RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Top 28 Moments From Bombshell Barr Interview - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Top 28 Moments From Bombshell Barr Interview Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Liz 

  • ***-----------***
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 50,995
  • Joined: 28-February 03

  Posted 04 June 2019 - 01:01 AM

Top 28 Moments From Bombshell Barr Interview

'The idea of resisting a democratically elected president and...really changing the norms on the grounds that we have to stop this president, that is where the shredding of our norms and our institutions is occurring.'

The Federalist
By Mollie Hemingway
June 3, 2019

Excerpt:

Attorney General William Barr’s nearly hour-long interview with CBS News’ Jan Crawford last week was full of fascinating details about the special counsel probe, the debunked Russia collusion theory that roiled Washington for years, and Barr’s investigation into how the FBI and Department of Justice used the “bogus” theory to investigate the Trump campaign.

The interview was downplayed by the media, which is implicated in perpetuating the Russia hoax Barr is investigating, and which came in for criticism from Barr for its failure to care about violations of civil liberties. Here are the top 28 take-aways from the interview.

1. Mueller ‘Could Have Reached a Conclusion’

Crawford, whose questions revealed a command of the facts not demonstrated by many of her mainstream media peers, asked Barr about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s decision to outline 11 instances where President Trump’s frustration at falsely being accused of treason could amount to “possible obstruction” followed by a refusal to decide whether they did.

Barr explained that the Office of Legal Counsel opinion that prevents presidents from being indicted was no barrier to making a conclusion about obstruction. “Right, he could have reached a conclusion,” Barr said, noting that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that Trump had not obstructed justice.

“[W]hen he didn’t make a decision, the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I felt it was necessary for us as the heads of the Department to reach that decision,” Barr said. “That is what the Department of Justice does, that is why we have the compulsory powers like a grand jury to force people to give us evidence so that we can determine whether a crime has committed and in order to legitimate the process we felt we had to reach a decision.”

2. DOJ Not an ‘Adjunct to Congress’

Mueller received praise from the media for, they said, subtly asking Congress to impeach the president for, apparently, his frustration with falsely being accused of being a traitor. Barr was less enamored of this idea.

“Well, I am not sure what he was suggesting but, you know, the Department of Justice doesn’t use our powers of investigating crimes as an adjunct to Congress. Congress is a separate branch of government and they can, you know, they have processes, we have our processes. Ours are related to the criminal justice process. We are not an extension of Congress’s investigative powers,” he said.

3. Mueller’s Guilty Until Proven Innocent Standard ‘Not The Standard We Use’ At DOJ

Mueller’s refusal to determine whether President Trump had obstructed justice by making hiring and firing decisions or complaining about false accusations he had conspired with Russia to steal the 2016 election was one problem. The other was that Mueller flipped the standard prosecutorial approach on its head, Barr said.

“[H]e also said that he could not say that the president clearly did not violate the law, which of course is not the standard we use at the department. We have to determine whether there is clear violation of the law, and so we applied the standards we would normally apply. We analyzed the law and the facts and a group of us spent a lot of time doing that and determined that both as a matter of law, many of the instances would not amount to obstruction,” Barr said.

4. Mueller’s Obstruction Theories ‘Did Not Reflect The Views’ of DOJ

Barr said the legal analysis in the special counsel’s obstruction report “did not reflect the views of the department” and were the “views of a particular lawyer or lawyers.” He went on to explain that firing James Comey, for example, is a “facially valid exercise of core presidential authority.”

Even if you don’t accept that presidents have the right to fire incompetent employees, to show obstruction the firing would have to have the probable effect of sabotaging a proceeding and be done with corrupt intent.

“[T]he report itself points out that one of the likely motivations here was the president’s frustration with Comey saying something publicly and saying a different thing privately and refusing to correct the record. So that would not have been a corrupt intent. So for each of these episodes we thought long and hard about it, we looked at the facts and we didn’t feel the government could establish obstruction in these cases,” Barr explained.

5. Barr Doesn’t Care about ‘Hyper-Partisan’ Complaints

Asked about the criticism he’s received from the media and other partisans, Barr said, “Well, we live in a hyper-partisan age where people no longer really pay attention to the substance of what’s said but as to who says it and what side they’re on and what it’s political ramifications are. The Department of Justice is all about the law, and the facts and the substance, and I’m going to make the decisions based on the law and the facts. And I realize that’s in tension with the political climate we live in because people are more interested in getting their way politically. so I think it just goes with the territory of being the attorney general in a hyper-partisan period of time.”

