr who buried the Iran-Contra scandal. Do you think that’s another coincidence, Poke? Sully and Yglesias claim it’s better for the country that our president isn’t a traitor and under normal circumstances I would agree. But they’re wrong on this one; the sooner this evil is exposed and rooted out the better. And even if you’re right about every corner of Trump’s agenda from here on out, Poke, which is winning-lotto-twice-while-crashing-in-a-plane unlikely, the long term damage this administration will unleash on the planet is unconscionable. Today we find that Trump’s EPA thinks the best way to fight climate change is with more pollution, here.

“Yeah, we don’t know a lot about this science stuff, so maybe polluting more will actual counter the rest of the pollution, or at least it will help some of us in key positions obtain the resources to horde enough oxygen when shit gets real.”

—John Q. Republican

How do you remain convinced you’re on the right side of history with tidbits like that each day? Similarly, did you listen to Schiffs’ response to calls for his resignation? What parts of that damning laundry list will prove false? Somewhere between zero and none. We really need to find out where the Republican brain hides when facts emerge. It’s like how you can only look at light as a wave or a particle, but not both at the same time. QAnon Mechanics?

In my adult lifetime Republicans got away with a proxy war with Iran, war crimes that include torture, lying us into a war, which set into motion a chain of events so disastrous for all involved that it’s still destabilizing parts of Europe today, let alone the Middle East. And now who knows how much conspiracy/collusion/ and corruption is being swept under the table?

Republican crimes fall into a few camps: never investigated (see: George W Bush), or hired mob-like ‘cleaner’ such as Barr to take care of business (see: Ronald Reagan/Donald Trump), or some Scooter Libby agreed to take the fall (see: Dick Cheney). They make themselves rich and are never held accountable for their crimes, save a little historical criticism. But, don’t worry, it’s nothing AM radio and Fox News can’t white-nationalist-wash. Who cares if their presidents rank among the worst in history, as long as they stay out of the hoosegow and make a few bucks, right? All is fair in love and unnecessary war. What does the next Wall Street collapse matter to the people who know how to profit from it?

Is there a Scooter Libby in this scenario? Manaforte? Stone? Or some other as yet unnamed individual 3? Will the Mueller report reveal such a person? What are the areas Mueller chose not to investigate, offhand it seems like all of them.

Here’s the real shitty part: moving forward anything—and I mean any Trump wrongdoing even questioned—will trigger a variation of this same response: “sorry, you had your chance with the one-lane still-redacted Muellerigan Report.” No matter what it says or doesn’t say, the cliff notes are the new gospel. Re-read the redacted parts, Zano, no collusion. Mueller looked into everything under the sun and Trump is now beyond reproach. Post Mueller, we as a nation are going to have a much harder time correcting this disastrous mistake. We could have hoped for more and no matter how this turns out, it certainly isn’t one of my better predictions. But remaining locked into this administration any longer is like being in the part of the sci-fi movie when the last escape pod has left and gravity is now sucking the mother ship into the black hole. Not sure this will fit somewhere in the GOP’s mission statement, but perhaps that’s a good weekend project.

Meanwhile, let’s ignore these huge, in your face, web of deceit crime-fests, in favor of more fishing expeditions for process crimes. McCabe didn’t follow protocol, Loretta Lynch did her job, but she’s black. Hillary Clinton still mishandled several emails. Why wasn’t she mishandling them via Instagram, like Jared and Ivanka? And a whole shit load of other brain farts that we’ve come to expect from our know-nothing counterparts.

Barr is going to find a way to redact anything damning, because that’s what Republicans do. And to answer your other question, Pokey, the new mantra for U.S. politics should be innocent until proven Republican. That should help. I don’t think there are a lot of crimes to even uncover as Mueller stuck to two topics, aka collusion (not guilty enough) and obstruction (guilty as F***). As for money laundering, more to come on that score. And I’m sick of people who don’t give a rat’s ass about the truth asking, “what crimes?” Open your eyes, read the links I offer. Take a Trump U class if you don’t believe me. Here’s another one: Taj Mahal’s money laundering past.

[Seventh wonder of my ass joke removed from the janitor with a political plunger.]

Sometimes 27 indictments does not a relevant inquiry make and sometimes the largest money laundering charge in history changes nothing. Our president has surrounded himself with crooks, but, sure, maybe he isn’t one—maybe he just lies all the time and acts guilty as some of the finer aspects of his personality disorder. Evidence, indictments, convictions ….none of this matters anymore. The Republican brain is programmed to reject reality. It’s like their all forged from the same impervious adamantine of the political world. Wolverines of Wall Street? How about instead of ignoring this growing mountain of disturbing facts, try finding a year devoid of Trump money laundering, fraud, tax dodging, or corruption?

The final score is yet to come and it’s going to get ugly before it gets uglier. This bright spot in Trump’s tenor is still a disgustingly dark patch for American history …at least for those of us who can still process information.




(Visited 94 times, 1 visits today)
Mick Zano

Mick Zano

Mick Zano is the Head Comedy Writer and co-founder of The Daily Discord. He is the Captain of team Search Truth Quest and is currently part of the Witness Protection Program. He is being strongly advised to stop talking any further about this, right now, and would like to add that he is in no way affiliated with the Gambinonali crime family. 

  11 comments for “Calling A Muellerigan? Barr To Release Special Counsel Report In April But Won’t Specify Year

  1. pokey
    April 1, 2019 at 8:39 AM

    For 2 years I’ve heard constant hysterical speculation about how Trump was going to fire Mueller. When Sessions left, the hysteria continued. Neither Trump nor Barr interfered with Mueller’s investigation. Mueller had unlimited investigative powers and resources. Mueller could have indicted anybody connected to the Trump campaign for criminal conspiracy or coordination. I’m sure there’s all kinds of information on Mueller’s report that you and the Dems can spin to make Trump look bad, but ultimately none of that matters–and the more Dems cling to Trump-collusion, the stronger Trump becomes. The inconvenient bottom line remains–MUELLER (not Barr or Rosenstein), but MUELLER could not establish that ANYBODY on the Trump campaign (or any other American for that matter) conspired or coordinated with Russia’s interference with the election. That’s what Trump has been saying from beginning, and Mueller’s lack of indictments confirms Trump’s claim.

    • Mick Zano
      April 1, 2019 at 12:24 PM

      I won’t disagree with some of that, but hysterical? Do you have access to the news yet? Although Trump did fire Yates, Comey, and McCabe (obstruction) and threatened to fire Mueller and Sessions. By the fourth round folks explained how the investigation wouldn’t stop if he kept firing people. I will read the report and let you know. If it is 400 pages of Trump and his cohorts are swell peeps, then I will admit I’m wrong on all counts. But if it’s grey (which was always my thought, thus my thoughts) well, there still could be, and likely is, unethical and potentially impeachable offenses in there. If Mueller did leave congress to decide some areas of inappropriateness and farmed out sections to other courts, how many Trumpian indictments will it take to reach the level of relevant to you people? And drawing all your conclusions prior to reading the evidence is a very republican thing to do. Up to the line of treason, if that’s what we hit, is not great a day for the country. It’s a great day for the traitors, sure. Your president lied about every corner of this grey area, from his business dealings, to secret meetings for dirt, to WikiLeaks and beyond. Had he and his people told the truth, even 50% of the time we probably wouldn’t have had this investigation in the first place, but they are incapable. Take him out and shoot him? Maybe not, but break some knee caps? Let’s read that report. Why do liars and cheats get a free pass from you? Is it because they are indistinguishable from the rest of the republican party at this point? Ancient Alien theorists say ‘yes’

      • Mick Zano
        April 1, 2019 at 12:28 PM

        Next bet, if the full report is revealed will we be in: A. the murky, twilight lands of disturbing business, executive behavior and unethical practices (Zano), or B. Trump is a god among men and should be the next Pope (Pokey). You shouldn’t take that bet, just continue to aid and abet, like our AG. Barr likely jumped the gun, or the shark by absolving Trump of obstruction. Even while climbing out of scandals, republicans create other scandals. Their baseline is jail or probation?

        • pokey
          April 2, 2019 at 8:32 AM

          From the perspective of justice (I know that you’re not really interested) the central question–“Did Trump or members of his administration conspire or coordinate with Russian interference?”

          It appears to be that Muller answers–“no.’

          Of course Mueller and the democrats knew the answer to this question two years ago. The purpose of this investigation was not to find out whether Trump colluded with Russia. The purpose of this investigation was to continually give the media “suspicious” and speculative information that would cloud the president’s legitimacy. Since the central question of the investigation is now debunked, the dems will now settle for showing “disturbing business, executive behavior, and unethical practices,” or Monica Lewinsky.

          It wasn’t just Barr who absolved Trump–Rosenstein also signed that letter.

          • Mick Zano
            April 2, 2019 at 12:53 PM

            I will admit you are the most correct you’ve been in years, Pokey, so hang tough. Less is more right now. Don’t go blatantly false here and tarnish that meh record of yours. The president’s legitimacy started out shaky prior to inauguration day due to something called reality. Now pay attention, because you’re still going to lose this one. I know, and you were so close!