6. Barr ‘Surprised’ by Mueller Not Providing Report Ready to Release

Barr explained that he wrote a four-page summary of Mueller’s 400-page report because Mueller failed to provide a report that was ready to release to the American public. In conversations in the weeks leading up to Mueller’s report delivery, Barr repeatedly requested that the grand jury information be highlighted so it could be quickly redacted by Justice Department officials.

Instead, the report included no highlighting of which portions were from grand jury information, which must be redacted by law. That meant it would be weeks before the report would be made public, at a time when former intelligence officials were making false claims about the Mueller report.

Barr said he wrote the four-page summary:

because I didn’t think the body politic would allow us to go on radio silence for four weeks. I mean, people were camped outside my house and the department and every — there was all kinds of wild speculation going on. Former senior intelligence officials who were purporting to have it, or intimating that they had inside information were suggesting that the president and his family were going to be indicted and so forth. Saying that publicly. There was all kind of wild and — Yes, and it was wild and irresponsible speculation going on which the very — Right, and talking heads and things like that, and these things affect the United States’ ability to function in the world.

We have an economy. It could affect the economy. It can affect, it can affect our foreign relations during very delicate period of time with, you know, serious adversaries in the world. So I felt that in order to buy time, in order to get the report out, I had to state the bottom line just like you’re announcing a verdict in a case. My purpose there was not to summarize every jot and tittle of the report and every, you know, angle that, that Mueller looked into. But, just state the bottom line, which I did in the four-page memo.

7. Mueller Letter Complaining About Lack of Impeachment Narrative Was ‘A Little Snitty and Staff-Driven’

Someone within the special counsel’s office leaked to The New York Times a letter complaining that Barr’s four-page summary set the media narrative differently than they would have preferred. Barr said he was surprised Mueller “didn’t pick up the phone and call me given our 30-year relationship” and that he felt “the letter was a little snitty and staff-driven.” He reiterated his preference to have the full report released so that everyone could determine “what Bob’s reasoning was.”

*snip*

Full Story
0

#2 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 56,638
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 04 June 2019 - 12:01 PM

AGAIN, as I've said so often before - I understand and empathize with those who remain skeptical. But I for one am starting to get just a little bit excited. I think Barr, unlike his predecessors, really means business this time. And what's more, if ANYBODY could get it done properly, Barr's the one. It's no wonder the leftist crime mob is trying so desperately to smear his reputation and credibility. But tough sh*t, he won't back off.

Anyhow, as I said, I fully understand why so many of you remain skeptical. We've been sold this bill of goods before, and so far nobody has followed through. I just hope & pray that Barr will break the mold.

B)
0

#3 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 27,506
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 04 June 2019 - 02:15 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 04 June 2019 - 12:01 PM, said:

AGAIN, as I've said so often before - I understand and empathize with those who remain skeptical. But I for one am starting to get just a little bit excited. I think Barr, unlike his predecessors, really means business this time. And what's more, if ANYBODY could get it done properly, Barr's the one. It's no wonder the leftist crime mob is trying so desperately to smear his reputation and credibility. But tough sh*t, he won't back off.

Anyhow, as I said, I fully understand why so many of you remain skeptical. We've been sold this bill of goods before, and so far nobody has followed through. I just hope & pray that Barr will break the mold.

B)

Agreed - and hopefully Barr realizes that he must follow through for our sake, not their own (the politicians’) sake. Justice must begin to prevail even for democrats.
0

#4 User is offline   NH Populist 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,282
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 04 June 2019 - 03:12 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 04 June 2019 - 12:01 PM, said:

AGAIN, as I've said so often before - I understand and empathize with those who remain skeptical. But I for one am starting to get just a little bit excited. I think Barr, unlike his predecessors, really means business this time. And what's more, if ANYBODY could get it done properly, Barr's the one. It's no wonder the leftist crime mob is trying so desperately to smear his reputation and credibility. But tough sh*t, he won't back off.

Anyhow, as I said, I fully understand why so many of you remain skeptical. We've been sold this bill of goods before, and so far nobody has followed through. I just hope & pray that Barr will break the mold.
B)

I can't help but think back to Hillary's quote that "If Trump won we're all going to hang". She might just be right after all... :pray:

This post has been edited by NH Populist: 04 June 2019 - 03:13 PM

0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users