            1. The investigation into Russian interference with our election was about Russian interference into our election, which was proven to be true. Zano = correct, Pokey = never acknowledged in two years and, like his president, not interested in protecting the next one. You should get a minus 10 for this and your president should be 25th.

            2. No criminal conspiracy between Russia and Trumpsters. Zano = never said would reach criminal conspiracy (much gnashing of teeth as per my quotes/predictions and how I never gave it over a 50/50 chance), Pokey = doesn’t even acknowledge that attempted collusion occurred and will downplay related unethical findings in Mueller Report. Kidding, it will all be redacted by ‘the cleaner.’ Draw? I’m trying to give you one here, Poke.

            3. Obstruction of Justice: Trump will not be exonerated because there’s a strong case for obstruction, but it’s up to congress to enforce (pending Mueller report release). Zano = will be proven correct, Pokey = claims he left Crime-O-Meter back in car.

            4. Money laundering, white collar crimes and other corruption. If Mueller claims to have done some widespread assessment of Trump Inc and says their legit. Zano = wrong, but if these pending investigations net criminal Trumpian misdeeds, than Zano = correct, Pokey = claims to have failed to calibrate Crime-O-Meter.

            5. Spygate, aka the Feds and liberals set up Trump as some ‘insurance policy’: Pokey = this will uncover a wide-ranging liberal conspiracy to hurt Trump’s presidency. Zano = this might net how someone on floor 3 of FBI headquarters failed to file something in a timely fashion and the like.

            You can probably add a number six in there, is this president compromised? I think this is yet another area that there’s another disturbingly strong case to be made. Yes, a darker chapter in our history is a ‘bright spot’ for the GOP. That’s actually not surprising. I don’t think that parts actually over either, but we will see. I will admit this is the most correct republicans have been since 9/11, and the best my blogvesary has done toe to toe with yours truly, maybe ever. So since my peeps ran with collusion and there was no collusion, let’s give him the full point and take away mine (begrudgingly). Then carry the one and, even handing you one of my points, the final score (historically speaking) will be 4 to 1. I realize this means nothing to our republican friends, but let’s let them enjoy their victory lap, aka allowing the republic and environment ending antics of a sociopathic man clown.

            Let’s not forget that the heart of my zenwrongness theory is twofold: 1. republicans reduce any problem or issue to a binary/false choice (when most matters are more complicated), and then choose the most wrong one. 2. By the time all the facts are in and, in this case my overarching assessment proves accurate, republicans will be too busy being wrong about something else to even notice.

            • Pierce Winslow
              April 3, 2019 at 12:55 PM

              I’m sorry Mick, but you’re going to lose point three. It has nothing to do with Trump’s not attempting to thwart the investigation, but the fact that there was no crime to obstruct the justice of. Since there was no collusion, there’s no underlying course of justice with which to interfere, ergo Mueller saying he didn’t know if a crime was committed. It’s a matter of law, not a matter of Trump being a good citizen. It certainly wasn’t for a lack of trying.

              • Mick Zano
                April 3, 2019 at 9:39 PM

                I did always worry that without the linchpin of conspiracy some of this was going to be a harder slog, but collusion did occur to some degree, probably up to but not over the line of military firing squad. Proud day for the GOP. But, yes, Trump’s people committed a number of indictable offenses, thus all the indictments (not to mention the ones yet to be uncovered). But even if none of this were true, you can still obstruct justice. It is described as “any interference with the orderly administration of law and justice”, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1521. Maybe he was just trying to protect his friends. Kidding, compassion is not part of his Dx. He would definitely obstruct to keep people away from his endless shady business dealings. Thus his floating of pardons, his warnings to Mueller about crossing a red line into his finances, and inciting riots were he to be found guilty. Hey, but if this doesn’t work out we should try to pin ‘obstruction of reality’ on his base. That’s a gimme.

                • pokey
                  April 5, 2019 at 8:37 AM

                  Keep grasping’ Zano. Keep graspin’.

                  DEMOCRATIC RHETORIC–The media polling and propaganda campaign convinces the uninformed that Clinton is sure to win 2016 Presidential election.
                  REALITY–Tump wins the election.
                  DEMOCRATIC RHETORIC–Trump’s victory is illegitimate because he colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election.
                  REALITY–after 2 years, unlimited investigatorial access, 25 million dollars spent, 19 (mostly) democratic lawyers, and 40 FBI, the special counsel cannot establish that anybody connected to the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russians.
                  DEMOCRATIC RHETORIC–The attorney general is withholding the real “damning” evidence of Trump’s wrongdoing.
                  (predicted) REALITY–AG releases his report proving his honest interpretation of the essential special counsel findings.
                  DEMOCRATIC RHETORIC–Trump’s tax returns show the real “damning” evidence of Trump’s wrongdoing.

                  • Mick Zano
                    April 5, 2019 at 11:20 AM

                    Oh come on, you’re jumping the shark again there, Fonze. Granted, there’s only so much Barr would twist or hide, so conspiracy is still likely a dud (or dud-ish). But some of the folks who wrote this thing don’t like how it’s being portrayed by our AG. If Mueller left a detailed report for congress to decide culpability and key people in congress don’t ever get to see this thing, in its entirety, we can and will and should continue to speculate, question, condemn. Why didn’t Barr use the summaries Mueller provided? Hmmm. Nothing has really changed since my initial predictions. Why should it? What part should I change? We had an investigation into our election because of Russian meddling. Trump was rightly caught up in this due to the numerous covert meetings his people had with the Russians and then lied about them to congress. I still think the argument can be made our president is compromised, to not one but to a number of foreign entities because of his financial entanglements. Are you suggesting Russia should not have been investigated? Or they should have been, but no body within our own government who met with them secretly on the lead up to the election should have? Historians will categorize the Trump presidency as a get rich quick scheme. This isn’t a created scandal, in fact it’s still a huge one. If it isn’t, why shouldn’t the Pulitzer be pulled from the Washington Post and NYTs? Because they’re reporting is sound. Schiff’s diatribe is damning, whether you bothered to understand the implications, or not. Keep in mind, this is likely going to be a very short victory lap, because republicans are incapable of getting things right. Why should this be any different? They’re very good at declaring victory before the facts are in, but when has that ever held? When the Mueller report is out and the rest of the investigations have run their course, you get to tell me exactly where I was wrong. If you can find anything. I will stand by my horrible, way-off predictions over your above summary of events, any day. Following the news is not ‘grasping’, but regurgitating the ravings of a gaggle of partisan hacks is.

                    • pokey
                      April 6, 2019 at 3:24 PM

                      “Following the news is not ‘grasping'”–Well now, that all depends on what news your following, Zano.

                      Let me give you an example of how to avoid being brainwashed and manipulated by political activists disguised as news reporters (in case some day you are interested). New York Times April 3rd headline reads–“Some of Mueller’s Team Say Report More Damaging Than Barr Revealed.” “Aha!” says the Zanoites. “Just what we suspected. Barr’s covering up the juicy impeachable dirt on Trump.”

                      But as the critical reader probes deeper into the text of the article, we realize that no member of Mueller’s team ever spoke with the reporter of this article. No, this reporter actually claims to have spoken only with some anonymous “associates” of members of Mueller’s team. Hmm. Now wait, that’s not what the headline implies. I’m starting to smell something. The article goes on to make suggestive claims based on no actual person who “declined to flesh out why some of the special counsel’s investigators viewed their findings as potentially more damaging for the president than Barr explained.”

                      So let me get this straight–we can be assured that the writer of this article makes the unsubstantiated claim that an anonymous associate of at least one person who worked on the special counsel gave no particular reason why they believe that the findings are more damaging for the president than Barr explained.

                      That’s the art of pretending to say something very important while actually not saying anything at all. This is a totally made up story with no factual basis in reality–just like the entire story of Trump-Russia collusion.

                      But several other news sources pick up and run with the NYT’s headline, which then gives it the illusion of credibility; and so now Zano and the Resisters are inspired with fresh flaberschrockle to spew in Pokey McDores’ general directions.

                    • Mick Zano
                      April 6, 2019 at 4:37 PM

                      Wow, again …and the Most Wrong Award for the Russia probe goes to (drum roll). We can be assured that: A. we have not seen the Mueller report, B. anyone Trump hired to whitewash this thing is suspect, C. other investigations are still pending, and D. when all is said done, the most wrong narrative will be the republican one, because at this point I don’t believe it can be otherwise. Forget the whole late-stage democracy, Trump irreparably damaging the republic stuff, wouldn’t it be horrible if republicans ruined there nearly two decade long streak by getting something right? That would be tragic. They need to stick with their strengths. Besides, how else could I always get it right, just by betting against them? They need to start thinking about my 11 fans and my crucial fake news reputation as a pseudo journalistic coach potato. Again, my version of the probe will prove more accurate than your abject denialism.

Leave a Reply to pokey Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *